• You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

Religion - Nihilism - Existentialism - ???

Savage Idealist

Permabanned
Joined
Aug 17, 2010
Messages
2,841
MBTI Type
ENFP
Enneagram
6w7
Instinctual Variant
sp/so
So I've been wondering, since nihilism is embraced when one gives up all objective values of the world and society, and existentialism is derived from nihilism but actually embraces values (subjective ones), what possible philosophical system would rationally emerge from existentialism? Would people embrace an enhanced existentialism, akin to that of ubermensch level morality? Or something else?
 

erm

Permabanned
Joined
Jun 19, 2007
Messages
1,652
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
5
Do you mean what system of values/morality would rationally emerge from existentialism?
 
S

Sniffles

Guest
Depends on what form of Existentialism one adheres to. Theistic Existentialism follows a different path from Atheistic Existentialism.
 

Lark

Active member
Joined
Jun 21, 2009
Messages
29,569
So I've been wondering, since nihilism is embraced when one gives up all objective values of the world and society, and existentialism is derived from nihilism but actually embraces values (subjective ones), what possible philosophical system would rationally emerge from existentialism? Would people embrace an enhanced existentialism, akin to that of ubermensch level morality? Or something else?

I got a couple of questions before I can provide an answer, what do you mean by "rationally emerge" from existentialism? What is "ubermensch level morality" and why is it "enhanced existentialism"? How so?

I mean are you suggesting that existentialism's subjectivism is akin to or in parity with the amorality, called moral superiority, of the ubermensch? Is the suggestion that they are the same thing anyway? I perhaps could agree with that but only in so far as they are the same thing, one is not a more rationalist philosophy than the other, one does not emerge from the other and one is not existential subjectivism following the advent of rationalism.
 

Zarathustra

Let Go Of Your Team
Joined
Oct 31, 2009
Messages
8,110
Ummm... how about just existentialism? in its various forms and what not?

Also, you could look historically, and say that structuralism was a reaction to existentialism...

And then post-structuralism, deconstruction, and post-modernism were a reaction to structuralism...

The people above also provided some worthwhile questions/answers to your query...
 

Savage Idealist

Permabanned
Joined
Aug 17, 2010
Messages
2,841
MBTI Type
ENFP
Enneagram
6w7
Instinctual Variant
sp/so
Originally posted by erm
Do you mean what system of values/morality would rationally emerge from existentialism?

Yes, what comes after existentialism.

Originally posted by Peguy
Depends on what form of Existentialism one adheres to. Theistic Existentialism follows a different path from Atheistic Existentialism.

I was more or less referring to existentialism in general, or whichever one is currently most popular in our present world.

Originally posted by Lark
I got a couple of questions before I can provide an answer, what do you mean by "rationally emerge" from existentialism? What is "ubermensch level morality" and why is it "enhanced existentialism"? How so?

I meant, what possible system of thought could come from existentialism, if there is any. I've also always seen existentialism as a precurser to a lot of what Nietzsche talks about in his philosophical works, his ideals of how an Ubermensch would one day inherent the earth, it seems as though the mindest of such a being would have to be to an extent existentialist in his own right. This is what brought me to the speculative theory that one form of existentialism would manifest into the philosophy that Nietzsche forsaw, ergo an enhanced existentialism.

Originally posted by Zarathustra
Ummm... how about just existentialism? in its various forms and what not?

Also, you could look historically, and say that structuralism was a reaction to existentialism...

And then post-structuralism, deconstruction, and post-modernism were a reaction to structuralism...

Actually, know that I think about it, existentialism was in of itself a reaction to rational/objective systems of thought that cam before it (not so much nihilism), considering all those forms of thought that reacted from it, perhaps existentialism can't really manifet into anything else beyond itself?
 

Zarathustra

Let Go Of Your Team
Joined
Oct 31, 2009
Messages
8,110
Yes, what comes after existentialism.

I laid out the historical successors for you in my post...

Existentialism>Structuralism>Post-structrualism/Post-modernism/Deconctruction

Personally, I think existentialism is still as relevant today as ever.

The fact that new movements have followed in its wake, does not make it any less relevant or true.

I was more or less referring to existentialism in general, or whichever one is currently most popular in our present world.

Simply put, there's no such thing.

Quite true.

It's sort of a contradiction in terms.

