Existentialism, anyone?
Existentialism, anyone?
I occasionally reach out to anyone interested doing a reading, interpreting of a serious work in philosophy. I like to read and study anyone from Kant to the present, even Derrida. I tend to shy away from analytic philosophy because, while helpful, I find it missing the point. Existentialism is fascinating to me.
It is a great way to improve your philosophical understanding: read and write back and forth about it the text, for it is in the writing that one polishes thought and really penetrates convoluted theory. I am open to reading anyone in the literature. If you would like to go paragraph by paragraph into the dense and inscrutable philosophy of existentialism, and you have the time to do this, just let me know and you can name the text, philosopher. No problem.
It is a great way to improve your philosophical understanding: read and write back and forth about it the text, for it is in the writing that one polishes thought and really penetrates convoluted theory. I am open to reading anyone in the literature. If you would like to go paragraph by paragraph into the dense and inscrutable philosophy of existentialism, and you have the time to do this, just let me know and you can name the text, philosopher. No problem.
- FlashDangerpants
- Posts: 6269
- Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2016 11:54 pm
Re: Existentialism, anyone?
I'm somwhat meh on the existentialists. But I do have a soft spot for anyone who can't make up their mind about stuff. So I have a copy of Hilary Putnam's Ethics without Ontolgoy sitting around waiting to be read. If anyone wants to form a book club and is dumb enough to let me choose the book, then I'm in.
This 'un
"Putnam’s central concern is ontology—indeed, the very idea of ontology as the division of philosophy concerned with what (ultimately) exists. Reviewing what he deems the disastrous consequences of ontology’s influence on analytic philosophy—in particular, the contortions it imposes upon debates about the objective of ethical judgments—Putnam proposes abandoning the very idea of ontology. " Exciting shit, what's not to love about abandoning Ontology eh?
Although I might need all the math bits explaining to me, I'm not very smart.
This 'un
"Putnam’s central concern is ontology—indeed, the very idea of ontology as the division of philosophy concerned with what (ultimately) exists. Reviewing what he deems the disastrous consequences of ontology’s influence on analytic philosophy—in particular, the contortions it imposes upon debates about the objective of ethical judgments—Putnam proposes abandoning the very idea of ontology. " Exciting shit, what's not to love about abandoning Ontology eh?
Although I might need all the math bits explaining to me, I'm not very smart.
Re: Existentialism, anyone?
I have the Putnam book in PDF. Just started reading. Ontology is a sticky wicket because the "isness" of things goes two ways and Putnam does not go the way of Heidegger, so his critique is going to be about what i will call presence. What is present, IS. What he calls inflationary ontology is an ontology abut what is present, and philosophy will have no truck with this kind of thing because it is weird and mystical and absolutist. Heidegger called it walking on water philosophy: There is no confirmable presence of anything because noting sits still in this world of becoming, says H.FlashDangerpants
'm somwhat meh on the existentialists. But I do have a soft spot for anyone who can't make up their mind about stuff. So I have a copy of Hilary Putnam's Ethics without Ontolgoy sitting around waiting to be read. If anyone wants to form a book club and is dumb enough to let me choose the book, then I'm in.
This 'un
"Putnam’s central concern is ontology—indeed, the very idea of ontology as the division of philosophy concerned with what (ultimately) exists. Reviewing what he deems the disastrous consequences of ontology’s influence on analytic philosophy—in particular, the contortions it imposes upon debates about the objective of ethical judgments—Putnam proposes abandoning the very idea of ontology. " Exciting shit, what's not to love about abandoning Ontology eh?
Anyway, sure, let's read ethics without Ontology. I am skeptical at the outset, for I am what you could call an ethical realist. His critical remarks about G E Moore I take issue with. Let me know your thoughts on this or any part of the book. I'll finish it tomorrow.
Re: Existentialism, anyone?
Actually FlashDangerpants, having just looked at the "math bits" I notice there is extensive reference to analytic philosophers. Are you sure you want to read THIS book? Analytic philosophy is frankly boring. Do you have anything laying about of the Continental sort? I can read the Putnam book, but the references will get tedious as all hell, and the logic indicates an analysis of ethical statements.....anyway, let me know.
-
- Posts: 8121
- Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2011 3:08 pm
- Location: Retirement Home for foolosophers
Re: Existentialism, anyone?
May I join your expedition? A suggestion: How about Albert Camus' The Myth of Sisyphus? It's kind of a continental classic. I have the book and it appears there are downloadable PDFs of it, if you don't want to purchase a copy. It's also relatively short and accessible. I'm not up to speed on Logic enough to read anything with a lot of equations in it.
Re: Existentialism, anyone?
I have it. Let's begin with the first chapter, shall we? An Absurd Reasoning; Absurdity and Suicide. Give me some time to read it, assimilate it. A few days. But till then feel free to put any and all ideas on the table. I happen to think Camus is wrong. Now, I think this text may get a little challenging in places. There is a chapter on Kierkegaard, e.g. No matter. Mostly not a very dense read.Gary Childress
May I join your expedition? A suggestion: How about Albert Camus' The Myth of Sisyphus? It's kind of a continental classic. I have the book and it appears there are downloadable PDFs of it, if you don't want to purchase a copy. It's also relatively short and accessible. I'm not up to speed on Logic enough to read anything with a lot of equations in it.
The logic of Putnam is not so tough, really. It's just anticlimactic as far as I am concerned. Goes nowhere that I like to go.
