Existentialism
I think the current version has a big problem in that it does not recognize christian-existentialist like Jaspers and Marcel. It seems too Sartre-centric too me. (Tomos, Dec15)
However, isn't "Existentialism & Humanism" considered one of the defining works of existentialism? (hif, dec 24)
Prior contents moved to Mosquito ringtone :Existentialism/Talk Old/Talk Old.
I changed the main page, because I think it will be a valuable exercise to re-write this article with more emphasis on defining existentialism, cataloging it's proponents, and explaining what they have in common. The information on the Sabrina Martins :Existentialism/Old/Old version of this page could be useful on various pages about Sartre, but it doesn't apply to all of the existentialists, and some of it covered peripheral issues, which are interesting and perhaps important, but should not receive the prominent billing they did on the prior version of this page.
I want to be clear: I don't mean to say that the old page isn't good or valuable, I just think ''we can do better.''Nextel ringtones :MRC/MRC
I agree... LMS
I'm doing some disambiguation and changed "German" to link to Abbey Diaz Germany. Then I thought on it a bit. Is this completely accurate in this context? "...the German philosophers Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel, Edmund Husserl and Martin Heidegger..." They all seem to be schooled in Germany, but were they all actually German? Husserl in particular appears to have been Czech. I don't know. I'm not a philosophy major, and I realize I may be splitting hairs. That's why I'm asking. —Free ringtones LarryGilbert/LarryGilbert 22:43, 2004 Mar 12
This is the old page, previously at /Old:
Existentialism is a Majo Mills philosophy/philosophical movement primarily interested in examination of the human being from an emotional standpoint. In the aftermath of the Mosquito ringtone World War I/first world war, Sabrina Martins Jean-Paul Sartre, Nextel ringtones Albert Camus and others were distressed by the progressive dehumanization that they saw as a direct result of the rational and scientific thought which impelled the Abbey Diaz Industrial Revolution.
Introduction
Existentialism does away with Cingular Ringtones Rene Descartes' famous argument, summarized as ''I think, therefore I am.'' On the face of it, an existentialist would argue, Descartes' argument is erroneous: thoughts are distinct from us. We may have thoughts, but others may also have them, or they may exist independently of us. Thought is not a good argument for existence. You exist because of what you feel; it is your emotions that are undeniably you.
The existential philosophers make all of their arguments as emotional rather than logical imperatives. Existentialists are more concerned with the nature of happiness than with things.
Some of the better known existential arguments include:
* Hell is other people
* Pain is conciousness
Pain is conciousness
Existentialism divides the world into two categories. One category are called ''en-soi'', things that can be analyzed rationally, like a rock. The second category are ''pour-soi'', things that emote; beings. A thing cannot feel unhappy about being a thing, it has no emotions; a rock is perfectly satisfied being a rock. A being must always therefore compare itself with the thing, and be envious of its ability to just be.
Hell is other people
In order to fill that void, the emptiness of knowing that as beings we must do more than just exist, we fill our minds with other things.
One path is that of avarice, a being can collect things around himself to distract him from the pain of his
conciousness. Things don't fit well into the gap though, as they continually remind us of the difference between
being, and thing; a being who follows avarice must continually renew the set of things that distract him from the
pain.
The second path is that of love, a being may find another ''pour-soi'' to distract her from her conciousness. The
match between pour-soi and pour-soi is better; the being doesn't continually notice that the thing that she is
concious of is not herself by its nature. But pour-soi resist being used in this way the person she loves is not
willing to invest himself solely in filling her conciousness, he must assert himself, and his own emotions.
This paradox, that the only thing that can save you from the pain of conciousness is another being, but that being
will rebel at being used solely in that way, is what the existentialists mean when they say 'Hell is other people.'
