Existentialism

[lunababymoonchild]

I'd appreciate it if someone could come up with an easy definition (if there is such a thing) of existentialism. I've looked around the internet and come up with a few but they all seem complicated and long!

I'm reading The City and The City by China Mielville and it's popping up regularly, so I'd like a working definition, please.

[David]

I'd appreciate it if someone could come up with an easy definition (if there is such a thing) of existentialism. I've looked around the interenet and come up with a few but they all seem complicated and long!
Sadly you're not really going to find an explanation that isn't! Existentialism is a philosphical viewpoint. In a very trite summary, it suggests that any understanding of truth (if there even is such a thing) must be rooted in the individual. Schools of thought, science - all 'external' systems which try to place meaning on the universe will always be inadequate. It's within the self that any meaningful insight lies - which of course is a highly relative concept. That's why existentialism is pretty vague and undefined.

However, its practitioners tend to be pretty miserable. So, how do you define yourself? You live and then of course you die. What guides you through life? Free will, which means inevitably you'll face despair. Is there any guiding force beyond yourself in the universe? No, so it's all meaningless then.

I suspect Marvin the Paranoid Android was an existentialist.

Anyway, I wouldn't worry about its meaning, Luna, since nothing has any meaning.

[momac]

Hi David: Found your post interesting on existentialism (if I've spelled it correctly) - seems like a pretty depressing viewpoint of life for the proponents of this philosophy - not a whole lot of laughter there. :hmm:

[David]

seems like a pretty depressing viewpoint of life for the proponents of this philosophy
Indeed. To be fair I caricature it somewhat, but it gives you a rough idea.

[lunababymoonchild]

Sadly you're not really going to find an explanation that isn't! Existentialism is a philosphical viewpoint. In a very trite summary, it suggests that any understanding of truth (if there even is such a thing) must be rooted in the individual. Schools of thought, science - all 'external' systems which try to place meaning on the universe will always be inadequate. It's within the self that any meaningful insight lies - which of course is a highly relative concept. That's why existentialism is pretty vague and undefined.

However, its practitioners tend to be pretty miserable. So, how do you define yourself? You live and then of course you die. What guides you through life? Free will, which means inevitably you'll face despair. Is there any guiding force beyond yourself in the universe? No, so it's all meaningless then.

I suspect Marvin the Paranoid Android was an existentialist.

Anyway, I wouldn't worry about its meaning, Luna, since nothing has any meaning.Thank you David, that's enough to be going on with. I keep finding references to Satre, Nietzsche, de Beauvoir etc and feeling a touch out of my depth (one at a time, maybe ................). The book keeps referring to it and I thought that if it was a touch clearer it would help but it's just a reference so not central to the theme (I think!).

[Grammath]

If it's any help, lbmc, I don't think an understanding of existentialism is essential to an appreciation of The City and the City.

Perhaps try adding Albert Camus' L'Etranger (usually, but not totally accurately, translated into English either as The Outsider or The Stranger; the French wordplay doesn't translate) to your reading list; it is a great novel and often cited as a fine example of existentialist thought in fiction.

[lunababymoonchild]

If it's any help, lbmc, I don't think an understanding of existentialism is essential to an appreciation of The City and the City.

Perhaps try adding Albert Camus' L'Etranger (usually, but not totally accurately, translated into English either as The Outsider or The Stranger; the French wordplay doesn't translate) to your reading list; it is a great novel and often cited as a fine example of existentialist thought in fiction.Thanks Gram.

[eager reader]

I keep finding references to Satre, Nietzsche, de Beauvoir etc and feeling a touch out of my depth (one at a time, maybe ................). The book keeps referring to it and I thought that if it was a touch clearer it would help but it's just a reference so not central to the theme (I think!).

Since the topic is on, from the very little I've read of the authors you mention, I would risk saying that Simone de Beauvoir was not really an existentialist (more so if you consider David's definition, which I found very accurate) - she was just included in the "package" because she was Sartre's wife.

Grammath, you seem to be an expert too!! Do you agree with me?

[jfp]

she was Sartre's wife.Beauvoir would turn in her grave if she knew you'd said that, eager reader... they spent their whole lives in a much-trumpeted "open relationship", both of them enjoying other "contingent" relationships, but with Beauvoir confessing to agonising jealousy... but they were never married. Oh no...

But why was she "not really an existentialist"?

[Grammath]

Grammath, you seem to be an expert too!! Do you agree with me?Hardly! Of luna's list, I've only read that one Camus novel.

[eager reader]

Beauvoir would turn in her grave if she knew you'd said that, eager reader... they spent their whole lives in a much-trumpeted "open relationship", both of them enjoying other "contingent" relationships, but with Beauvoir confessing to agonising jealousy... but they were never married. Oh no...

But why was she "not really an existentialist"?

Hi jfp - I know she wasn't his wife as in 'being married wife', but the fact is they spent a lifetime together, didn't they ?

What I meant about her not being a die-hard existentialist is that her books don't seem to bring all that suffering and endless questions about the true reason for and of life, when compared to the works of the other authors, Sartre included. She comes across as much more subtle, in my opinion. I could read some of her books without much difficulty, whereas the other authors were really daunting. Maybe that's where my impression comes from. :o

[theprodigy]

Read this article, it gives a great explanation on "Existentialism".

http://explainlikeakid.blogspot.com/2011/10/what-is-existentialism.html

[lunababymoonchild]

Thank you very much Prodigy, that made it all the clearer and welcome to the Board!