Jean-Paul Sartre on life

[Animavore]

Nietzsche could say what Sarte does in one succinct line

[rachelbean]

Nietzsche could say what Sarte does in one succinct line

No, he probably couldn't, but he wouldn't be trying to anyway. Nietzsche was anti-christian in a way I find distracting and there are a lot of other reasons why I prefer Sartre 10 times over, but I'm not going to waste my time talking about it anymore because I really don't care that much about any of it

[Animavore]

He just told it like it was

[Jason]

I agree with some of what you wrote, but disagree with your idea of "self-definition", for want of a better term atm, so I had to vote in disagreement.

Self-definition was the whole point of it. What is there left to agree with?

Maybe I misinterpreted your point, I thought there was more than one - however that is not the whole point of Sartre's philosophy and certainly not existentialism.

[PsychoSerenity]

It all seems to be a bit of a false dichotomy to me - it leaves out the possibility of any naturalistic determinism, and it ignores the importance of emergent patterns in complex systems, that ultimately give us things like society - which is far more powerful than any individual.

[Exi5tentialist]

The quote, and much of this rather solipsistic approach ignores the influence of the social dimension. I have often been puzzled by this given that Sartre was, for a good part of his life, an active and intellectual heavy duty socialist.

I can understand the initial impression of solipsism, but I think it's an unsustainable charge seeing that in his writing Sartre was explicit in demonstrating why his philosophy overcame the problem of solipsism. It's true that Sartre was an ally of the left but never unconditionally. He expressed criticisms of communism, he set out serious challenges to Marxist ideology.

He posited the phenomenon of 'The Other' which directly challenges the interpretation of absolute subjectivity and therefore solipsism, so he recognises a social dimension, in fact Sartre acknowledges we positively depend on that dimension. However, the existence of 'The Other' doesn't absolve us of our absolute freedom or our absolute responsibility for who we are and what we make of ourselves. It's a hard line to take and Sartre did make provision for the universal human inability to act authentically according to our absolute freedom, describing this as 'bad faith'. Nobody's perfect.

In short, at a philosophical level, something is either solipsistic or it isn't. There is no 'rather'.

[Exi5tentialist]

Am I the only person that find Sartre inspiring

Is that a trick question?

[Exi5tentialist]

Tge problem with Sarte is is he talks too much bollox. I found a Robert Solomon lecture on Sarte far more interesting than Sarte himself.

That may be a translation problem (French to American). Or it could be an era displacement: Solomon lived in the 21st century, Sartre didn't.

I think existentialism needs to update itself to remain interesting.

[Exi5tentialist]

Existentialism is nothing else but an attempt to draw the full conclusions from a consistently atheistic position.

Therein lies my interest: "a consistently atheistic position." By this I take him to mean a position the full consequences of the position that God does not exist. This is what makes Sartre more inspiring to me than most modern atheists: he is exacting in his description of a consistently atheistic position.

Anyone can superficially tick a box for the dictionary definition of atheism, and then be utterly inconsistent with that definition through adopting a range of theistic philosophical presumption. This is the main failing of the New Atheists. They lack consistency with the basic idea of atheism. This inconsistency is not found in Sartre's work.

[Exi5tentialist]

I agree with some of what you wrote, but disagree with your idea of "self-definition", for want of a better term atm, so I had to vote in disagreement.

Self-definition was the whole point of it. What is there left to agree with?

Maybe I misinterpreted your point, I thought there was more than one - however that is not the whole point of Sartre's philosophy and certainly not existentialism.

I'd say that's factually wrong. The whole point of existentialism is that existence precedes essence. First, human beings realise they exist. Having done so, they must then define themselves: self-definition. It is the whole point of Sartre's philosophy and of his existentialism. That's what the opening quote means.

[apophenia]

[Disclaimer - if this is comes across like I think I know what I'm talking about, I want to make it clear that I don't. I'm just trying to get my thoughts down]

"I've never been an intellectual but I have this look." — Woody Allen

[Jason]

I agree with some of what you wrote, but disagree with your idea of "self-definition", for want of a better term atm, so I had to vote in disagreement.

Self-definition was the whole point of it. What is there left to agree with?

Maybe I misinterpreted your point, I thought there was more than one - however that is not the whole point of Sartre's philosophy and certainly not existentialism.

I'd say that's factually wrong. The whole point of existentialism is that existence precedes essence. First, human beings realise they exist. Having done so, they must then define themselves: self-definition. It is the whole point of Sartre's philosophy and of his existentialism. That's what the opening quote means.

I'm glad you ceded the point that it's not the whole point of existentialism. I'd love to debate Sartre's existentialism some time.

[Exi5tentialist]

I'm glad you ceded the point that it's not the whole point of existentialism. I'd love to debate Sartre's existentialism some time.

Sartre's existentialism is the only existentialism. I ceded nothing.

[Jason]

I'm glad you ceded the point that it's not the whole point of existentialism. I'd love to debate Sartre's existentialism some time.

Sartre's existentialism is the only existentialism. I ceded nothing.

Well, as you like it.

[Exi5tentialist]

I'm glad you ceded the point that it's not the whole point of existentialism. I'd love to debate Sartre's existentialism some time.

Sartre's existentialism is the only existentialism. I ceded nothing.

Well, as you like it.

No that's Shakespeare. Do try to stay on topic.