© Mark J. Boone, 2021. All Rights Reserved.

This content is copyright protected and shall not be

shared, uploaded, or distributed without permission.

LESSON EIGHT

Existentialism

Five main points from this lesson:

1. “Existentialism” could be defined as either (1) a theory about the meaning of
life or (2) a tradition in modern (postmodern, rather) philosophy that tends to
emphasize that theory.
2. In that tradition: Nietzsche, Kierkegaard, Heidegger, Sartre, Camus, Simone de
Beauvoir.
3. That theory: The meaning of life is what you make of it!
4. Nihilism is the theory that life is meaningless–full stop! Existentialism is not
nihilism.
5. Camus’ “The Myth of Sisyphus” says that life is absurd, and the right response
to that absurdity–and the source of joy in life–is to resist that absurdity!
I. Existentialism: Just the Basics
 –the usual way of thinking about the meaning of life is: The meaning of life must be
determined for us, by God (Christianity [e.g. Augustine], Islam, Hinduism, etc.) or
perhaps by certain facts about human nature (Aristotle, Confucius, etc.). The
meaning of life is pre-established. It is fixed. We have to conform to it. We have no
say in the matter!
–but if we can’t find such a meaning, then . . . nihilism may be right! Oh no!
–the idea of Existentialism is: The meaning of life does not have to be determined for
us! It’s not fixed, pre-established, etc.! It can be determined by us! We do have a say
in the matter!

A. The general idea of Existentialism: __existence___ precedes __essence__.

B. Existence: Our __being here__ in the world.

C. Essence: Who or what we are; our ___purpose / role_ in the world.

D. In other words, Existentialism thinks there are no preexistent truths about the meaning
of life.

E. Life is not meaningless, but its meaning is not forced on us. Rather, we get to
discover it, and even create it, for ourselves.

F. First we come into existence. Then we get to decide what our purpose is.

G. So existentialism is committed to a radical conception of human freedom.

H. It is also committed to the individual. _____We decide on an individual basis_____!

I. Inspiration for Existentialism: ___Nietzsche_ and __Kierkegaard_!

–Nietzsche:

–1800s
–German
–atheist
–“God is dead.” This is not a literal statement; it means the idea of God has lost
all its relevance in modern European culture.
–our values have been based on the idea of God and other mistakes; we need to
invent our own values now, based on . . . on ourselves, really, and on the affirmation of
life.
 –Kierkegaard:

–1800s
–Danish
–Christian!
–often misunderstood because he said interesting/controversial/outrageous things
using pseudonyms.
–his association with Existentialism is mostly based on the pseudonym stuff.
–other than his emphasis on the individual, it’s mostly stuff K. does not think
himself.
–what does he think himself? Basically traditional (Lutheran) Christianity, and the
main point of his philosophy is just that HEGEL’S PHILOSOPHY IS NOT
COMPATIBLE WITH CHRISTIANITY.

II. Some comparing and contrasting

J. _Sartre___: The existence of man precedes his choice of his essence. (Good, short,
easy intros to Sartre: here and here!)
K. __Heidegger__: The existence of the world is independent of humans, but its essence
or nature is shaped by humans.
L. __Camus__: Absurdity (the existence of the irrational world in which we find
ourselves) is consistent with happiness (the human essence which we are free to choose).

–who is actually, definitely an Existentialist based on the definition of Ex. as a theory

we’re using here (Sartre’s definition)? I think definitely __Nietzsche___, and
definitely ____Sartre__. But not __Kierkegaard___. (It’s complicated, and we have
no more time to talk about it!) And not exactly _Heidegger___ or ___Camus_ either.

III. Camus: The Myth of Sisyphus

Life is absurd. So we have to ask “Is it worth living?” which is closely related to
“Should I kill myself?”

A. Life is (at least at first) __meaningless__. It’s absurd!

B. This should not lead to __despair_.
C. __Suicide__ is _NOT__ the way out.
D. The way out is really the way forward: ____struggle happily against the
absurdity_____!
E. “___The struggle itself towards the heights__is enough to fill a man’s heart.
One must imagine Sisyphus happy.”
 F. ____Suicide is not an escape___ from absurdity; it is __surrender__ to it!
G. When we keep living despite absurdity, we are revolting against absurdity, and
this revolt is what “gives life its value.”
H. This is ____a practical philosophy_____! Camus’ explains that his analysis here
“merely defines a way of thinking. But ___the point is to live___.”

