what exactly is Existentialism all about?

[GQ Chris]

Just posting this because I want to discuss it here, I know a little bit about it.

 

[The Nihilist]

It's about being bored and drunk in Paris.

 

[Gracchus]

Just posting this because I want to discuss it here, I know a little bit about it.

So what do you know? I have never been able to understand what it even is, and why it matters, if it does.

One of my philosophy professors said it's about putting horse shoes on a unicorn. (I got an "A" in the course. I think he was impressed because I couldn't make any sense of it.)

 

[Eudaimonist]

It's about philosophizing about one's beer, or at least that's how it started for Sartre.

Oh, and it's about asserting that existence precedes essence, and that meaning in life is a pure personal creation, not a discovery.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[Gracchus]

"ex·ist (

g-z

st

)
intr.v. ex·ist·ed, ex·ist·ing, ex·ists
1. To have actual being; be real.
2. To have life; live: one of the worst actors that ever existed.
3. To live at a minimal level; subsist: barely enough income on which to exist.
4. To continue to be; persist: old customs that still exist in rural areas.
5. To be present under certain circumstances or in a specified place; occur: "Wealth and poverty exist in every demographic category" (Thomas G. Exter).
[Latin existere, exsistere, to come forth, be manifest : ex-, ex- + sistere, to stand; see st

- in Indo-European roots.]
ex·is·tence (

g-z

s

t

ns)
n.
1. The fact or state of existing; being.
2. The fact or state of continued being; life: our brief existence on Earth.
3.
a. All that exists: sang the beauty of all existence.
b. A thing that exists; an entity.
4. A mode or manner of existing: scratched out a meager existence.
5. Specific presence; occurrence: The Geiger counter indicated the existence of radioactivity.
Synonyms: existence, actuality, being
These nouns denote the fact or state of existing: laws in existence for centuries; an idea progressing from possibility to actuality; a point of view gradually coming into being.
Antonym: nonexistence
es·sence (

s

ns)
n.
1. The intrinsic or indispensable properties that serve to characterize or identify something.
2. The most important ingredient; the crucial element.
3. The inherent, unchanging nature of a thing or class of things.
4.
a. An extract that has the fundamental properties of a substance in concentrated form.
b. Such an extract in a solution of alcohol.
c. A perfume or scent.
5. One that has or shows an abundance of a quality as if highly concentrated: a neighbor who is the essence of hospitality.
6. Something that exists, especially a spiritual or incorporeal entity.Idioms:
in essence
By nature; essentially: He is in essence a reclusive sort.
of the essence
Of the greatest importance; crucial: Time is of the essence.
[Middle English essencia and French essence, both from Latin essentia, from esse, to be, from the presumed present participle *ess

ns, *essent- (on the model of differentia, difference, from differ

ns, different-, present participle of differre, to differ), created to translate Greek ousi

(from ousa, feminine present participle of einai, to be); see es- in Indo-European roots.]"

The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition copyright ©2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Updated in 2009. Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.

As near as I can, and ever could make out, "Existence precedes essence." seems to mean, "Being precedes being." This could mean, I suppose, that a thing is one thing before it becomes another thing. But why make a fuss about that?

 

[Eudaimonist]

As near as I can, and ever could make out, "Existence precedes essence." seems to mean, "Being precedes being." This could mean, I suppose, that a thing is one thing before it becomes another thing. But why make a fuss about that?

Nah, as I recall, it means that human beings do not live by preprogrammed instinct and so we don't have any purposes built into us by nature. All our purposes are chosen by us. And so while we certainly exist, we don't have a fixed essence (a pre-set nature) inside of us. We choose our essence, and so existence precedes essence.

Even though I personally agree that we do not have preprogrammed purposes, I don't consider myself an existentialist because I see human nature as having a natural function that suggests a non-arbitrary standard of ethics. While one's purposes in life are certainly chosen, their appropriateness to our lives is not. We can make mistakes in choosing our values for the reason that we exist as human individuals.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[GQ Chris]

It's about philosophizing about one's beer, or at least that's how it started for Sartre.

Oh, and it's about asserting that existence precedes essence, and that meaning in life is a pure personal creation, not a discovery.


eudaimonia,

Mark

Ahh, yes yes. I do find in the middle of imbibing, what comes about is very profound inquisitive ponderings on philosophy, and life, lager seems to bring that out of me.

