You need to sign in or sign up before continuing.
Take a photo of a barcode or cover
4.22 AVERAGE
4.22 AVERAGE
This was a fun read, getting to know some philosophers personalities better. I want to read more about Maurice Merleau-Ponty now.
emotional
inspiring
reflective
medium-paced
Although I really enjoyed Bakewell's earlier book on Montaigne, and I had some interest in learning about some of the existentialist philosophers, this book ended up falling flat for me. I think there are a few reasons for that. Mainly, the book spreads itself too thin by trying to cover all of these characters. Just look at the subtitle: seven people are named, plus a generic "and others"! A couple of months after reading the book, I literally don't remember a single thing about Karl Jaspers, even though he is named in the subtitle. My feeling is that the book would have been stronger if it had focused only on one or two of these characters, with the others in a supporting role instead of getting their own chapters. Sartre and Beauvoir are the obvious choices, but maybe Bakewell thought that was overdone. I think I can see why Bakewell wanted to include the full cast--the social aspects seem to have been an important part of the movement--but it just didn't work for me as a self-contained book.
I guess my other complaint is that I didn't come away from the book with a very strong understanding of existentialist philosophy, or of phenomenology, its precursor. This is probably a joint fault of the philosophy itself, Bakewell's exposition, and my own understanding. I didn't feel like I could understand it either as a coherent approach to describing the world (or some component of it), or as a practical outlook on how to live our lives--these to me being the two main categories of useful philosophy. I felt like I came away with a couple of core ideas that I can see as valuable, but no more than that. The first, from phenomenology, is the idea that individual lived experiences are or should be the fundamental unit of analysis, as contrasted to some abstracted universal experience or principles. I can see this as a significant departure from much of earlier philosophy (Montaigne being an obvious exception), and contributing to movements like feminism (directly via Beauvoir) and race studies (via e.g. Richard Wright, who is mentioned a few times in the book). But it seems to me more interesting to study those offspring than the original idea itself. The second, from existentialism, is the idea that we are necessarily and continuously burdened with choosing "for ourselves," and that any attempt to act or believe otherwise is an instance of "bad faith" (for example, believing that we must be guided by the dictates of a religion or other tradition, without recognizing that we are freely choosing to believe that this tradition is worthy of following). This idea seems to be a strong influence on some books I have really liked, such as Erich Fromm's "Escape From Freedom" and Victor Frankl's "Man's Search for Meaning". It also feels to me like a valuable idea to reflect on regularly in the context of one's own life, when so much is determined (or appears to be so!) by routine, tradition, etc. However, the idea itself also seems to undercut any potential project of developing a further philosophy!
Now that I wrote those things out, they do seem more substantive that I started out thinking. Perhaps existentialism is an odd type of philosophy in that its ideas often seem better expounded through literary writing than analytical writing. (One could argue that it's not appropriate to call it a philosophy for that reason; I'm not sure if I agree.) But anyway, my main problem with this book itself still stands, and mainly, it made me want to go back and read Montaigne again!
I guess my other complaint is that I didn't come away from the book with a very strong understanding of existentialist philosophy, or of phenomenology, its precursor. This is probably a joint fault of the philosophy itself, Bakewell's exposition, and my own understanding. I didn't feel like I could understand it either as a coherent approach to describing the world (or some component of it), or as a practical outlook on how to live our lives--these to me being the two main categories of useful philosophy. I felt like I came away with a couple of core ideas that I can see as valuable, but no more than that. The first, from phenomenology, is the idea that individual lived experiences are or should be the fundamental unit of analysis, as contrasted to some abstracted universal experience or principles. I can see this as a significant departure from much of earlier philosophy (Montaigne being an obvious exception), and contributing to movements like feminism (directly via Beauvoir) and race studies (via e.g. Richard Wright, who is mentioned a few times in the book). But it seems to me more interesting to study those offspring than the original idea itself. The second, from existentialism, is the idea that we are necessarily and continuously burdened with choosing "for ourselves," and that any attempt to act or believe otherwise is an instance of "bad faith" (for example, believing that we must be guided by the dictates of a religion or other tradition, without recognizing that we are freely choosing to believe that this tradition is worthy of following). This idea seems to be a strong influence on some books I have really liked, such as Erich Fromm's "Escape From Freedom" and Victor Frankl's "Man's Search for Meaning". It also feels to me like a valuable idea to reflect on regularly in the context of one's own life, when so much is determined (or appears to be so!) by routine, tradition, etc. However, the idea itself also seems to undercut any potential project of developing a further philosophy!
