You need to sign in or sign up before continuing.
Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.65 AVERAGE
3.65 AVERAGE
Best intro book to Sartre’s thought and existentialism in general
challenging
medium-paced
informative
reflective
slow-paced
Good intro to how anguish, despair, and forlornness are talked about in an existentialist context, and how they contribute to or highlight one's freedom to develop. Kinda goes off into the weeds when discussing psychoanalysis though; I've ignored the last couple chapters for reviewing/rating this.
"A freedom which wills itself freedom is in fact a being-which-is-not-what-it-is and which-is-what-it-is-not, and which chooses as the ideal of being, being-what-it-is-not and not-being-what-it-is."
TAKEAWAYS
-what would happen if everybody looked at things as not affecting the whole of humanity?
-if God does not exist we have no values or commands that will legitimize our conduct
-a man leaves his impression on his life based on the reality of his ACTIONS, not his hopes and dreams
-an existentialist looks at a coward as a person who is a coward BY THEIR ACTS AND CHOICES, a non-existentialist looks at a coward who just happens to be that way innately
-action is the only thing that enables a man to LIVE and leave his mark
-in order to gain truth about yourself, you must have contact/relationships with other people (compare/contrast only works with two disparate objects)
-before you were alive, life meant nothing; it's up to you to give it meaning and the value of your life is nothing other than the meaning you choose throughout
-Sartre defines "the instant" as an abrupt change in orientation and the assuming a new position in the face of an unalterable past; have never thought of it like that, what a beautiful definition
-one of the most fundamental tendencies of being human is to "fill holes", ie filling empty places
-what would happen if everybody looked at things as not affecting the whole of humanity?
-if God does not exist we have no values or commands that will legitimize our conduct
-a man leaves his impression on his life based on the reality of his ACTIONS, not his hopes and dreams
-an existentialist looks at a coward as a person who is a coward BY THEIR ACTS AND CHOICES, a non-existentialist looks at a coward who just happens to be that way innately
-action is the only thing that enables a man to LIVE and leave his mark
-in order to gain truth about yourself, you must have contact/relationships with other people (compare/contrast only works with two disparate objects)
-before you were alive, life meant nothing; it's up to you to give it meaning and the value of your life is nothing other than the meaning you choose throughout
-Sartre defines "the instant" as an abrupt change in orientation and the assuming a new position in the face of an unalterable past; have never thought of it like that, what a beautiful definition
-one of the most fundamental tendencies of being human is to "fill holes", ie filling empty places
Excerpted essays pulled from "Existentialism" and "Being and Nothingness."A fantastic read, especially the first half which is quite clarifying on the intricacies of existentialism.
In a world without God, are there man and morals? Through the concepts of Anguish, Freedom and Will, Sartre attempts to argue that *yes*, it is man who now tries to find meaning. The first few chapters and the final one are well argued, and rest on relatively uncontroversial principles- but more strikingly, I find them more instructive and descriptive than the rest of the existentialist, or even nihilist philosophers. The psychoanalysis chapters are rather dated though, and I find that the inclusion of them (under the theme of Human Emotions?) detracts from the book as a whole.
Accessible, basic explanation of Existentialism for beginners like myself!
Sartre’s writing style is so engaging.
But then again, he goes on about existentialist psychoanalysis towards the end and the book lost me:(
I still highly recommend, it’s thought provoking and easy to read.
Sartre’s writing style is so engaging.
But then again, he goes on about existentialist psychoanalysis towards the end and the book lost me:(
I still highly recommend, it’s thought provoking and easy to read.
…man is condemned to be free.
Condemned, because he did not create himself, yet, in other respects is free; because, once thrown into the world, he is responsible for everything he does.
The most terrible situations of war, the worst tortures do not create a non-human state of things; there is no non-human situation.
Before you come alive, life is nothing; it's up to you to give it a meaning, and value is nothing else but the meaning that you choose.
Absolute fire until the bs about existential psychoanalysis begins three fourths into the book.