tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4683970826895755480.post2943820662239445268..comments2024-03-19T04:32:18.795+00:00Comments on Bruce Charlton's Notions: Existentialism and choiceBruce Charltonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09615189090601688535noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4683970826895755480.post-56281146253158804012014-07-18T22:07:39.793+01:002014-07-18T22:07:39.793+01:00Existentialism is said to have come historically f...Existentialism is said to have come historically from Protestant Christianity. I remember being offered in secondary school an image of the agonized Puritan/pre-destinationist, neurotically obsessed at every moment with he is truly Saved or not. I don't know how historically accurate this picture is, as I haven't read enough sources and have become suspicious of much of what I've been taught, but if there is truth in it, it bears a very close resemblance to the 20th century existentialist. <br /> It may be that certain strains of Christianity go astray by overemphasizing either pre-destination or free will, or perhaps don't get the relation between these concepts right. Modern existentialism may be a post-Christian 'hiccup' of this derailment (heresy?) in Christianity. danielnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4683970826895755480.post-46844656084350118532014-07-17T12:26:35.085+01:002014-07-17T12:26:35.085+01:00@NF - The difficulty with this kind of discussion ...@NF - The difficulty with this kind of discussion that we are having, is that we are treating philosophy as if it were a form of psychotherapy; and this is almost inevitable once there are no grounds for truth. <br /><br />However, "We may act as though free, but as is being demonstrated via science, freedom is not possible in fact, but it is a socially useful idea - a not factually supported one." <br /><br />- Come, come; that statement is obviously incoherent! - because science presupposes freedom. If we are not free, and everything that happens is merely a consequence of what led up to it; then there can be no judgment, or decision, or choice; then science has no validity, and nor does this conversation, and neither does anything else! <br /><br />The very concept of a fact depends on freedom - therefore facts formally cannot disprove freedom. Bruce Charltonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09615189090601688535noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4683970826895755480.post-29415395954786432482014-07-17T11:40:34.525+01:002014-07-17T11:40:34.525+01:00It tends towards despair because it puts the sisyp...It tends towards despair because it puts the sisyphean burden of total choice and responsibility upon the individual. By discounting the epiphenomenal nature of "self" and creating a projection of the self as free in fact, it creates an absurd and false dilemma. <br /><br />We may act as though free, but as is being demonstrated via science, freedom is not possible in fact, but it is a socially useful idea - a not factually supported one.<br /><br />Existentialism nevertheless has some utility, but not as a dogma or as an ultimately liberating philosophy. It has utility in helping the individual to obtain some dissociation from oppressive forms, and opens the mind to ideas that are novel and stimulating - even if factually absurd. It is like the Magic Theatre in Steppenwolf. And in that is the absurdity, the lightness, the great guffaw in the fabric of being. It makes light of itself, implying, "it is important that you make light of this philosophy so that it does not become dogma." In a sense then it is self-negating even while emphasising the singular importance of responsibility and freedom. The elbow in the ribs is there, but somehow it gets missed. <br /><br />I remember seeing an excellent production of Dostoevsky's "The Double", which is many ways an absurdist-existentialist play - well before the term was coined as a philosophy. Perhaps he could be termed a proto-existentialist, and some call him a Christian-existentialist - which given "The Brothers Karamazov" is probably apt.<br /><br />The problem is that existentialism is deconstructivist and offers only negation when one follows it all the way to the end. Negation can liberate from illusion but then offers the horror of an empty mirror - the void. It hence invites despair and meaninglessness for most who look that deeply into the abyss. <br /><br />There is a need to step to the edge and then back a few steps because taking it all the way is a form of suicide. Hence existentialism is a transitional philosophy, but transitional to what? It provides some humour, insight and creative impetus, but only if it is not taken so seriously that suicidal existential despair is the end. And I think that is what Hesse is on about with his Magic Theatre - for madmen only.Nicholas Fulfordnoreply@blogger.com