Expansion
The above is of course an over simplification. The key to Sartre's theory is that the "existential I" is not a "transcendental I". The problem with the ''Cogito'' is not that it assumes or infers existence from thought, but that that it goes farther than it should by affirming the existence of an I, which is a "thinking thing." To put it in more clear english: A thought I experience proves its own existence, but it does not prove my existence as the "one who has the thought". Though earlier philosophers postulated a "transcendental ego" as thing which thinks, Sartre argues that the transcendental ego is not necessary since thought needs no "pole" to hang on, since as Husserl says, consciousness is always consciousness of something else and that something else can explain thought's existence without postulating an unperceived transcendental ego. However, it is right to point out that attraction and repulsion are understood by Sartre as objects of consciousness, and therefore are one poles on which consciousness hangs.
Now, on to the use of "emotional" certainly the existentialists were concerned that philosophy not lose touch with the basic passions of human existence. Human beings do not just think about the world around them, they become passionately involved in all kinds of relationships. Emotional is not the right word to use, passion is. But even then passion is not opposed to reason (usually) it is simply admitted that Blasé Pascal was correct to say "the heart has reasons know not of." And though this takes Pascal's statement out of context it is very illustrative of the existential position that the world cannot be understood by reason alone. Passionate involvement is necessary if you wish to "really" understand the world around you.
Inclusion of people as existentialists
I added sexually vital Peter Wessel Zapffe (1899-1990) to existentialistic philosophers. Allthough nihilistic from my point of view, I read this description of him on the cover of a book summing up his life. peaked years Sigg3.net/Sigg3.net 14:48 3 Jul 2003
I am very surprised by the mention of Henri Bergson and Emmanuel Lévinas as existentialists. Blaise Pascal has indeed been mentioned as a precursor, although this is too me far from obvious. I cannot say anything about Berdyaev, Stirner and Zapffe. cubans over Marc Girod/Marc Girod 16:58, 29 Nov 2003
::Just a question: Are there clear criterias for being an existentialist which could rule out (or in) people? I mean, what is the definition of existentialist? A person with existentialistic views? It's a circledefinition. - whose accessed Sigg3.net/Sigg3.net 21:26, 29 Nov 2003
::I think so. Existentialism is a sort of dialectical synthesis on top of (thesis) the idealism of Plato, and (antithesis) the realism of Aristotle. There exists something, but it is meaningless, as all meaning comes from discrimination and is free can be placed anywhere, is subjective, or negociated (inter-subjective), and thus engages our responsibility. I think this excludes Lévinas and probably Bergson (I am less sure) as idealists. Pascal sees the necessity of freedom since he doesn't publish his wager; that's why he is a precursor. pulling secession Marc Girod/Marc Girod 14:53, 1 Dec 2003
:::If I'm not mistaken, today's existentialism is based on the words of Jean-Paul Sartre and Søren Kierkegaard. At least on ethics, allthough they are quite different on this matter - Kierkegaard with emphasis on the Religious Level while Sartre clearly states that God is not. But you're right on the radical freedom. Angst is a definite keyword in this -ism. a coffin Sigg3.net/Sigg3.net 22:35, 1 Dec 2003
::What Sartre and Kierkegaard have in common is the freedom and the responsibility of choice (''leap of faith'' for Kierkegaard). I still wait for a justification of the mention of Bergson as existentalist. I think Bergson is not easily classified (and I read this also from von Wright). beautiful georgian Marc Girod/Marc Girod 15:18, 20 Dec 2003
Defining people by actions
Does this sentence mean anything: ''A person can only defined by his actions''?
I changed it to ''..be defined''. - phantasmagoric stage Sigg3.net/Sigg3.net 17:59, 10 Dec 2003
Mention more Nietzsche?
This was a great article, and the last thing I would want to do is critisize it. I thought it was very well structured and well delivered. I think that a little more could be mentioned about Nietzsche, considering he was quite an influential figure of Existentialism. How about it? ~apokryphos
:Go ahead! toward noticeably Be bold!- ferrell public Sigg3.net/Sigg3.net 15:18, 17 Dec 2003
:: I don't understand at all why Nietzsche gets called an existentialist. The biggest thing about Sartre's ideas seems to be freedom, yet Nietzsche was against free will. He didn't believe in a moral world order, but then neither did Spinoza or Hume and no-one calls them existentialists. ~Ed
::: For what it's worth, Camus was considered an existential writer, and he calls free will into question a few times. Nietzche was probably considered existential because of his call for people to live without morals as previously defined, which some have probably interpreted as promoting free will. Just my two cents. against hollow CriminalSaint/CriminalSaint 06:58, 26 Feb 2005
Existentialism and Humanism
Can anybody tell me if whether or not Existentialism is the same as Humanism?
