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

Re: [existlist] Re: the Sartre-con

Expand Messages
  • Aija Veldre Beldavs
    ... there s a fundamental relational problem in the assumption of the concept the masses as opposed to oneself as special, individual, human. to underline,
    Message 1 of 5 , Jun 30, 2006
    • 0 Attachment
      > We might know enough to live our own lives, but I doubt we'll ever know
      > enough to guide the masses." Mary

      there's a fundamental relational problem in the assumption of the concept
      "the masses" as opposed to oneself as special, individual, human. to
      underline, one could ironize about the "unwashed masses." arrogant
      intellectuals create social structures which atomize/ pulverize humans
      that form aggregate masses. natural humans in their normal associations
      and relationships are born into and form social units that are meaningful
      to them.

      aija
    • louise
      TC. Beginning to wonder now, if unclarity in my thinking apparently provoked or aggravated by comments you made a couple years ago, has prevented me from
      Message 2 of 5 , Jul 1, 2006
      • 0 Attachment
        TC. Beginning to wonder now, if unclarity in my thinking apparently
        provoked or aggravated by comments you made a couple years ago, has
        prevented me from seeing the philosophic foundation of your
        thought. Maybe you are European in your presentations, maybe
        metaphysical in tradition of German thinkers, such as Kant, Hegel,
        whose works I have scarcely opened. Others at the list will be more
        qualified to comment thereon. Your own existence manifests through
        medium of poetic writing, couched in grammatical prose, balking
        utterly at dialectical subjectivity evinced by Kierkegaardian
        student such as myself. There is so much more to say about the
        message below, I only know a limit has been reached. Ignorance the
        ocean on which may drift this personal pronoun, I do, most slow.

        Mary. If you are correct to state that J-P believed he
        could 'decide for others with his actions', that such decision were
        implicitly contained by his own freedom, we would seem to be in
        presence of that which is cultic rather than philosophical.
        Existentialism is born of the human individual, can die only with
        the death of individual will, and belongs in the bosom of philosphy.

        Louise
        ... making sober preparations

        --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "two_owl_night"
        <two_owl_night@...> wrote:
        >
        > Interesting speculation and mostly accurate assessment of the non-
        > philosophy we call existentialism. But don't forget, J-P believed
        he
        > was responsible for his freedom and able to decide for others with
        > his actions. It suggests an ego of immense proportion to believe
        one
        > is capable of such a life. "But then, what the hell do I know, and
        it
        > probably only matters to my existence anyway." Your last sentence
        > seals the deal for individuals who comprehend the inability to
        know
        > most things with any certainty. We might know enough to live our
        own
        > lives, but I doubt we'll ever know enough to guide the masses.
        >
        > Mary
        >
        > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "Trinidad Cruz" <cruzprdb@>
        > wrote:
        > >
        > > I personally think (with a great respect for the man's
        intelligence)
        > > that he repudiated his philosophy on purpose. I think he saw, as
        I
        > do,
        > > that existentialism and humanism could only be framed by the
        > > individual, and that all personal action is personally mediating
        to
        > > one's own existence regardless of contingency, indeed an ultimate
        > > acceptance of personal responsibility and worth. There was no
        > > metaphysics, no scheme to it, no universal truth, other than
        what
        > one
        > > did with one's own existence; truly the possession of self,
        however
        > > absurd or uninformed or blissful or tragic. He embraced a
        messianic
        > > system to avoid being taken as a messianic presence in a field
        > > (philosophy) that assimilates common sense like a vacuum,
        sucking
        > any
        > > kind of actual human insight whatsoever into a metaphysical view.
        > > Metaphysics is a delusion and not possible for an existentialist.
        > > Consider the philosophic wreck that the existentialist view
        really
        > is,
        > > and that men used to collapse and burst into tears when meeting
        > Sartre
        > > in his heyday. Existentialism is not hope for the masses, it is
        just
        > > unqualified dignity for the individual, for the action of being
        > human,
        > > regardless of contingency, regardless of knowledge, regardless of
        > > information. It was a big thing he drunkenly stumbled upon. It is
        > > foolish to believe he took it lightly in the climate of the
        > twentieth
        > > century at the end of his life. It had to be shaken free of
        > > philosophy, something that can only be assimilated and forgotten
        > into
        > > another kind of being right along with literature. But then,
        what
        > the
        > > hell do I know, and it probably only matters to my existence
        > anyway.
        > >
        > > tc
        > >
        >
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.