-
- Posts: 8121
- Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2011 3:08 pm
- Location: Retirement Home for foolosophers
Re: Existentialism, anyone?
Sounds good. I'm starting the first chapter now. Do you want to start a thread in the "Book Club" forum or shall we communicate via PM? I'm thinking if we post it in the "Book Club" forum others might like to join in where they are able and we could have a broader discussion on it. But it's up to you.odysseus wrote: ↑Wed Feb 12, 2020 4:06 amI have it. Let's begin with the first chapter, shall we? An Absurd Reasoning; Absurdity and Suicide. Give me some time to read it, assimilate it. A few days. But till then feel free to put any and all ideas on the table. I happen to think Camus is wrong. Now, I think this text may get a little challenging in places. There is a chapter on Kierkegaard, e.g. No matter. Mostly not a very dense read.Gary Childress
May I join your expedition? A suggestion: How about Albert Camus' The Myth of Sisyphus? It's kind of a continental classic. I have the book and it appears there are downloadable PDFs of it, if you don't want to purchase a copy. It's also relatively short and accessible. I'm not up to speed on Logic enough to read anything with a lot of equations in it.
The logic of Putnam is not so tough, really. It's just anticlimactic as far as I am concerned. Goes nowhere that I like to go.
Re: Existentialism, anyone?
LOL? ..it's the greatest waste of time, only showing you have ZERO clue about anything!!odysseus wrote: ↑Mon Feb 10, 2020 8:30 pm I occasionally reach out to anyone interested doing a reading, interpreting of a serious work in philosophy. I like to read and study anyone from Kant to the present, even Derrida. I tend to shy away from analytic philosophy because, while helpful, I find it missing the point. Existentialism is fascinating to me.
It is a great way to improve your philosophical understanding
- Immanuel Can
- Posts: 22265
- Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm
Re: Existentialism, anyone?
Also not to miss is "The Sickness Unto Death," by Soren Kierkegaard. Between Camus and Kierkegaard, one gets a very clear sense of the massive difference between the original Christian Existentialism and the later secular versions. Some of the vocabulary is the same (the absurd, angst, self-realization, despair, choice, fatalism, etc.), but the meaning and implications are really profoundly different.Gary Childress wrote: ↑Tue Feb 11, 2020 9:31 am May I join your expedition? A suggestion: How about Albert Camus' The Myth of Sisyphus? It's kind of a continental classic. I have the book and it appears there are downloadable PDFs of it, if you don't want to purchase a copy. It's also relatively short and accessible. I'm not up to speed on Logic enough to read anything with a lot of equations in it.
- henry quirk
- Posts: 14706
- Joined: Fri May 09, 2008 8:07 pm
- Location: Right here, a little less busy.
Re: Existentialism, anyone?
Exposing the discussion to all, and really, it already is, but it dilutes the exchange and makes for a free for all. It is better, I think, to keep it the way it is, here under the original OP. This allows for focus. There are parts of this text that can be, if adventured into, very in depth. His take on Kierkegaard alone invites, well, reading Kierkegaard. But this space he plays in where questioning produces distance from mundane existence is absolutely fascinating, and there is more than a century of writing that takes up where Kierkegaard and Nietzsche left off. Adjacent readings are many and bringing them into the mix is what makes this fun.Gary Childress
Sounds good. I'm starting the first chapter now. Do you want to start a thread in the "Book Club" forum or shall we communicate via PM? I'm thinking if we post it in the "Book Club" forum others might like to join in where they are able and we could have a broader discussion on it. But it's up to you.
Yes, this is my idea of fun.
Re: Existentialism, anyone?
I consider this a most welcome challenge. Why not read the Camus and tell me why it's a waste of time? I notice your ZERO is in capital letters, which suggests passion. Come and do your worst, then. Just be reasonable, have a defense, an argument.HexHammer
LOL? ..it's the greatest waste of time, only showing you have ZERO clue about anything!!
-
- Posts: 8121
- Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2011 3:08 pm
- Location: Retirement Home for foolosophers
Re: Existentialism, anyone?
I was thinking about that after I posted in the "Book Club" forum. Apologies for jumping ahead. I got all excited after reading the first section. Not looking before I leap seems to be a categorical imperative I live by.odysseus wrote: ↑Wed Feb 12, 2020 8:11 pmExposing the discussion to all, and really, it already is, but it dilutes the exchange and makes for a free for all. It is better, I think, to keep it the way it is, here under the original OP. This allows for focus. There are parts of this text that can be, if adventured into, very in depth. His take on Kierkegaard alone invites, well, reading Kierkegaard. But this space he plays in where questioning produces distance from mundane existence is absolutely fascinating, and there is more than a century of writing that takes up where Kierkegaard and Nietzsche left off. Adjacent readings are many and bringing them into the mix is what makes this fun.Gary Childress
Sounds good. I'm starting the first chapter now. Do you want to start a thread in the "Book Club" forum or shall we communicate via PM? I'm thinking if we post it in the "Book Club" forum others might like to join in where they are able and we could have a broader discussion on it. But it's up to you.
Yes, this is my idea of fun.
-
- Posts: 8121
- Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2011 3:08 pm
- Location: Retirement Home for foolosophers
Re: Existentialism, anyone?
BTW: Odysseus, I sent you a couple of PMs, did you see them?
Re: Existentialism, anyone?
give me a day or so to look. Got some business to attend to.