:It is not. There you go. - education richard Sigg3.net/Sigg3.net 14:51, 5 Feb 2004
direct which Dashiell Hammett
Can anybody justify the inclusion of genuity inc Dashiell Hammett in the list of "Major thinkers and authors associated with existentialism"? I certainly can't. I'll give it a few days and then delete the link, if no one objects. televised joint R Lowry/R Lowry 19:23, 19 Mar 2004
Line about fascism in the criticisms of existentialism
I moved this line to the talk page, until someone comes up with a list of who these critics are:
:Existentialism's critics have suggested that these ideas helped foster the growth of for neurontin fascism.
Considering the amount of time halliburton be Simone de Beauvoir and called snow Sartre, as well, write against fascism, overt or otherwise, and for ever-increasing human freedom, my immediate thought is that this line is nonsense. However, if the contributor who added this line would mention who these critics are, and maybe their arguments, I'd be more than happy to see it returned to the article page. -way maslin Sethmahoney/Seth Mahoney 17:29, Jul 2, 2004
Line about Nietzsche in the criticisms of existentialism
'''Moved the following section here pending clarification:'''
:This in turn led writers like miserable lives Friedrich Nietzsche and Leo Strauss to suggest that concepts of "right and wrong" or "good and evil" were entirely arbitrary and subjective; that only through the assertion of the individual will, can a human being express his individual essence.
The sentence as it is now written seems to suggest that existentialism led Nietzsche to suggest that concepts of good and evil were entirely arbitrary, which is absurd considering that Nietzsche died before the existentialist movement began. I'm not familiar with Leo Strauss' work, but I figured the sentence at least needs to be rephrased before it can be moved back, so I took the whole thing. -Sethmahoney/Seth Mahoney 20:59, Jul 2, 2004
I'm not extremely familiar with Strauss, but he's definately not Existentialist.
Camus
By no means do I know all of his work, but the impression I got from what I have read is that Camus does more than Satre in relating what it actually means to every day life to hold an existentialist worldview. The main point of The Outsider, I think, was that we never feel so alive as when we are close to death (non-existence) and therefore we need to continually remind ourselves that death is inevitable and could occur at any point. If you can manage this then your taste for life will be enhanced and you will have the fullest experiences.
I think you could point out some of the positive aspects of existentialism that can follow after the initial dispair and fear of facing the world alone. True freedom may be a terrible thing but it has advantages.
(I haven't got an account yet, but will soon) - Adam
Existentialism and Human Emotions
To the regular contibutors: I only wanted to alert you to this and politely ask you that someone knowledged should either merge this with this article, Jean-Paul Sartre or simply turn into a redirect if you feel that's more appropriate. All the best, Lady Tenar/Lady Tenar 23:29, 15 Dec 2004
Bold, emphasized paragraphs?
What's the deal with the big bold paragraphs? I find it distracting. Otherwise, nice article :).
Modernism template
I've added a Template:Modernism / template feel free to add new articles to it. Stirling Newberry/Stirling Newberry 00:32, 3 Jan 2005
Dear Michael Szymczyk, Please stop spamming this article!
