English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

2007-07-09 13:41:31 · 6 answers · asked by Jonathan H 2 in Arts & Humanities Philosophy

6 answers

A chosen prescription for inducement of chronic depression. It is merely one chosen point of view among others, but a terrifying choice if carried to its extremes. If we choose to see meaninglessness in our being, we will think and choose in such a way as to fulfill our chosen focus. On the other hand, if we see that our life has intrinsic value, meaning and purpose, we will think and choose such a way as to fulfill that focus. Our interior state determines how we interpret outer conditions. Existentialism as a working philosophy interprets everything and everyone as having no intrinsic value. If we operate from that perspective, any means, whatever the cost in pain and suffering to others, to an end is acceptable. Terrifying. I am reminded of the move Seven Monkeys where the mysterious terrorists unleashed lethal biological materials world-wide just because they could.

I see people, life, ours and others, as precious and having intrinsic value and worth, as a gift to be cared for and cherished, nurtured. This perspective is life affirming; existentialism may or may not be life affirming.

2007-07-09 14:18:42 · answer #1 · answered by jaicee 6 · 0 0

What made sense in post-war Europe gave birth to poseur-America. Existentialism never had a place in U.S. thought, but was long a favorite of pseudo-intellectuals and their hangers-on. We are still in intellectual infancy, wrestling with our coming-to-terms between spiritual and materialsitic interpretations of the universe.

And guess what? It looks like quantum physics will justify the spiritual in purely material terms.

Or will it define material in spiritual terms?

Stay tuned.

2007-07-09 15:16:06 · answer #2 · answered by Grey Raven 4 · 0 0

Today we live in a post-existentialistic society. We all know our society is absurd and meaningless, yet we are totally helpless to do anything about it. So as a post-existentialist we have to cope with our helplessness the same way the existentialist coped with life's absurdities. Out of the three great ones, Sartre was the strongest philosopher, Beckett the strongest playwright, and Camus the strongest novelist. The magi of their time with no one to offer gifts.

2007-07-09 13:47:36 · answer #3 · answered by mac 7 · 0 2

Giving precedence to the modern-day self quantities to being self centred, and selfish, damaging besides as ego centric. All advised, it truly is one damaging philosophy, which had rendered many human beings aimless and anarchic.

2016-10-19 03:28:07 · answer #4 · answered by ? 4 · 0 0

i agree with it, the concept of it , it reminds me of a quote "you often hear of people trying to find theirselves, but i feel the self is not something you find, but something you create"

i think its obvious we do create the meaning of our life, as what has meaning to one person, wont to another, we define our own reality, though we may perhaps often agree with others about a particular subject, no one can tell us what we feel, or how we should feel, we define that for ourselves,

2007-07-09 14:15:13 · answer #5 · answered by dlin333 7 · 0 0

It is an exhausted project.

2007-07-09 14:26:29 · answer #6 · answered by Timaeus 6 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers