![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Existentialism
Apr. 6th, 2010 04:36 pmRead an excerpt from my Humanities book today about Existentialism. I've read about it a bit before, but most of my exposure to it was through Albert Camus ("The Stranger," "Exile and the Kingdom"). Basically Jean-Paul Sartre put forth the idea that human beings have no fixed nature. Human beings are "condemned to be free." Also, every choice we make affects not only ourselves, but those around us, and ultimately all of mankind. This idea Sartre called "anguish." The only thing we don't have control over is our birth, which is why we are "condemned to be free," without our own choice, we are thrust into a world for which we are completely 100% accountable.
It made me think about things differently. First of all, that seemed horribly depressing. The words which the Frenchman used to describe the conditions probably had a lot to do with it. I suppose that those are the things most people would feel. Imagining the idea of every single action affecting all of mankind would drive some to feel anguish. Of course there are those who believe that these conditions are a good thing, a very hopeful thing even. I have mixed feelings, and for me I swing back and forth between the two ideas. I need to committ to one (good thing).
One of the central ideas is that there is no one else to hold accountable. Existentialists don't argue about whether or not there is or isn't a God, because that doesn't matter to their argument. Simply that humans are completely responsible for their actions and cannot blame anything else, such as divinity, chance, passion, or another human being. In the end, we all put ourselves into the situations we wanted/ needed/ or neglected ourselves enough to be in.
The reason I bring this up (since I'm not enjoying being so academic in personal postings lately) is because it seems to reflect the ideas of a lot of people close to me whom I know. Being fully accountable is something which has scared the crud out of me to be perfectly honest. Like most people I enjoy excuses. It's my parents fault. It's rough at work. I'm just tired. All kinds of bullshit marches through my lips.
It made me think about things differently. First of all, that seemed horribly depressing. The words which the Frenchman used to describe the conditions probably had a lot to do with it. I suppose that those are the things most people would feel. Imagining the idea of every single action affecting all of mankind would drive some to feel anguish. Of course there are those who believe that these conditions are a good thing, a very hopeful thing even. I have mixed feelings, and for me I swing back and forth between the two ideas. I need to committ to one (good thing).
One of the central ideas is that there is no one else to hold accountable. Existentialists don't argue about whether or not there is or isn't a God, because that doesn't matter to their argument. Simply that humans are completely responsible for their actions and cannot blame anything else, such as divinity, chance, passion, or another human being. In the end, we all put ourselves into the situations we wanted/ needed/ or neglected ourselves enough to be in.
The reason I bring this up (since I'm not enjoying being so academic in personal postings lately) is because it seems to reflect the ideas of a lot of people close to me whom I know. Being fully accountable is something which has scared the crud out of me to be perfectly honest. Like most people I enjoy excuses. It's my parents fault. It's rough at work. I'm just tired. All kinds of bullshit marches through my lips.