I've removed the following section because it is laced with spam inserted by Michael Szymczyk. I'm not sure what, if any of it, is real. This is the second time I've removed his spam (articles about him and his book have been recently vfd'd and speedied). LeeHunter/LeeHunter 13:11, 19 Jan 2005
*The annual meeting of The Commitee for Existentialism in 2004, which brings together some of the top philosophers, thinkers and writers from around the world to discuss the current state of Existentialism, declared that in 2004 Existentialism had evolved into what the philosopher Michael Szymczyk called "Neo-Existentialism". The commitee published a paper of its annual conference that stated that Post-Modernism in no way hindered or conflicted with the ideas of Existentialism. In fact, they said, books such as Fight Club and Toilet: The Novel, which combined a dreary and confused sense of time and identity along with a consciousness of individuality and death, served to promote Existentialism, in that, it taught people to question, think and above all, live extraordinarily. But, they said, the avant garde in Existentialism should never replace such impeccable gems like "Crime and Punishment" or the film Dead Poets Society, that never stray far from the existential dictum "Carpe Diem". After all, as the committee's paper said in conclusion, "...if one thinks too much, one may find that when all is said and done, one has lived too little."
Regarding 4.46.35.112's addition to the novelists list
Was Kurt Vonnegut really an existentialist? I would argue that he was not; I'll leave this for someone else to back me up on without making a deletion, just in case I'm mistaken, but it seems to me that if anything, Vonnegut was a post-modernist/post-structuralist. Considering the nature of free will as core necessity in existentialism, and Vonnegut's toying with the ideas of solipsism and CONSTANT free-will-as-illusion (see: Breakfast of Champions, for example). CriminalSaint/CriminalSaint 07:41, 21 Feb 2005
:I'd agree that Vonnegut was not an existentialist. It would take some serious argumentation to get me to accept that. I'd also agree that his novels not only don't deal with existential themes, they're decidedly anti-existentialist. Maybe we're missing something? -Sethmahoney/Seth Mahoney 07:46, Feb 21, 2005
:I'll take Vonnegut off the novelists list for now, but I'm not above being proven wrong; it's just that of all the Vonneguts I've read, none have done anything that I've been able to identify as existential. CriminalSaint/CriminalSaint 22:22, 24 Feb 2005
:I'd agree with him not being existentialist, but I wouldn't go so far as to call him post-anythingist. Toying with solipsism and free-will-as-illusion predates postmodernism and poststructuralism by centuries. Delirium/Delirium 11:17, Mar 6, 2005
However, isn't "Existentialism & Humanism" considered one of the defining works of existentialism? (hif, dec 24)
Prior contents moved to Mosquito ringtone :Existentialism/Talk Old/Talk Old.
I changed the main page, because I think it will be a valuable exercise to re-write this article with more emphasis on defining existentialism, cataloging it's proponents, and explaining what they have in common. The information on the Sabrina Martins :Existentialism/Old/Old version of this page could be useful on various pages about Sartre, but it doesn't apply to all of the existentialists, and some of it covered peripheral issues, which are interesting and perhaps important, but should not receive the prominent billing they did on the prior version of this page.
I want to be clear: I don't mean to say that the old page isn't good or valuable, I just think ''we can do better.''Nextel ringtones :MRC/MRC
I agree... LMS
I'm doing some disambiguation and changed "German" to link to Abbey Diaz Germany. Then I thought on it a bit. Is this completely accurate in this context? "...the German philosophers Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel, Edmund Husserl and Martin Heidegger..." They all seem to be schooled in Germany, but were they all actually German? Husserl in particular appears to have been Czech. I don't know. I'm not a philosophy major, and I realize I may be splitting hairs. That's why I'm asking. —Free ringtones LarryGilbert/LarryGilbert 22:43, 2004 Mar 12
This is the old page, previously at /Old:
Existentialism is a Majo Mills philosophy/philosophical movement primarily interested in examination of the human being from an emotional standpoint. In the aftermath of the Mosquito ringtone World War I/first world war, Sabrina Martins Jean-Paul Sartre, Nextel ringtones Albert Camus and others were distressed by the progressive dehumanization that they saw as a direct result of the rational and scientific thought which impelled the Abbey Diaz Industrial Revolution.
Introduction
Existentialism does away with Cingular Ringtones Rene Descartes' famous argument, summarized as ''I think, therefore I am.'' On the face of it, an existentialist would argue, Descartes' argument is erroneous: thoughts are distinct from us. We may have thoughts, but others may also have them, or they may exist independently of us. Thought is not a good argument for existence. You exist because of what you feel; it is your emotions that are undeniably you.
