Existentialism

[KingAlfred]

In some ways I have great respect for existentialism. At a base level its beliefs on choice and responsibility are something we should all remember.

I agree. I admire the discernment and courage belief in it requires. It’s not for me, though.

 

[KingAlfred]

Existentialism doesn’t deny the notion of “transcendental” truth; it’s beside the point. If you and your personal life don’t matter to the Almighty Transcendental Universe of Everlasting Mathematical Truth, then what is really the point of anything? What matters is the life I lead now and the meaning I can derive from it.

That sounds very similar to what I recall of Sartre and Camus (many moons ago, I’m afraid). I know Nietzshe (sp) commented directly on what I mentioned previously.

 

[LeonBloy]

Hi, I love existentialism and have read a great deal–of the atheistic types, and the Thomistic existential philosophy. It then can lead a lovely path to phenomenology… which as you know John Paul the Great was a big fan… so here goes:

Basically, existentialists posit that existence precedes essence. Existence is “that a thing is.” Essence is “what a thing is.”

Kierkegaard, Marcel, Maritain, Pieper… there are several others. I think it is good read the atheistic philosophers (Camus, Sartre, although Camus seems deeper and is quite lovely in French) in a sort of Pseudo-Dionysius-ian treatment of rationalists conception of God. It makes sense in the face of something like Hegel, existentialism that is.

edit to add: Authenticity is a huge notion as well. And a great moral text of existentialism is Victor Frankl’s Man’s Search for Meaning…

 

[Jim_Baur]

LeonBloy

What is phenomenology?

Oh, thanks to all of you for your help!

LeonBloy, thanks in advance!

I hope you are still there!

Any person can answer: What is phenomenology?

THANKS!

If you don’t mind–make it simple!

 

[LeonBloy]

plato.stanford.edu/entries/phenomenology/

interestingly, the ‘father’ of phenomenology, Husserl, had a great female assistant, Edith Stein, who became a great Catholic Saint Teresa Benedicta of the Cross.

 

[LeonBloy]

I’ve read a lot of Heidegger, but not Husserl in any depth. I’m itching to read Edith Stein’s Science of the Cross, and actually all of her work. She was a great mind, and we are very lucky to have her work, a great Carmelite.

 

[DixiesFinest]

I suspect he just succumbed to mental disease. The few works of his I read were excellent. I didn’t agree with his atheism, but I liked his ‘literary’ style of philosophy.

Very true. The Madman (found in N. “The Gay Science”) has to be the easiest piece of philosophy to understand I have ever read. Agree with it? Not entirely, but easy to understand at least.

 

[LeonBloy]

The impulses involved with Existentialism are certainly very amenable to Christianity. It’s a very active philosophical position; Peter Kreeft calls it the front lines. It’s the kind of philosophical energy that Catholics could sometimes stand to take their cue from.

and they certainly have… It is all about Being, and the contemporary Thomists have been either influenced or versed in existentialism. And their contention is largely that: Being is very important to philosophy, and no one has thought about it as deeply as the medievals and no one has thought about it as deeply as the Medieval Thomas Aquinas.

Remember Jacques and Raissa’s suicide pact? They vowed to commit suicide together if they didn’t discover the authentic Truth. Thank God they met Leon Bloy (okay Bloy is a hugely admired soul of yours truly) and subsequently converted to Catholicism.

Also if you read Josef Pieper’s autobiography, No one Could have Known you will also see this intense passion for the authentic, this existential anguish and despair–and Holy Mother Church has encountered this before and has a lovely answer.

…

 

[mattjak28]

as has been said by many before on this thread, there are three main points that qualify an existentialist: existence before essence, belief in the absurdity of life, and absolute freedom. but, for each existential thinker, there is a unique combination of these three to the point where it can become a very christian doctrine.
Kierkegaard, the father of existentialism and a devout christian felt that the absurdity of life in this world for most was a sign of the need for an inward reconnection with god. this tumult of living without definite reason or logic connecting our line of existence meant that comfort was to be found in a leap of faith into religion. it was not an entirely irrational move, but he admited that it also could not be proven with empirical exactitude. it took an occasional suspension of judgement and blind dash into god in order for the absurdity of life to be managed.
in this way, he was not unlike St thomas, who proposed that while gods existence was probable by logic, it could not be connected to reality by logic alone and rather took revelation.

basically, existentialism is not so bad in the proper recipe

 

[IrishBrigade]

*In simple language, what is it?
*

…as defined by the estimable giant of Western thought, Bubba, it depends on what the “meaning of ‘is’ is”…

 

[Isambard]

Nietzsche moved from existentialism to nihilism and went insane.

No he didn’t. He wrote against nihilism in several of his books.

As per the insanity, the evidence is much more indicative of brain siphilus in his later years which is neither here nor there.

 

[Greg27]

It is basically a philosophical movement that tries to address philosophical questions from the viewpoint of individual human existence, focused on the needs, problems and issues of the individual person. Typical themes include alienation, the question of religion and belief in God, anxiety, inauthentic vs authentic living, guilt, subjectivity, action, ethics and morality, and other themes. John MacQuarrie (a very good philosophical theologian) wrote a book about it, and there are other good introductions.

“Nietzsche moved from existentialism to nihilism and went insane.”

Nietzsche, strictly speaking, was not a nihilist. It is more accurate to say he thought there were currents of nihilism in European culture and he wanted Europeans to face up to these currents by renewing European culture with great art, ideas, and visions. I think his view is close to the Greek philosophical tradition in many ways, particularly that of the Pre-Socratics and Aristotle.

 

[Jim_Baur]

Basically, existentialists posit that existence precedes essence. Existence is “that a thing is.” Essence is “what a thing is.”

Concerning existence precedes essence: I have come to the understanding that essence and existence come into being at the same time. I have come to the understanding that essence is first in a principle manner. I have come to the understanding that essence is first in a cardinal number manner.

The best example for me would be our understanding of the human being. The soul is first in the principle or cardinal number manner. They come into existence simultaneously, but soul is first in the sense of controlling the existence of the human.

Does this make some sense?

Is this correct?