I am currently reading a book by Robert Olson entitled “an introduction to existentialism” which I’ve found to be quite a difficult read (as philosophy often can be) but well worth the effort. I believe that by nature I myself am an existentialist, but I am all too guilty of what Olson calls “philosophical daydreaming” and fall prey to the “frustrations” & “tedium” of everyday life all the time.
I have been reading over & over the following excerpt, trying to etch it into my memory….into my very being.
The existentialists do not always agree among themselves either as to the precise nature or as to the relative ranking of the values which they say accompany a deliberate espousal of anguish & suffering. Jean-Paul Sartre, for instance, emphasizes freedom of choice and a certain type of individual dignity (although the term “dignity” is not used by Sartre), whereas Nicholas Berdyaev stresses personal love and creative endeavour. Generally speaking, however, freedom of choice, individual dignity, personal love, and creative effort are the existentialist values, and generally speaking, the most important among these are freedom of choice & individual dignity. Furthermore all existentialists without exception agree on three points with respect to the values for which they have opted, however different these values may be in other respects or however they may be ranked.
First a resolute acceptance of anguish and suffering is a necessary condition of their being experienced at all. A man may pretend to have made a free choice without anguish, but if so it is only because the stakes are petty and in the true sense of the word he has not chosen at all. Without having known suffering a man may write a clever or a pretty poem, but not a great one. Similarly, a man may be in love without having known suffering, if to be in love is to be infatuated or simply to be a faithful husband and father. But in the former case what passes by the name of love is simply a nervous itch; in the later case, a routine or habit. In its essence love is an attitude of care and concern for a being whose death or desertion is always possible and would be an irreparable personal loss.
Second, in the experience of the ordinary man and the traditional philosopher who fail to face up to its inevitablity, anguish takes the form of tedium or petty anxiety, apathy or craven fear. The function of existentialist values is to liberate man from these degenerate and unwholesome forms of anguish.
Third, existentialist values intensify consciousness, arouse the passions, and commit the individual to a course of action which will engage his total energies. As Kierkegaard put it, he wants a value by which he is prepared to live and for which, if necessary, he is willing to die. “Let others complain that the age is wicked” he cried, “My complaint is that it is wretched, for it lacks passion.” Or in the words of Nietzsche: “the secret of the greatest fruitfulness and the greatest enjoyment of existence is to live dangerously.” It is not blindness to danger, but the intense awareness of danger which makes the blood mount.
In sum, existentialist values have a common source, a common function, and a common identifying characteristic. Their common source is an acute awareness of the tragedy inherent in the human condition. Their common function is to liberate us from the fears and frustrations of everyday life or the tedium of philosophical daydreaming. Their common identifying characteristic is INTENSITY.
I have been reading over & over the following excerpt, trying to etch it into my memory….into my very being.
The existentialists do not always agree among themselves either as to the precise nature or as to the relative ranking of the values which they say accompany a deliberate espousal of anguish & suffering. Jean-Paul Sartre, for instance, emphasizes freedom of choice and a certain type of individual dignity (although the term “dignity” is not used by Sartre), whereas Nicholas Berdyaev stresses personal love and creative endeavour. Generally speaking, however, freedom of choice, individual dignity, personal love, and creative effort are the existentialist values, and generally speaking, the most important among these are freedom of choice & individual dignity. Furthermore all existentialists without exception agree on three points with respect to the values for which they have opted, however different these values may be in other respects or however they may be ranked.
First a resolute acceptance of anguish and suffering is a necessary condition of their being experienced at all. A man may pretend to have made a free choice without anguish, but if so it is only because the stakes are petty and in the true sense of the word he has not chosen at all. Without having known suffering a man may write a clever or a pretty poem, but not a great one. Similarly, a man may be in love without having known suffering, if to be in love is to be infatuated or simply to be a faithful husband and father. But in the former case what passes by the name of love is simply a nervous itch; in the later case, a routine or habit. In its essence love is an attitude of care and concern for a being whose death or desertion is always possible and would be an irreparable personal loss.
Second, in the experience of the ordinary man and the traditional philosopher who fail to face up to its inevitablity, anguish takes the form of tedium or petty anxiety, apathy or craven fear. The function of existentialist values is to liberate man from these degenerate and unwholesome forms of anguish.
Third, existentialist values intensify consciousness, arouse the passions, and commit the individual to a course of action which will engage his total energies. As Kierkegaard put it, he wants a value by which he is prepared to live and for which, if necessary, he is willing to die. “Let others complain that the age is wicked” he cried, “My complaint is that it is wretched, for it lacks passion.” Or in the words of Nietzsche: “the secret of the greatest fruitfulness and the greatest enjoyment of existence is to live dangerously.” It is not blindness to danger, but the intense awareness of danger which makes the blood mount.
In sum, existentialist values have a common source, a common function, and a common identifying characteristic. Their common source is an acute awareness of the tragedy inherent in the human condition. Their common function is to liberate us from the fears and frustrations of everyday life or the tedium of philosophical daydreaming. Their common identifying characteristic is INTENSITY.
No comments:
Post a Comment