Now that I wrote those things out, they do seem more substantive that I started out thinking. Perhaps existentialism is an odd type of philosophy in that its ideas often seem better expounded through literary writing than analytical writing. (One could argue that it's not appropriate to call it a philosophy for that reason; I'm not sure if I agree.) But anyway, my main problem with this book itself still stands, and mainly, it made me want to go back and read Montaigne again!
Astonishing. Bakewell is so skilled at taking complex ideas and making them familiar and she has clearly done the reading, so so much of it. I am grateful to her for doing the work so the rest of us can appreciate the interconnected ideas and personalities that made up “Existentialism”.
challenging
informative
mysterious
reflective
slow-paced
i read this book at the end of middle school, the summer going into my first year of high school. it was my first real introduction to existentialist philosophy and it was absolutely captivating. what is particularly wonderful about this book is that it does its very best to chop down super dense, heady ideas into accessible concepts, as much as that is possible with these writers. the beautiful way that sarah does this is not by structuring the book as dense conceptual academic philosophical text, but as a collective biography, putting these writers and ideas into a greater context. this skillful blend of the tangible and intangible (concrete biography and inconcrete philosophy) makes this book a wonderful introduction to this particularly remarkable moment in history that defines european existentialist philosophy. added bonus: she meticulously provides wonderful jumping off points to dive into the thick of it. from fourteen year old me: a million thank yous. for welcoming me and showing me around this world that would be my shelter through the next few years of my life and help to define my person and i grew and stretched.
An excellent book that provides a holistic account of Phenomenology, Existentialism, and the lives of the thinkers most prominent in these schools of thought. Existentialism is a philosophy of understanding life as lived, and how we choose to navigate it, and so a book that weaves the complexity of different philosophies with the ambiguities inherent to their creator's lives is maybe one of the best ways to understand this branch of philosophy.
Unlike many secondary philosophical texts, this one doesn't feel like it's just part of a lecture series, and so it is especially valuable to people trying to learn philosophy outside of a classroom setting. Much of the context and enlightening connections missed by some secondary texts are abundantly present here.
If you're looking to learn about Phenomenology and/or Existentialism from the ground up, this is an excellent starting place. After reading it, you will have enough of an understanding of the key players and their relationships to start reading just about any of them - though maybe don't start with Heidegger or Sartre.
Unlike many secondary philosophical texts, this one doesn't feel like it's just part of a lecture series, and so it is especially valuable to people trying to learn philosophy outside of a classroom setting. Much of the context and enlightening connections missed by some secondary texts are abundantly present here.
If you're looking to learn about Phenomenology and/or Existentialism from the ground up, this is an excellent starting place. After reading it, you will have enough of an understanding of the key players and their relationships to start reading just about any of them - though maybe don't start with Heidegger or Sartre.
Not sure I can truly capture in words what I’ve just experienced in getting through this book. In this incredible account of the existentialist movement, Sarah Bakewell walks us through the key players, chronological moments, and ideas that shaped existential philosophy. She is thorough and engaging, masterfully breaking down complex ideas into digestible concepts. I had a very limited understanding for existentialism prior to this read and have emerged from this book blown away by the sheer impact these revolutionary, seemingly terrifying, ideas have had on our society over the past century. Highly recommend.