I meant, what possible system of thought could come from existentialism, if there is any. I've also always seen existentialism as a precurser to a lot of what Nietzsche talks about in his philosophical works, his ideals of how an Ubermensch would one day inherent the earth, it seems as though the mindest of such a being would have to be to an extent existentialist in his own right. This is what brought me to the speculative theory that one form of existentialism would manifest into the philosophy that Nietzsche forsaw, ergo an enhanced existentialism.

I'm just gunna throw it out there that you seem a little bit confused and your ideas jumbled up a bit...

Nietzsche was an existentialist. He and Keirkegaard are generally looked at as the first two existentialists.

Other thinkers commonly considered existentialists have followed after them (Heidegger, Sartre, Camus, Merleau-Ponty, de Beauvoir, et al), and the movement sort of started to run its course in the 50s and 60s, during which time structuralism was on the rise.

Actually, know that I think about it, existentialism was in of itself a reaction to rational/objective systems of thought that cam before it (not so much nihilism), considering all those forms of thought that reacted from it, perhaps existentialism can't really manifet into anything else beyond itself?

Well, I think your conclusion (underlined) is more-or-less accurate, but, regarding the bolded, existentialism did indeed spring out of nihilism.
 
S

Sniffles

Guest
Can't forget Garbiel Marcel - he after all is credited with coining the term Existentialism.
 

Zarathustra

Let Go Of Your Team
Joined
Oct 31, 2009
Messages
8,110
I figured I'd leave the Christian Existentialists to you...

I almost wanted to claim Jaspers for myself...

But I figured that would be selfish...

;)
 

Lark

Active member
Joined
Jun 21, 2009
Messages
29,569
I dont think that Nietzsche's philosophising corresponds to existentialism too well, I know he's been described as existentialist but he wouldnt have known the word or very possibly embraced it (although Camus rejected it too I think), I'm unsure about some of Nietzsche's outlook too because he was off his rocker when he came up with some of his ideas and that's a fact, it can be amusing to speculate when exactly he was on the basis of his theorising.

Its clear he felt that life was meaningless and tragic and only had whatever meaning individuals created or attributed themselves, its also clear that he rejected humbling and quietescent thinking, or what he perceived as such, and thought that both of these perspectives where grasped by superior men, his ubermensch, but is his theory that different from Confucious' repeated maxims or sayings about "the superior man thinks/acts" or "the way of the superior man is...", every system of thought will assert its own superiority in some sense, otherwise, if it supposes one is as good as the next, it is nihilism.

There's a great deal of what goes under the heading of existentialism which I think is bogus, its later day sophistry by pseduo-intellectuals and egotists, and it goes double for much of the wordy pretenders which followed, like structuralism, post-structuralism and post-modernism. I reached that conclusion by comparisons between Orwell and Satre and their writings, I gradually came to the conclusion that Satre was despicable and typified a lot of what made Orwell (and I think its a perrenial anglo-saxon trait in many ways, even if I find that strange for other reasons to do with scholasticism vs. the reformation) sceptical or hostile towards intellectuals.
 

Zarathustra

Let Go Of Your Team
Joined
Oct 31, 2009
Messages
8,110
I dont think that Nietzsche's philosophising corresponds to existentialism too well...

False.

...I know he's been described as existentialist but he wouldnt have known the word or very possibly embraced it (although Camus rejected it too I think)...

Well, as has been noted, the term had not yet been coined, but that means nothing about whether or not the term would be fitting (for him, or Kierkegaard [who also couldn't have known of it]).

Furthermore, most thinkers generally considered existentialists have rejected the label...

...I'm unsure about some of Nietzsche's outlook too because he was off his rocker when he came up with some of his ideas and that's a fact...

Bolded is false.

I'm not disputing that something may have been wrong with him, but nobody, including yourself, knows exactly what was going on.

...it can be amusing to speculate when exactly he was on the basis of his theorising.

Particularly for those with a predisposition against him.

Its clear he felt that life was meaningless...

False.

...its also clear that he rejected humbling and quietescent thinking...

I'm not sure what "quietescent" means, but the first claim is false.

Your reading of Nietzsche continues to not impress...

...[Existentialism is] later day sophistry by pseduo-intellectuals and egotists...

Men in glass houses should not throw stones.

...and it goes double for much of the wordy pretenders which followed, like structuralism, post-structuralism and post-modernism.