The existential philosophers make all of their arguments as emotional rather than logical imperatives. Existentialists are more concerned with the nature of happiness than with things.
Some of the better known existential arguments include:
* Hell is other people
* Pain is conciousness
Pain is conciousness
Existentialism divides the world into two categories. One category are called ''en-soi'', things that can be analyzed rationally, like a rock. The second category are ''pour-soi'', things that emote; beings. A thing cannot feel unhappy about being a thing, it has no emotions; a rock is perfectly satisfied being a rock. A being must always therefore compare itself with the thing, and be envious of its ability to just be.
Hell is other people
In order to fill that void, the emptiness of knowing that as beings we must do more than just exist, we fill our minds with other things.
One path is that of avarice, a being can collect things around himself to distract him from the pain of his
conciousness. Things don't fit well into the gap though, as they continually remind us of the difference between
being, and thing; a being who follows avarice must continually renew the set of things that distract him from the
pain.
The second path is that of love, a being may find another ''pour-soi'' to distract her from her conciousness. The
match between pour-soi and pour-soi is better; the being doesn't continually notice that the thing that she is
concious of is not herself by its nature. But pour-soi resist being used in this way the person she loves is not
willing to invest himself solely in filling her conciousness, he must assert himself, and his own emotions.
This paradox, that the only thing that can save you from the pain of conciousness is another being, but that being
will rebel at being used solely in that way, is what the existentialists mean when they say 'Hell is other people.'
Expansion
The above is of course an over simplification. The key to Sartre's theory is that the "existential I" is not a "transcendental I". The problem with the ''Cogito'' is not that it assumes or infers existence from thought, but that that it goes farther than it should by affirming the existence of an I, which is a "thinking thing." To put it in more clear english: A thought I experience proves its own existence, but it does not prove my existence as the "one who has the thought". Though earlier philosophers postulated a "transcendental ego" as thing which thinks, Sartre argues that the transcendental ego is not necessary since thought needs no "pole" to hang on, since as Husserl says, consciousness is always consciousness of something else and that something else can explain thought's existence without postulating an unperceived transcendental ego. However, it is right to point out that attraction and repulsion are understood by Sartre as objects of consciousness, and therefore are one poles on which consciousness hangs.
Now, on to the use of "emotional" certainly the existentialists were concerned that philosophy not lose touch with the basic passions of human existence. Human beings do not just think about the world around them, they become passionately involved in all kinds of relationships. Emotional is not the right word to use, passion is. But even then passion is not opposed to reason (usually) it is simply admitted that Blasé Pascal was correct to say "the heart has reasons know not of." And though this takes Pascal's statement out of context it is very illustrative of the existential position that the world cannot be understood by reason alone. Passionate involvement is necessary if you wish to "really" understand the world around you.
