Contemporary continental philosophers agree that personal identity and subjectivity are not grounded in a transcendental self as a substance that defines an essential human nature.
BRIEFLY describing Sartre's understanding of self and subjectivity in terms of the implications that follow from his thought on how we should live our lives.
***please don't be an idiot with your answer. ---if it isn't helpful, it is idiotic. ThAnKs***i need help, not advice
2006-12-11 04:57:45 · 6 answers · asked by daffydil4_7 1 in Arts & Humanities ➔ Philosophy
Is this your homework? If so, why am I going to answer it. Anywho Sarte was influential in the existential movement and your answer lies therein.
2006-12-11 05:01:09 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Sartre is not a "contemporary continental philosopher"; as an existentialist, he belongs very much to the old guard. You ought to read "Being and Nothingness," probably -- it will help you figure things out. You might want to read some of Husserl's work and also Heidegger's "Being and Time" first. It helps to understand where Sartre is coming from.
2006-12-11 05:43:03 · answer #2 · answered by Drew 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If one is an "existentialist," one's own advanced information of the human challenge ought to or received't incline one in the route of one or yet another type of duty. The question is, then, how does an cutting-edge one boost information and duty. For Sartre, screwing youthful philosophy groupies pimped by Simone Beauvoir replaced into an excellent element. somebody else would locate killing Ukrainians an excellent element (J. Stalin), or killing intellectuals (Chairman Mao). those too are "existentialists," as they got here upon no God, no Transcendent reality, and actually reported there replaced into none (a touch bit a logical blunders, btw). A. Hitler likewise got here upon Jews to be obnoxious, subhuman, and acted to that end. therefore, "information" and "duty" are, for the existentialist, paradoxical, as even relative values are conditioned. Derrida, postmodernism, and Rorty are examples of thinkers who opined so. therefore, at the same time as Sartrean existentialism contains interior of it the seeds of its own paradoxical deconstruction, it truly is undeveloped by Sartre, who purely opted for a particular socialist humanism, brushing aside the further profound implications of his notions, which in turn were explicated by Derrida, Rorty, et al.
2016-11-25 20:54:09 · answer #3 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
in terms of consciousness: we barely connect with each other, and act from the ususal ignorant, fear based motifs in beta consciousness. improvements occur, and the heart is more open, and the fear level much lower, especially in theta; in delta we all "merge". to a profound degree. lower theta and delta, perhaps, define who we really are as a species. alas, this culture, and most other "modern/post modern" ones are addicted to beta, and are not really "functional" at the other levels. a true adept can navigate all levels with precision, and is not riddled with fear and confusion.
2006-12-11 06:20:50 · answer #4 · answered by drakke1 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sartre
2006-12-11 05:14:17 · answer #5 · answered by kalusz 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
dead french fart
rhymes with j p s
this is very helpful if youre learning poetry!
2006-12-11 06:26:47 · answer #6 · answered by catweazle 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