G Existentialism Introduction.ppt

Existentialism: Historical
Background
 Meaning and its locale
 Authenticity

1.1. Introduction
 “When I consider the brief span of my life,
swallowed up in the eternity before and
behind it, the small space that I fill, or even
see, engulfed in the infinite immensity of
spaces which I know not, and which know
not me, I am afraid, and wonder to see
myself here rather than there; for there is no
reason why I should be here rather than
there, now, rather than then.”
–Pascal, Thoughts of Pascal

 “Rarely has the existential question been put more
simply or beautifully. In this passage we see, first, the
profound realization of the contingency of human
life, which existentialists call “thrownness.” Second,
we see Pascal facing unflinchingly the question of
being there or more accurately, being where? Third,
we see the realization that one cannot take refuge in
some superficial explanation of time and space, which
Pascal, scientist that he was, could well know and
lastly, the deep shaking anxiety arising from this
stark awareness of existence in such a universe.”
–May, R. Existence: Origins of the Existential
Movement

1.2. Definition
 “Existentialism is not a comprehensive philosophy,
or way of life, but an endeavour to grasp reality...
existentialism is immersed in and arises directly out
of Western man’s anxiety, estrangement, and
conflicts. Like psychoanalysis, existentialism seeks
to... utilize these very conflicts... as avenues to the
more profound self-understanding of Western man.”
– May, R. Existence: Origins of the Existential Movement
 “In many ways [existentialism] is the unique and
specific portrayal of the psychological predicament
of contemporary Western man....”
– May, R. Existence: Origins of the Existential Movement

“We can see more clearly the significance of the term
[existentialism] if we recall that traditionally in Western
thought “existence” has been set over against “essence.”
Essence refers to the greenness of this stick of wood, let
us say, and its density, weight, and other characteristics
which give it substance.
By and large Western thought since the Renaissance has
been concerned with essence. Traditional science seeks
to discover such essences or substances; it assumes an
essentialist metaphysics. But it can only do this by
abstraction. The existence of the given individual thing
has to be left out of the picture.”
 May, R. Existence: Origins of the Existential Movement.

"Existentialism is not a school of thought nor reducible to any set of
tenets. The three writers who appear invariably on every list of
'existentialists' - Jaspers, Heidegger, and Sartre - are not in agreement
on essentials. Such alleged precursors as Pascal and Kierkegaard
differed from all three men by being dedicated Christians; and Pascal
was a Catholic of sorts, while Kierkegaard was a Protestant's
Protestant.
If, as is often done, Nietzsche and Dostoevsky are included in the
fold, we must make room for an impassioned anti-Christian and an
even more fanatical Greek-Orthodox Russian imperialist. By the time
we consider adding RiIke, Kafka, Ortega, and Camus, it becomes
plain that one essential feature shared by all these men is their
perfervid individualism.The refusal to belong to any school of
thought, the repudiation of the adequacy of any body of beliefs
whatever, and especially of systems, and a marked dissatisfaction
with traditional philosophy as superficial, academic, and remote from
life - that is the heart of existentialism"
 Walter Kaufmann

Rejection of the “rational man”: man as
thinking (or even sensing) subject -
substitution, the individual in motion:
 the division of object and subject
 the object as abstract entity
 the subject as compartmentalized efficient industrial
man
– the division of science and ethics
– the relation between outer and inner fragmentation (Freud)
» the slavery of the self (as a substitute (?) for the slavery of
others)?
» the division of labour
» the reduction of reason to technique

The concept of alienation
 The created object exists in opposition to the creator
– the father vs the son (mythologically speaking)
– dogma vs spirit
– the dead hero vs the live individual
– history vs the present
 untruth is alienation (motivated by cowardice)

The vitality of the subjective (value vs
objective fact?)
 Truth is not a thing, it is a relationship -- a manner of
being, not a manner of conception.
– we cannot be content to view truth disinterestedly, “objectively.”
 Truth as freedom (for Kierkegaard; for Nietzsche, truth
enhances life)
 Truth in terms of relationship to the fact and
commitment (demonstrated in action)
– Can one live it?: All truths are bloody truths to me. (Nietzsche)

Central tenet: life as experienced.
 exemplar: statistical death vs real death
 “Truth exists only as the individual himself produces it
in action.”
 “Away from Speculation, away from the System, and
back to reality.”
– Kierkegaard.