Inclusion of people as existentialists
I added sexually vital Peter Wessel Zapffe (1899-1990) to existentialistic philosophers. Allthough nihilistic from my point of view, I read this description of him on the cover of a book summing up his life. peaked years Sigg3.net/Sigg3.net 14:48 3 Jul 2003
I am very surprised by the mention of Henri Bergson and Emmanuel Lévinas as existentialists. Blaise Pascal has indeed been mentioned as a precursor, although this is too me far from obvious. I cannot say anything about Berdyaev, Stirner and Zapffe. cubans over Marc Girod/Marc Girod 16:58, 29 Nov 2003
::Just a question: Are there clear criterias for being an existentialist which could rule out (or in) people? I mean, what is the definition of existentialist? A person with existentialistic views? It's a circledefinition. - whose accessed Sigg3.net/Sigg3.net 21:26, 29 Nov 2003
::I think so. Existentialism is a sort of dialectical synthesis on top of (thesis) the idealism of Plato, and (antithesis) the realism of Aristotle. There exists something, but it is meaningless, as all meaning comes from discrimination and is free can be placed anywhere, is subjective, or negociated (inter-subjective), and thus engages our responsibility. I think this excludes Lévinas and probably Bergson (I am less sure) as idealists. Pascal sees the necessity of freedom since he doesn't publish his wager; that's why he is a precursor. pulling secession Marc Girod/Marc Girod 14:53, 1 Dec 2003
:::If I'm not mistaken, today's existentialism is based on the words of Jean-Paul Sartre and Søren Kierkegaard. At least on ethics, allthough they are quite different on this matter - Kierkegaard with emphasis on the Religious Level while Sartre clearly states that God is not. But you're right on the radical freedom. Angst is a definite keyword in this -ism. a coffin Sigg3.net/Sigg3.net 22:35, 1 Dec 2003
::What Sartre and Kierkegaard have in common is the freedom and the responsibility of choice (''leap of faith'' for Kierkegaard). I still wait for a justification of the mention of Bergson as existentalist. I think Bergson is not easily classified (and I read this also from von Wright). beautiful georgian Marc Girod/Marc Girod 15:18, 20 Dec 2003
Defining people by actions
Does this sentence mean anything: ''A person can only defined by his actions''?
I changed it to ''..be defined''. - phantasmagoric stage Sigg3.net/Sigg3.net 17:59, 10 Dec 2003
Mention more Nietzsche?
This was a great article, and the last thing I would want to do is critisize it. I thought it was very well structured and well delivered. I think that a little more could be mentioned about Nietzsche, considering he was quite an influential figure of Existentialism. How about it? ~apokryphos
:Go ahead! toward noticeably Be bold!- ferrell public Sigg3.net/Sigg3.net 15:18, 17 Dec 2003
:: I don't understand at all why Nietzsche gets called an existentialist. The biggest thing about Sartre's ideas seems to be freedom, yet Nietzsche was against free will. He didn't believe in a moral world order, but then neither did Spinoza or Hume and no-one calls them existentialists. ~Ed
::: For what it's worth, Camus was considered an existential writer, and he calls free will into question a few times. Nietzche was probably considered existential because of his call for people to live without morals as previously defined, which some have probably interpreted as promoting free will. Just my two cents. against hollow CriminalSaint/CriminalSaint 06:58, 26 Feb 2005
Existentialism and Humanism
Can anybody tell me if whether or not Existentialism is the same as Humanism?
:It is not. There you go. - education richard Sigg3.net/Sigg3.net 14:51, 5 Feb 2004
direct which Dashiell Hammett
Can anybody justify the inclusion of genuity inc Dashiell Hammett in the list of "Major thinkers and authors associated with existentialism"? I certainly can't. I'll give it a few days and then delete the link, if no one objects. televised joint R Lowry/R Lowry 19:23, 19 Mar 2004
Line about fascism in the criticisms of existentialism
I moved this line to the talk page, until someone comes up with a list of who these critics are:
:Existentialism's critics have suggested that these ideas helped foster the growth of for neurontin fascism.
Considering the amount of time halliburton be Simone de Beauvoir and called snow Sartre, as well, write against fascism, overt or otherwise, and for ever-increasing human freedom, my immediate thought is that this line is nonsense. However, if the contributor who added this line would mention who these critics are, and maybe their arguments, I'd be more than happy to see it returned to the article page. -way maslin Sethmahoney/Seth Mahoney 17:29, Jul 2, 2004
Line about Nietzsche in the criticisms of existentialism
'''Moved the following section here pending clarification:'''
:This in turn led writers like miserable lives Friedrich Nietzsche and Leo Strauss to suggest that concepts of "right and wrong" or "good and evil" were entirely arbitrary and subjective; that only through the assertion of the individual will, can a human being express his individual essence.
The sentence as it is now written seems to suggest that existentialism led Nietzsche to suggest that concepts of good and evil were entirely arbitrary, which is absurd considering that Nietzsche died before the existentialist movement began. I'm not familiar with Leo Strauss' work, but I figured the sentence at least needs to be rephrased before it can be moved back, so I took the whole thing. -Sethmahoney/Seth Mahoney 20:59, Jul 2, 2004
I'm not extremely familiar with Strauss, but he's definately not Existentialist.