This I will tend to agree with more.

I reached that conclusion by comparisons between Orwell and Satre and their writings, I gradually came to the conclusion that Satre was despicable and typified a lot of what made Orwell (and I think its a perrenial anglo-saxon trait in many ways, even if I find that strange for other reasons to do with scholasticism vs. the reformation) sceptical or hostile towards intellectuals.

I'm not a big fan of Sartre, but maybe you should try to appreciate the positives of his thought; they were very much at odds with the structuralists, post-structuralists, and post-modernists you so claim to despise.

Also, to form your judgment about all of existentialism based almost entirely on your reading of Sartre, as you have said you've done, is rather myopic.
 

erm

Permabanned
Joined
Jun 19, 2007
Messages
1,652
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
5
So why do you think existentialism undermines anything but the "absolute" in absolute values?

I'm not saying whether there is a more rational moral system for an existentialist, but from what I've seen most moral systems continue in much the same form through existentialism.
 

Savage Idealist

Permabanned
Joined
Aug 17, 2010
Messages
2,841
MBTI Type
ENFP
Enneagram
6w7
Instinctual Variant
sp/so
I thank you all for providing me with some clear answers to my question, although I think in future reference I'll take the initiative to reread any texts I have on the matter, rather than make hasty posts that betray any ignorance that I possess on the subject.
 

Zarathustra

Let Go Of Your Team
Joined
Oct 31, 2009
Messages
8,110
I thank you all for providing me with some clear answers to my question, although I think in future reference I'll take the initiative to reread any texts I have on the matter, rather than make hasty posts that betray any ignorance that I possess on the subject.

Sorry if I made you feel that way...

That wasn't the goal...

Personally, I think this method is actually a decent way to foster learning...

I'm sorry if I've contributed to disrupting it...
 
G

Ginkgo

Guest
So why do you think existentialism undermines anything but the "absolute" in absolute values?

I'm not saying whether there is a more rational moral system for an existentialist, but from what I've seen most moral systems continue in much the same form through existentialism.

It's generally a theme in existentialism to dichotomize Truth in terms of subjective truth and objective truth. Objective truths regard the essential qualities of things that can be demonstrated through science or analysis, while subjective truths are in the realms of commitments, interpretations, and personal values. For instance, the oaths taken in marriage would be examples of subjective truths; but once they are acted out they can be verified as objective.

In a way, this does leave room for absolute values; but existentialists are mostly concerned with ways for an individual to achieve purpose in life, whether it be faith based, power based, or something else entirely. This isn't exactly a call for proselytizing absolute values to others in the conventional way.
 

erm

Permabanned
Joined
Jun 19, 2007
Messages
1,652
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
5
This isn't exactly a call for proselytizing absolute values to others in the conventional way.

Change that "absolute" to "subjective" though and then many will.

According to Existentialist thought, everybody who follows absolute values are actually following subjective ones they merely think are absolute. As such, simply ceasing to think they are absolute does not remove the "they should be followed by everyone" aspect.
 

Lark

Active member
Joined
Jun 21, 2009
Messages
29,569
So why do you think existentialism undermines anything but the "absolute" in absolute values?

I'm not saying whether there is a more rational moral system for an existentialist, but from what I've seen most moral systems continue in much the same form through existentialism.

Well, to me existentialism is practically indistinguishable from other moral systems, whereby an adherent of, for instance, humanitarianism could subscribe to their values because they believe they correspond to universal, perrenial or "natural" norms or laws an existentialist would suggest there's no such thing but that subscribing to humanitarianism is still worthwhile for them personally.

That's my understanding of it, which pretty much comes from Camus, although I've read most of the existentialists and their precursors, in the end I sort of think its a very round about way of converging on the same essential point and only really important to people who are going to scrutinise the "why for", instead of simply the "what".

I've got to admit that I'm of a mind with a lot of the traditional or UK philosophers who are skeptical in the extreme about "continential trends" like existentialism.
 

Lark

Active member
Joined
Jun 21, 2009
Messages
29,569
Change that "absolute" to "subjective" though and then many will.

According to Existentialist thought, everybody who follows absolute values are actually following subjective ones they merely think are absolute. As such, simply ceasing to think they are absolute does not remove the "they should be followed by everyone" aspect.

That sums it up well but also makes me wonder what the expending of effort and time was all for.
 
Top