POST 3: EXISTENTIALISM

Date: Wed, 7 Jul 2004 00:34:05

existentialism is a philosophical concept in which the nature of every human being is formed by the choices they make, not because it has been pre-determined by a divine being.

sartre's existentialism stems from his belief that existence precedes essence; what he means by this is that "man exists, turns up, appears on the scene, and, only afterwards, defines himself." before a human being lives his life by making choices, he is nothing; only after he lives his life and makes choices, he becomes something, for according to sartre and his existentialism, what shapes a human is the choices he makes. sartre also denies the existence of god in his discussion for if existentialism is held to be true, then whether there is god or not no longer matters. the fact is that human beings have free will, and this concludes two things: first is that if god exists, then free will is given by god, second is that if god does not exist, then human beings are free without any divine supervision. in either conclusion, the fact that human beings have free will cannot be changed, so the existence of god matters not, because human beings are still free regardless. this analysis then leads to sartre's conclusion that god does not exist, and that human beings are "responsible for everything he does." sartre also denies the notion that human beings possess "essential nature," which then leads again to existentialism, since in existentialism human beings are nothing until they make choices that shape their lives.

kierkegaard's existentialism is essentially the same as other existentialists; he believes highly in the power of will, in the freedom to choose. kierkegaard acknowledges three different way of living, all three of which depend on ability to make choices: aesthetic, ethical, and religious way of living. the first one, aesthetic way of living, is based on pleasure. choices still shapes a person, for a person has free will, but his choices are geared toward pleasure. this way of living, according to kierkegaard, is considered only momentary, for he said that people living this way of live "build their lives upon something simple," not "fragmented as is the life-view of thsoe who build upon something intrinsically multiple." the second one, ethical way of living, is based on duty that one has, but according to kierkegaard, it is more than just duty; one has to involve personality into it, as kierkegaard said: "if the ethical did not have a much deeper connection with the personality it would always be very difficult to champion it against the aesthetic." the third one, religious way of living, is based on faith. kierkegaard does not openly admitted the existence of god, but he makes claim that faith is a necessary feat. using the example about abraham, kierkegaard proves a point that existentialism is subjective, for abraham "transgressed the ethical" but his act was "totally unrelated to the universal," and was considered "a purely private endeavor." from here kierkegaard continues to conlude that christianity is needed, for "christianity is spirit, spirit is inwardness, inwardness is subjectivity, subjectivity is essentially passion, and in its maximum an infinite, personal, passionate interest in one's eternal happiness."

while holding the same philosophical concept, kierkegaard and sartre can be very different in understanding. both claims that subjectivity is superior in existentialism, but the way these two philosophers view subjectivity is completely different. what makes the difference so big is their different views on god; sartre rejects the existence of god while kierkegaard accepts it. due to this, sartre based his subjectivity on human beings; that they are on their own, as he claims them as being "condemned to be free." kierkegaard, on the other hand, based his subjectivity on faith, using the example about abraham to prove the subjectivity in faith. these are the most essential difference in their understanding of existentialism.