Camus
By no means do I know all of his work, but the impression I got from what I have read is that Camus does more than Satre in relating what it actually means to every day life to hold an existentialist worldview. The main point of The Outsider, I think, was that we never feel so alive as when we are close to death (non-existence) and therefore we need to continually remind ourselves that death is inevitable and could occur at any point. If you can manage this then your taste for life will be enhanced and you will have the fullest experiences.
I think you could point out some of the positive aspects of existentialism that can follow after the initial dispair and fear of facing the world alone. True freedom may be a terrible thing but it has advantages.
(I haven't got an account yet, but will soon) - Adam
Existentialism and Human Emotions
To the regular contibutors: I only wanted to alert you to this and politely ask you that someone knowledged should either merge this with this article, Jean-Paul Sartre or simply turn into a redirect if you feel that's more appropriate. All the best, Lady Tenar/Lady Tenar 23:29, 15 Dec 2004
Bold, emphasized paragraphs?
What's the deal with the big bold paragraphs? I find it distracting. Otherwise, nice article :).
Modernism template
I've added a Template:Modernism / template feel free to add new articles to it. Stirling Newberry/Stirling Newberry 00:32, 3 Jan 2005
Dear Michael Szymczyk, Please stop spamming this article!
I've removed the following section because it is laced with spam inserted by Michael Szymczyk. I'm not sure what, if any of it, is real. This is the second time I've removed his spam (articles about him and his book have been recently vfd'd and speedied). LeeHunter/LeeHunter 13:11, 19 Jan 2005
*The annual meeting of The Commitee for Existentialism in 2004, which brings together some of the top philosophers, thinkers and writers from around the world to discuss the current state of Existentialism, declared that in 2004 Existentialism had evolved into what the philosopher Michael Szymczyk called "Neo-Existentialism". The commitee published a paper of its annual conference that stated that Post-Modernism in no way hindered or conflicted with the ideas of Existentialism. In fact, they said, books such as Fight Club and Toilet: The Novel, which combined a dreary and confused sense of time and identity along with a consciousness of individuality and death, served to promote Existentialism, in that, it taught people to question, think and above all, live extraordinarily. But, they said, the avant garde in Existentialism should never replace such impeccable gems like "Crime and Punishment" or the film Dead Poets Society, that never stray far from the existential dictum "Carpe Diem". After all, as the committee's paper said in conclusion, "...if one thinks too much, one may find that when all is said and done, one has lived too little."
Regarding 4.46.35.112's addition to the novelists list
Was Kurt Vonnegut really an existentialist? I would argue that he was not; I'll leave this for someone else to back me up on without making a deletion, just in case I'm mistaken, but it seems to me that if anything, Vonnegut was a post-modernist/post-structuralist. Considering the nature of free will as core necessity in existentialism, and Vonnegut's toying with the ideas of solipsism and CONSTANT free-will-as-illusion (see: Breakfast of Champions, for example). CriminalSaint/CriminalSaint 07:41, 21 Feb 2005
:I'd agree that Vonnegut was not an existentialist. It would take some serious argumentation to get me to accept that. I'd also agree that his novels not only don't deal with existential themes, they're decidedly anti-existentialist. Maybe we're missing something? -Sethmahoney/Seth Mahoney 07:46, Feb 21, 2005
:I'll take Vonnegut off the novelists list for now, but I'm not above being proven wrong; it's just that of all the Vonneguts I've read, none have done anything that I've been able to identify as existential. CriminalSaint/CriminalSaint 22:22, 24 Feb 2005
:I'd agree with him not being existentialist, but I wouldn't go so far as to call him post-anythingist. Toying with solipsism and free-will-as-illusion predates postmodernism and poststructuralism by centuries. Delirium/Delirium 11:17, Mar 6, 2005
posted at 7:12 PM
0 comments