2.0. Prophets of The Dawning
Age
 Outline
– The Inevitability of Nihilism
– The Insufficiency of Reason
– The Necessity of Difficulty
– The Crowd as the Lie
– The Individual as Truth
– Influence on Freud
– Conclusion

2.1. The Inevitability of Nihilism:
Friedrich Nietzsche

2.1. The Inevitability of Nihilism:
Friedrich Nietzsche
 “Of what is great one must either be silent or speak with
greatness. With greatness - that means cynically and with
innocence. What I relate is the history of the next two
centuries.
 I describe what is coming, what can no longer come
differently: the advent of nihilism. . . Our whole European
culture is moving for some time now, with a tortured tension
that is growing from decade to decade, as toward a
catastrophe: restlessly, violently, headlong, like a river that
wants to reach the end, that no longer reflects, that is afraid
to reflect.
 He that speaks here has, conversely, done nothing so far but
to reflect: as a philosopher and solitary by instinct who has
found his advantage in standing aside, outside.

 Why has the advent of nihilism become
necessary?
 Because the values we have had hitherto
thus draw their final consequence;
because nihilism represents the ultimate
logical conclusion of our great values
and ideals-because we must experience
nihilism before we can find out what
value these "values" really had.
 We require, at some time, new values.
Nihilism stands at the door: whence
comes this uncanniest of all guests?

 Point of departure: it is an error to consider "social distress" or
"physiological degeneration," or corruption of all things, as the
cause of nihilism. Ours is the most honest and compassionate
age.
 Distress, whether psychic, physical, or intellectual, need not at
all produce nihilism (that is, the radical rejection of value,
meaning, and desirability).
 Such distress always permits a variety of interpretations.
 Rather: it is in one particular interpretation, the Christian moral
one, that nihilism is rooted.
 The end of Christianity-at the hands of its own morality (which
cannot be replaced), which turns against the Christian God: the
sense of truthfulness, highly developed by Christianity, is
nauseated by the falseness and mendaciousness of all Christian
interpretations of the world and of history; rebound from "God
is the truth" to the fanatical faith "All is false"; an active
Buddhism.

 Skepticism regarding morality is what is
decisive. The end of the moral interpretation of
the world, which no longer has any sanction
after it has tried to escape into some beyond,
leads to nihilism. "All lacks meaning."
 (The untenability of one interpretation of the
world, upon which a tremendous amount of
energy has been lavished, awakens the
suspicion that all interpretations of the world
are false.)”
– Nietzsche, The Will to Power

2.2. The Insufficiency of Reason:
Fyodor Dostoevsky

Fyodor Dostoevsky
 In short, one may say anything about the history of the
world - anything that might enter the most disordered
imagination. The only thing one can't say is that it's
rational. The very word sticks in one's throat.
 And, indeed, this is the odd thing that is continually
happening: there are continually turning up in life
moral and rational persons, sages and lovers of
humanity who make it their object to live all their lives
as morally and rationally as possible, to be, so to
speak, a light to their neighbours simply in order to
show them that it is possible to live morally and
rationally in this world.

Fyodor Dostoevsky
 And yet we all know that those very people sooner
or later have been false to themselves, playing some
queer trick, often a most unseemly one.
 Now I ask you: what can be expected of man since
he is a being endowed with such strange qualities?

 Shower upon him every earthly blessing, drown him
in a sea of happiness, so that nothing but bubbles of
bliss can be seen on the surface; give him economic
prosperity, such that he should have nothing else to
do but sleep, eat cakes and busy himself with the
continuation of his species, and even then out of
sheer ingratitude, sheer spite, man would play you
some nasty trick.
 He would even risk his cakes and would deliberately
desire the most fatal rubbish, the most uneconomical
absurdity, simply to introduce into all this positive
good sense his fatal fantastic element.

 It is just his fantastic dreams, his vulgar folly
that he will desire to retain, simply in order to
prove to himself-as though that were so
necessary - that men still are men and not the
keys of a piano, which the laws of nature
threaten to control so completely that soon one
will be able to desire nothing but by the
calendar.

 And that is not all: even if man really
were nothing but a piano-key, even if this
were proved to him by natural science
and mathematics, even then he would not
become reasonable, but would purposely
do something perverse out of simple
ingratitude, simply to gain his point.
 And if he does not find means he will
contrive destruction and chaos, will
contrive sufferings of all sorts, only to
gain his point!

 He will launch a curse upon the world, and as
only man can curse (it is his privilege, the
primary distinction between him and other
animals), may be by his curse alone he will
attain his object-that is, convince himself that
he is a man and not a piano-key!
 If you say that all this, too, can be calculated
and tabulated, chaos and darkness and curses,
so that the mere possibility of calculating it all
beforehand would stop it all, and reason would
reassert itself, then man would purposely go
mad in order to be rid of reason and gain his
point!

 I believe in it, I answer for it, for the whole
work of man really seems to consist in nothing
but proving to himself every minute that he is a
man and not a piano-key!
 It may be at the cost of his skin, it may be by
cannibalism!
 And this being so, can one help being tempted
to rejoice that it has not yet come off, and that
desire still depends on something we don't
know?

 You will scream at me (that is, if you
condescend to do so) that no one is touching
my free will, that all they are concerned with is
that my will should of itself, of its own free
will, coincide with my own normal interests,
with the laws of nature and arithmetic.
 Good Heavens, gentlemen, what sort of free
will is left when we come to tabulation and
arithmetic, when it will all be a case of twice
two make four?
 Twice two makes four without my will. As if
free will meant that!”
–Dostoevsky, Notes from the Underground

2.3. The Necessity of Difficulty:
Soren Kierkegaard
 “It is now about four years ago that I got the notion
of wanting to try my luck as an author. I remember
it quite clearly; it was on a Sunday, yes, that's it, a
Sunday afternoon. I was seated as usual, out-of-
doors at the cafe in the Frederiksberg Garden . . .
 I had been a student for half a score of years.
Although never lazy, all my activity nevertheless
was like a glittering inactivity, a kind of occupation
for which I still have a great partiality, and for
which perhaps I even have a little genius.

 I read much, spent the remainder of the
day idling and thinking, or thinking and
idling, but that was all it came to... So
there I sat and smoked my cigar until I
lapsed into thought.
 Among other thoughts I remember these:
"You are going on," I said to myself, "to
become an old man, without being
anything, and without really undertaking
to do any-thing.

 On the other hand, wherever you look about you, in
literature and in life, you see the celebrated names
and figures, the precious and much heralded men who
are coming into prominence and are much talked
about, the many benefactors of the age who know
how to benefit mankind by making life easier and
easier, some by railways, others by omnibuses and
steamboats, others by the telegraph, others by easily
apprehended compendiums and short recitals of
everything worth knowing,
 and finally the true benefactors of the age who make
spiritual existence in virtue of thought easier and
easier, yet more and more significant. And what are
you doing?"

 Here my soliloquy was interrupted, for
my cigar was smoked out and a new one
had to be lit. So I smoked again, and then
suddenly this thought flashed through my
mind:
 "You must do something, but inasmuch
as with your limited capacities it will be
impossible to make anything easier than
it has become, you must, with the same
humanitarian enthusiasm as the others,
undertake to make something harder."

 This notion pleased me immensely, and at the same time
it flattered me to think that I, like the rest of them, would
be loved and esteemed by the whole community.
 For when all combine in every way to make everything
easier, there remains only one possible danger, namely,
that the ease becomes so great that it becomes altogether
too great; then there is only one want left, though it is not
yet a felt want, when people will want difficulty.

 Out of love for mankind, and out of despair at my
embarrassing situation, seeing that I had accomplished
nothing and was unable to make anything easier than it
had already been made, and moved by a genuine interest
in those who make everything easy, I conceived it as my
task to create difficulties everywhere.”
–Kierkegaard, Concluding Unscientific Postscript

2.4. The Crowd as the Lie: Soren
Kierkegaard
 “There is a view of life which conceives that where
the crowd is, there also is the truth, and that in truth
itself there is need of having the crowd on its side.
 There is another view of life which conceives that
wherever there is a crowd there is untruth, so that (to
consider for a moment the extreme case), even if
every individual, each for himself in private, were to
be in possession of the truth, yet in case they were all
to get together in a crowd - a crowd to which any sort
of decisive significance is attributed, a voting, noisy,
audible crowd - untruth would at once be in evidence.

 For a "crowd" is the untruth. In a godly
sense it is true, eternally, Christianity, as
St. Paul says, that "only one attains the
goal"- which is not meant in a
comparative sense, for comparison takes
others into account.
 It means that every man can be that one,
God helping him therein - but only one
attains the goal.

 And again this means that every man should be
chary about having to do with "the others," and
essentially should talk only with God and with
himself - for only one attains the goal.
 And again this means that man, or to be a man, is
akin to deity.
 In a worldly and temporal sense, it will be said by
the man of bustle, sociability, and amicableness,
"How unreasonable that only one attains the goal;
for it is far more likely that many, by the strength of
united effort, should attain the goal; and when we
are many success is more certain and it is easier for
each man severally."

 True enough, it is far more likely; and it is true
also with respect to all earthly and material goods.
If it is allowed to have its way, this becomes the
only true point of view, for it does away with God
and eternity and with man's kinship with deity.
 It does away with it or transforms it into a fable,
and puts in its place the modern (or, we might
rather say, the old pagan) notion that to be a man is
to belong to a race endowed with reason, to belong
to it as a specimen, so that the race or species is
higher than the in dividual, which is to say that
there are no more individuals but only specimens.

 But eternity which arches over and high above
the temporal, tranquil as the starry vault at
night, and God in heaven who in the bliss of
that sublime tranquillity holds in survey,
without the least sense of dizziness at such a
height, those countless multitudes of men and
knows each single individual by name - He, the
Great Examiner, says that only one attains the
goal.”
–Kierkegaard, That Individual: Two Notes
Concerning My Work as an Author

2.5. The Individual as Truth: Friedrich
Nietzsche
 “A traveler who had seen many countries and peoples
and several continents was asked what human traits he
had found everywhere; and he answered: men are
inclined to laziness.
 Some will feel that he might have said with greater
justice: they are all timorous. They hide behind customs
and opinions.
 At bottom, every human being knows very well that he
is in this world just once, as something unique, and that
no accident, however strange, will throw together a
second time into a unity such a curious and diffuse
plurality: he knows it, but hides it like a bad
conscience-why?

 From fear of his neighbor who insists on
convention and veils himself with it.
 But what is it that compels the individual
human being to fear his neighbor, to
think and act herd-fashion, and not to be
glad of himself?
 A sense of shame, perhaps, in a few rare
cases. In the vast majority it is the desire
for comfort, inertia-in short, that
inclination to laziness of which the
traveler spoke.

 He is right: men are even lazier than they are
timorous, and what they fear most is the
troubles with which any unconditional honesty
and nudity would burden them.
 Only artists hate this slovenly life in borrowed
manners and loosely fitting opinions and unveil
the secret, everybody's bad conscience, the
principle that every human being is a unique
wonder; they dare to show us the human being
as he is, down to the last muscle, himself and
himself alone - even more, that in this rigorous
consistency of his uniqueness he is beautiful
and worth contemplating, as novel and
incredible as every work of nature, and by no
means dull.

 When a great thinker despises men, it is their
laziness that he despises: for it is on account of
this that they have the appearance of factory
products and seem indifferent and unworthy of
companionship or instruction.
 The human being who does not wish to belong
to the mass must merely cease being
comfortable with himself; let him follow his
conscience which shouts at him:
 "Be yourself! What you are at present doing,
opining, and desiring, that is not really you.”
– Nietzsche, Untimely Meditation on Schopenhauer as Educator

Authenticity
 Kierkegaard: antipathy to the mass man
–the inauthentic subject has become his own
object: the pathology of self-consciousness
 Nietzsche: will to power
–Man’s task is simple: he should cease letting
his “existence” be a thoughtless accident....
In the Gay Science, Nietzsche hits on a
fomulation which brings out the essential
paradox of any distinction between self and
true self: “What does your conscience say? -
You shall become who you are.”
» Kaufman, Walter.

3.0. Conclusion: Part One
 And why are you so firmly, so triumphantly,
convinced -that only the normal and the
positive-in other words, only what is
conducive to welfare-is for the advantage of
man? h not reason in error as regards
advantage?
 Does not man, perhaps, love something
besides well-being? Perhaps he is just as
fond of suffering? Perhaps suffering is just
as great a benefit to him as well-being? Man
is sometimes extraordinarily, passionately,
in love with suffering, and that is a fact.

3.0. Conclusion: Part One
 There is no need to appeal to universal
history to prove that; only ask yourself, if
you are a man and have lived at all. As far
as my personal opinion is concerned, to care
only for well-being seems to me positively
ill-bred.
 Whether it's good or bad, it is sometiines
very pleasant, too, to smash things. I hold no
brief for suffering nor for well-being either.
I am standing for . . . my caprice, and for its
being guaranteed to me when necessary.
 Suffering would be out of place in
vaudevilles, for instance; I know that.

 In the “Palace of Crystal" it is unthinkable;
suffering means doubt, negation, and what would
be the good of a "palace of crystal" if there could be
any doubt about it? And yet I think man will never
renounce real suffering, that is, destruction and
chaos.
 Why, suffering is the sole origin of consciousness.
Though I did lay it down at the beginning that
consciousness is the greatest misfortune for man,
yet I know man prizes it and would not give it up
for any satisfaction.
– Dostoevski, F. (1864). Translated by Walter Kaufmann

3.0. Conclusion: Part Two
 “We are now in a position to see the crucial significance
of the existential psychotherapy movement. It is precisely
the movement that protests against the tendency to
identify psychotherapy with technical reason.
 We have seen that Kierkegaard and Nietzsche, as well as
the representatives of the existential cultural movement
following them, not only contributed far-reaching and
penetrating psychological insights, which in themselves
form a significant contribution to anyone seeking
scientifically to understand modern psychological
problems, but also did something else - they placed these
insights on an ontological basis, namely, the study of man
as the being who has these particular problems.

3.0. Conclusion: Part Two
 They believed that it was absolutely necessary
that this be done, and they feared that the
subordination of reason to technical problems
would ultimately mean the making of man over
in the image of the machine.
–May, Origins.

G Existentialism Introduction.ppt

More Related Content

Similar to G Existentialism Introduction.ppt (20)

More from JojamesGaddi1 (16)

Recently uploaded (20)

G Existentialism Introduction.ppt