 

[The Nihilist]

Ahh, yes yes. I do find in the middle of imbibing, what comes about is very profound inquisitive ponderings on philosophy, and life, lager seems to bring that out of me.

You should drink whiskey. That should make the problem go away.

 

[Penumbra]

For many existentialists, it means that there is no objective purpose, but people are free to make up their own subjective purpose for their selves if they choose to.

-Lyn

 

[Sphinx777]

Existentialism is a term that has been applied to the work of a number of nineteenth and twentieth century philosophers who, despite profound doctrinal differences, took the human subject — not merely the thinking subject, but the acting, feeling, living human individual and his or her conditions of existence — as a starting point for philosophical thought. Existential philosophy is the "explicit conceptual manifestation of an existential attitude" that begins with a sense of disorientation and confusion in the face of an apparently meaningless or absurd world. Many existentialists have also regarded traditional systematic or academic philosophy, in both style and content, as too abstract and remote from concrete human experience.

 

[nadroj1985]

As near as I can, and ever could make out, "Existence precedes essence." seems to mean, "Being precedes being." This could mean, I suppose, that a thing is one thing before it becomes another thing. But why make a fuss about that?

I don't think merely looking up the definitions in a dictionary is the right method for determining what Sartre means by "existence" and "essence," but granting that you did, this seems an incredibly odd and selective way of reading the definitions you looked up. Only the sixth definition of "essence" you quoted means anything like "being" or "existence."

Even just taking the first entries from each definition yields a non-tautalogous and rather interesting thesis -- namely, that things have actual being before they can be characterized in terms of intrinsic properties. Which, as it turns out, is not all that far from what Sartre means by existence preceding essence.

 

[Tony Danza]

There are many dimensions of existentialism, there is no main objective. Existentialism is more of a sociological attempt at defining the meaning of one's existence, always very focused on the individual and subjective experience.

For a mildly hi-larious approach to existentialism, watch the movie "I Heart Huckabees."

Or just Google it.

 

[The Nihilist]

There are many dimensions of existentialism, there is no main objective. Existentialism is more of a sociological attempt at defining the meaning of one's existence, always very focused on the individual and subjective experience.

For a mildly hi-larious approach to existentialism, watch the movie "I Heart Huckabees."

Or just Google it.

You're going to have to explain what you mean by sociological

 

[Sphinx777]

You're going to have to explain what you mean by sociological

Sociology is the systematic study of human societies. It is a branch of social science (often synonymous) that uses systematic methods of empirical investigation and critical analysis to develop and refine a body of knowledge about human social structure and activity, often with the goal of applying such knowledge to the pursuit of social welfare. Its subject matter ranges from the micro level of face-to-face interaction to the macro level of societies at large.

Sociology is a broad discipline in terms of both methodology and subject matter. Its traditional focuses have included social stratification (or "class"), social relations, social interaction, religion, culture and deviance, and its approaches have included both qualitative and quantitative research techniques. As much of what humans do fits under the category of social structure or social activity, sociology has gradually expanded its focus to further subjects, such as the study of the media, health disparities, the internet, and even the role of social activity in the creation of scientific knowledge. The range of social scientific methods has also been broadly expanded. The linguistic and cultural turns of the mid-20th century brought increasingly hermeneutic and interpretative approaches to the study of society. Conversely, recent decades have seen the rise of new mathematically rigorous approaches, such as social network analysis.

 

[The Nihilist]

Sociology is the systematic study of human societies. It is a branch of social science (often synonymous) that uses systematic methods of empirical investigation and critical analysis to develop and refine a body of knowledge about human social structure and activity, often with the goal of applying such knowledge to the pursuit of social welfare. Its subject matter ranges from the micro level of face-to-face interaction to the macro level of societies at large.

Sociology is a broad discipline in terms of both methodology and subject matter. Its traditional focuses have included social stratification (or "class"), social relations, social interaction, religion, culture and deviance, and its approaches have included both qualitative and quantitative research techniques. As much of what humans do fits under the category of social structure or social activity, sociology has gradually expanded its focus to further subjects, such as the study of the media, health disparities, the internet, and even the role of social activity in the creation of scientific knowledge. The range of social scientific methods has also been broadly expanded. The linguistic and cultural turns of the mid-20th century brought increasingly hermeneutic and interpretative approaches to the study of society. Conversely, recent decades have seen the rise of new mathematically rigorous approaches, such as social network analysis.

