Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [existlist] Re: Can you still be consider an Existentialist if....

Expand Messages
  • Bobconkawi@aol.com
    Gerald--Neither Camus nor Sartre felt they fit neatly into an existentialist box, eider. Camus was shocked when he met and talked to Sartre for the first time
    Message 1 of 9 , Jun 4, 2006
    • 0 Attachment
      Gerald--Neither Camus nor Sartre felt they fit neatly into an existentialist box, eider. Camus was shocked when he met and talked to Sartre for the first time at just how much they disagreed. Being an existentialist means thinking for yourself, so you are bound to think a little differently from other existentialists. --bob

      -----Original Message-----
      From: dasein512 <gghumanistic@...>
      To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
      Sent: Sun, 4 Jun 2006 18:05:51 -0000
      Subject: [existlist] Re: Can you still be consider an Existentialist if....



      I am in the middle, I believe in the power of choices, I believe in
      the concept of 'bad faith', inauthentic vs authentic, but I also
      believe biology has a powerful influence as well, not just in how tall
      I am, but in predispositions or temperment, but then existenialism
      comes in at this point and we have to choose. I believe that we do
      have some sort of essence, or more appropriately some basic energy
      behind us. I am more inclined towards religious or spiritual
      existentialism, but have some very secular/atheist beliefs as well. I
      have a hard time philosophically fitting in one neat box.

      Gerald







      Please support the Existential Primer... dedicated to explaining nothing!

      Home Page: http://www.tameri.com/csw/exist
      Yahoo! Groups Links






      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • dasein512
      Thank you for your kind comments. I know I come off a little naive....but I guess I am always looking for those more wise than I. I came to existentialism
      Message 2 of 9 , Jun 4, 2006
      • 0 Attachment
        Thank you for your kind comments. I know I come off a little
        naive....but I guess I am always looking for those more wise than I. I
        came to existentialism through readings of Fromm, May, Rogers, and
        then met Buber, Camus. I am still searching but find fertile ground in
        existentialism, where I am rooted firmly, along with humanism, etc.

        Gerald
      • louise
        Herman, I am not the least offended by your opinions. Don t worry about Bill - he just does gruff better than anyone else, and always to good purpose. If
        Message 3 of 9 , Jun 5, 2006
        • 0 Attachment
          Herman, I am not the least offended by your opinions. Don't worry
          about Bill - he just does gruff better than anyone else, and always
          to good purpose. If you look at what you wrote below, however,
          there's strong implication that many of us are clumped together in
          your mind, in that phrase, 'bunch of existential anarchists'. I am
          not an anarchist, nor have I ever met an individual who truly fitted
          that description. For many, claim to such an ethos might provide
          convenient mask, behind which to conduct hedonistic strategies, with
          varying degrees of conscious intent. Existlist does attract
          thinking individuals, fact which ensures that self-serving anarchism
          and heedless hedonism alike may be rigorously questioned here.
          Those who don't like the heat tend to leave the kitchen fairly
          promptly. If there is a big elephant in here, I haven't noticed
          yet. Your own rational powers seem far too substantive to bear the
          metaphor of gadfly, which famously Socrates took upon himself.
          Hadn't realised, before, that it's quite a Homeric image. In the
          Iliad, for instance, it is no disgrace for a warrior to be compared
          with an insect, any more than with a mountain lion or a wolf. Life
          persists, in great specificity. Poets notice this. Louise

          --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "hermanbtriplegood" <hb3g@...>
          wrote:
          >
          > Mister (Miss?) Dasein:
          >
          > In all probability, the most appropriate manner in which to try
          and
          > fit me into your picture of what goes on here is to imagine a
          great
          > big elephant in the room that everybody in the room is doing their
          > level best to try and ignore. I am the gadfly here, often
          > persistently irritating, sometimes out of element, perhaps a freak
          of
          > nature, a reason lover, a rationalist and moralist, in the midst
          of a
          > bunch of existential anarchists. I keep saying, but being
          reasonable
          > is existential too! Besides, since the very basis of
          existentialism
          > is no-rules, I feel quite justified in inviting myself to be here
          in
          > my capacity as a glaring instance of the breaking of the no-rules
          > rule.
          >
          > Welcome aboard.
          >
          > Hb3g
          >
          > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "dasein512" <gghumanistic@>
          > wrote:
          > >
          > > So I am an existentialist!!!
          > >
          > >
          > > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "two_owl_night"
          <two_owl_night@>
          > > wrote:
          > > >
          > > > First, packaged and pre-cooked Existentialism is not what we
          > offer
          > > > here, so we're not obliged to respond. And secondly, you must
          be
          > an
          > > > existentialist for the Existentialist Code to apply, and
          you're
          > not.
          > > > And thirdly, the Code is more what you'd call "guidelines"
          than
          > > > absolutes. Welcome aboard the ghost ship, "No Exit", Mr.
          > > > Gerald.[1]
          > > >
          > > > In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "dasein512" <gghumanistic@>
          wrote:
          > > >
          > > > <You are not sure if you believe in "existence precedes
          essence" I
          > > > think that there is some biology/genetics that makes the
          person
          > who he
          > > > is, and I'm not saying height, weight, etc. That our
          > personalities are
          > > > shaped partly by biology. Am I still an existentialist? Thanks
          > for
          > > > the insight. Gerald>
          > > >
          > > > You bet your ducats! Some angst is alleviated by knowledge of
          > > > biology, specifically genetics, but not all. We can compromise
          > and
          > > > say that our existence is a ship, designed according to
          > blueprint,
          > > > though not perfectly. It will be outfitted, though not for
          every
          > > > possible contingency. The ship is launched and experiences the
          > > > vicissitudes of storms, doldrums, and halcyon seas. So then,
          > living
          > > > out our lives in all these situations forms our essence, which
          as
          > > > Trinidad points out can never be a whole. Sartre and Beauvoir
          > were
          > > > sailing the trades, so to speak. But they didn't comprehend
          > > > shipbuilding or meteorology. Our own Captain William adeptly
          > > > navigates for us under these sidereal realities.
          > > >
          > > > You see, it was not by accident that ships were once named for
          > women,
          > > > though it was bad luck to have them onboard. Even the best
          > helmsman,
          > > > for all his scientific knowledge, must bring the ship back to
          > safe
          > > > harbor from time to time. And like the fat lady sang, "You've
          > gotta
          > > > make your own kind of music, sing your own special song, make
          > your
          > > > own kind of music, even if nobody else sings along."
          > > >
          > > > Mary
          > > >
          > > > [1]"First, your return to shore was not part of our
          negotiations
          > nor
          > > > our agreement, so I must do nothin'. And secondly, you must be
          a
          > > > pirate for the Pirate's Code to apply, and you're not. And
          > thirdly,
          > > > the Code is more what you'd call "guidelines" than actual
          rules.
          > > > Welcome aboard the Black Pearl, Miss Turner," says Barbossa" -
          > > > Pirates of the Caribbean
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > > --- >
          > > >
          > >
          >
        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.