Where to Start with Sartre? | Existence precedes essence
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 15 окт 2021
- It can be hard to know where to begin with a philosopher. Over the years, I've come to see philosophy as kind of like building a house: it's best to begin with the foundation, rather than the roof.
Similarly, many philosophical projects can be traced back to some foundational "starting point" -- an assumption or an idea upon which the rest of the project is built. I believe that in Sartre's case, a good place to look for such a starting point is in the following phrase: "Existence precedes [comes before] essence", a phrase Sartre delivered during a lecture titled 'Existentialism is a Humanism'.
Sometimes called the 'motto' of existentialism, Jean-Paul Sartre's "existence precedes essence" was first introduced to unite two very different phases of existentialist thought (the Christian existentialists and the atheist existentialists). But I also think this phrase serves as an excellent entry point into Sartre's philosophical project.
This is because many of Sartre's most well known ideas and phrases -- 'bad Faith', "man is condemned to freedom", and so on -- are actually built upon this fundamental idea. But where did it come from, what does it mean, and how did it come to shape modern existentialist thought?
We'll take a look here at some of the history that went into the 'making' of this concept, and how Sartre's "existence precedes essence" sums up the point of departure between existentialism and other, previous lines of thought in philosophy.
Good stuff! Keep this channel going man, step by step and don't get discouraged by slow growth.
Those who are looking for this type of stuff will find it eventually.
Thank you! Appreciate it
enjoyed it, interesting video
thanks, wonderful analysis and insight!
Thanks for watching! Glad you enjoyed
I logged into my Google Account after many years, just to subscribe.
First 5 minutes vibed with me. I am trying to understand ... I don't know what? Life, meaning of life, what does it all mean? I am not sure. But, when I read Dostoevsky and Camus, my mind was blown and I wanted to explore more. Tried reading Sartre and Nietzsche but, they are too difficult for me, as they're probably roof of the house without a foundation. I will keep on exploring Albert Camus and Dostoevsky for now and return to this channel. Thank you. Great work.
Thank you 🙂 Yes, still trying to figure some of those things out myself, and I'm grateful I can share with others some of the things I've picked up over the years. There's much wisdom we can take from these writers, and probably many different answers to those questions -- but we all find what works best for us on our journey, and that makes things interesting. Happy to hear you found this video helpful, and thank you for sharing your thoughts!
I think you presented an excellent ‘Sartre 101’ here. I’ve always found myself intimidated by his big, thick (and now dusty) tome on my shelf, “Being and Nothingness “. Making myself begin to read it told me I would be setting myself up for failure, ha! Maybe it’s time to give it a go. I don’t know when he began to write it, but it was published during the depths of WW2, not a fun time in Europe, to be sure. ‘Free to choose’ under the most limited of constraints, I might add.
All the best, Matt … Cheers!
Thanks @hiwayshoes - I'm excited to incorporate some other philosophers onto the channel. And yes, I remember me and a classmate had both tried to dive into B&N around the same time, and I don't think either of us made it past the first couple chapters. Tbh I still haven't read it from cover to cover, but I look at it as kind of an "encyclopedia" of existentialism.
I'm also glad you brought up the WW2 connection. I think that the existentialist movement coincided with the aftermath of WW2 partly because the war and its atrocities upset so much of what people thought about the world, life, meaning... We also saw an explosion of interest in the subjects of control, obedience and authority in the social sciences (i.e. Erich Fromm, Stanley Milgram, the Stanford Prison experiments), which I think came about in response to the rise of Nazism. I think people wanted to know how something like that could happen.
On a related note, I'm hoping to do a talk on the existential psychiatrist and Holocaust survivor Viktor Frankl one of these days. I look at his book "Man's Search For Meaning" as a real-world example of actually putting the existentialist philosophy into practice, in the most challenging of circumstances. (If Frankl tells me I always have a choice in how I respond to life, it's hard for me to argue with him! Considering what he'd gone through).
Thanks again and hope you're doing well! Best, Matt
@@VarsityBookworm yes, Frankl ‘s entire life-work is a solid detour off the headlong path toward nihilism. Not that I’m suggesting existentialism takes us there, but Frankl made it his mission to create actionable steps for one’s own action in the world, showing that meaning can be made and held even in the worst of circumstances. I will be eagerly awaiting your study on him, and I think what might be an interesting idea would be to specifically contrast his work with the philosophical concept of Nihilism. If nihilism is our path forward (and I’ve seen a lot on that lately), then what truly is the point? My take is that nihilism is a completely reactionary way to live one’s life, a relinquishing of creativity. I think that what breeds nihilism IS indeed the essence of nihilism. It is utterly useless for an agent in the world to fight nihilism with even more nihilism… Cheers! (Janice)
Hi Janice, I really liked this idea, been thinking about it alot. I have something in mind to maybe talk about Frankl and nihilism specifically, and I was hoping to quote a bit of your comment in the video. Would that be alright with you? -Matt
@@VarsityBookworm sure thing, Matt, not a problem at all… Cheers!
Hi Janice, thanks -- just posted a new talk about this subject! ruclips.net/video/0ltWKieF3-w/видео.html
I was really interested in the idea of looking at how Frankls work stands out from other answers to nihilism. I think in order to answer this question, we need to also ask how Frankls work is distinct from other existentialist writers (since they are all concerned with the "meaning question" in one way or another).
I also really liked what you said about there being an increase in discussion of nihilism as "the path forward" but that this amounts to "fighting nihilism with more nihilism". This interested me especially since I've seen a lot of commentary on Viktor Frankls work which seems to misinterpret his idea of meaning as something purely subjective, chosen at random, for the purpose of achieving emotional well-being. This is a popular interpretation (one I've seen most prominently on RUclips videos covering his work), but I think this is nearly the opposite of what Frankl actually thought. That's something I tried to focus on in the video.
Anyway, thanks for this food for thought, and thanks too for your kind and encouraging words over the past few months or so, I appreciate it -- hope you are well, Matt
This quiet ironically concides with le reading JP sartre's Nausea i beleive it would be delightful if you could make a video series that is structured like this one a "where to start" for Spinoza or i dunno maybe Deleuze Foucault Neitzshe etc
Hi, I'm glad you found it! It's been a while since I read Nausea, I hope you enjoy it. I like the idea of doing more "where to start" videos, and so I did make one for Nietzche --- ruclips.net/video/ROSfbY8gq_Y/видео.html
Foucault would also be very interesting to do, as would Deleuze. I do have a series on one of Deleuze' later books "What is Philosophy" which he wrote with Guattari, if you're interested --- ruclips.net/p/PLfKCYZXuSqDzemcfBr48ChwJayvidXeb7
Thank you for these videos!!
My pleasure! Thanks for watching