Thank you, Sphinx. However, before I come down on this girl like a ton of bricks for being wrong, I thought I'd give her a chance to explain precisely what she means

 

[Gracchus]

I don't think merely looking up the definitions in a dictionary is the right method for determining what Sartre means by "existence" and "essence," but granting that you did, this seems an incredibly odd and selective way of reading the definitions you looked up. Only the sixth definition of "essence" you quoted means anything like "being" or "existence."

Well, I did try other combinations of definition. None of them seemed to make much sense.

Even just taking the first entries from each definition yields a non-tautalogous and rather interesting thesis -- namely, that things have actual being before they can be characterized in terms of intrinsic properties. Which, as it turns out, is not all that far from what Sartre means by existence preceding essence.

But come on! How could a thing exist without properties? On the other hand a thing could have properties and not exist. For instance, it might be ubiquitous, omnipotent, omniscient, and insubstantial.

 

[GQ Chris]

Looks like there was little progress made here... looks like I'll go back to pondering the meaning of life over top shelf whiskey.

 

[Tony Danza]

However, before I come down on this girl like a ton of bricks for being wrong, I thought I'd give her a chance to explain precisely what she means

I meant sociology as the examination of human behavior. So more like psychological. My apologies for being fairly incompetent with the English language :/

I was trying to give a very simple definition, according to my own understanding of existentialism. If I have the wrong idea, I suppose my question lies in the very first post. Care to explain, Nihilist?

 

[nadroj1985]

But come on! How could a thing exist without properties? On the other hand a thing could have properties and not exist. For instance, it might be ubiquitous, omnipotent, omniscient, and insubstantial.

I never said anything about a thing existing without properties. You are of course quite right to say that such a thing is impossible (though there are actually some who'd challenge you on that, I'm not one of them).

What I actually said was that a thing (and we might as well call the things "humans," since for Sartre those are the things for which existence precedes essence) could exist without being characterized in terms of intrinsic properties (i.e., properties that it has just because it's the thing that it is, and not because of its relations to anything else). This is actually where I think your dictionary method gets a little iffy, since I think essence here means something a bit more straightforward than that. What Sartre really means is that a human can exist without our being able to characterize it in terms of essential properties (i.e. properties that it has necessarily). This could be read in a few different ways -- either that properties of humans are all non-essential, or that humans come to gain essential properties as a result of their existence (or, as Sartre will say, as a result of their choices), or that "humanity" in general is essentially undefined -- we don't and can't know what essential properties mark out what it is to be "human."

All of these are interesting theses which are not obviously false or tautological. I'm inclined to believe they're also pretty problematic, and likely false, but they're interesting options, nonetheless.

 

[Gracchus]

IWhat I actually said was that a thing (and we might as well call the things "humans," since for Sartre those are the things for which existence precedes essence) could exist without being characterized in terms of intrinsic properties.

So what he should have said is that you have to recognize the existance of a thing before you can assign it properties? If so, he should have said that, instead of obfuscating the obvious with a catch-phrase.

(i.e., properties that it has just because it's the thing that it is, and not because of its relations to anything else)

A defintion is a boundary, and thus a definition always relates something to something else.

This is actually where I think your dictionary method gets a little iffy, since I think essence here means something a bit more straightforward than that. What Sartre really means is that a human can exist without our being able to characterize it in terms of essential properties (i.e. properties that it has necessarily). This could be read in a few different ways -- either that properties of humans are all non-essential, or that humans come to gain essential properties as a result of their existence (or, as Sartre will say, as a result of their choices), or that "humanity" in general is essentially undefined -- we don't and can't know what essential properties mark out what it is to be "human."

So what he meant was, "I think, therefore I am, and at some point I become uncertain." Can't sell books with that thesis, I would guess.

All of these are interesting theses which are not obviously false or tautological. I'm inclined to believe they're also pretty problematic, and likely false, but they're interesting options, nonetheless.

"Existence precedes essence", then, seems to be an assertion about which we could echo Wolfgang Pauli: "This isn't right. This isn't even wrong."