I. In the preface to The Myth of Sisyphus and Other Essays, Camus tells us that his
essay is making these claims:
1. We must wonder ___whether there is any meaning in life_____.
2. This means that _____we should directly consider THE
QUESTION___whether suicide is the right idea!
3. That question has ___this ANSWER___: _NO__! Suicide is not the right
idea!
4. Even if we do not believe in God, it is still not the right idea!

J. Some details from our reading at the end of the essay (translated from the French
by Justin O’Brien):
1. There are different account from Greek mythology of why exactly the gods
punished Sisyphus.
2. In all the stories, he was condemned to spend an eternity in the underworld
rolling a stone up a mountain all day and watch the stone roll down the mountain
when he was finished.
3. “Myths are made for the imagination to breathe life into them.” We must
imagine some of the details of how Sisyphus spends his eternity.
4. Camus imagines Sisyphus defiant of the gods even in this punishment. His
scorn for the gods who have punished him is a kind of victory in his absurd
existence.
5. Camus imagine Sisyphus happy in his eternal struggle toward the heights!

Do we have time now to do the group activity thing I had hoped to do in Lesson 8?

INSTRUCTIONS:

1. For in person: Sort yourselves into groups of THREE or FOUR.

For Zoomers:
Go here!
 2. Discuss among yourselves the correct answers.

3. Answer the questions on the paper or in the Google document.

4. And then . . . wait for further instructions!

IV. Extra notes: Sartre’s “Existentialism Is a Humanism”

My YouTube intro to Sartre’s article: here!

Sartre’s purpose: to defend Existentialism from several attacks.

Some of the objections to Existentialism that have been made

1. Ex. leads to despair and quietism (i.e., giving up) b/c it thinks there is no
escape from our condition (a charge made by the Communists).
2. Ex. looks on the negative too much.
3. Existentialists “deny the reality and seriousness of human affairs” by
ignoring God’s commands and eternal values (a charge made by Christians).

Sartre replies

A. Ex. “is a doctrine that does render human life possible.”

B. Existentialism “affirms that every truth and every action imply both an
environment and a human subjectivity.”
C. “The essential charge” against Ex. is that it overemphasizes “the evil side of
human life.”
D. The term is often and carelessly used, but may “easily be defined.”
E. The essential Ex. thesis is that existence comes before essence—i.e., “that we
must begin from the subjective.”
F. The essence of a whiteboard, for example, preceded its existence, for it was
designed with a purpose.
G. We often think of God as designing humans in similar fashion—our essence
came first in God’s plan, then our existence came about when God made us.
H. Kant thinks of humans in much the same way—only without God.
I. Atheistic existentialism is more consistent.
 J. However, note that “The existentialist . . . finds it extremely embarrassing that
God does not exist,” because we have no pre-existent sources of value from
God—or from anywhere else.

K. “there is at least one being whose existence comes before its essence, a being
which exists before it can be defined by any conception of it.”
L. “That being is man or, as Heidegger has it, the human reality.”
M. I.e., man exists and finds himself in the world and only after that “defines
himself.”
N. “Thus, there is no human nature. . . . Man simply is.”
O. Man “is what he wills” to be.
P. Man “is nothing else but that which he makes of himself.”
Q. Ex. recognizes that to each individual human is given both himself and the
ability to be what he chooses to be!

Existentialist ethics

A. When the individual decides, he decides for all humans.

B. To choose is to affirm the value of what is chosen.
C. Therefore, in choosing, I choose a way a man ought to be—all men, not me
only.
D. Therefore, “In fashioning myself I fashion man.”

E. So the responsibility of a human is extreme, for my choice concerns not only

me but all.
F. Like Kant says, one should always ask: What if everyone did as I am doing?

G. The existentialist realizes that the grave responsibility of this choice leads to
anguish.
H. This is an anguish not of despair or quietism or even merely of dwelling on
the negative; it is an anguish of heavy responsibility!
I. Man is “without excuse” for not fulfilling his responsibility to choose well.
 J. “every man . . . is condemned at every instant to invent man.”
K. Man is “condemned to be free”:

--free because we have to choose our essence!

--condemned because it is a heavy responsibility we can’t escape!

L. Existentialist despair means relying only on what depends on our own

wills—which gives me very little to really rely on.
M. “man is no other than a series of undertakings.”

A more direct reply to the charges against Existentialism

A. Ex. is not a quietism because man is defined by action.

B. Ex. is not pessimistic because “the destiny of man” is his own determination;
“no doctrine is more optimistic.”

C. Ex. is “an ethic of action and self-commitment.”

D. Ex. is a humanism, dedicated to the dignity of the human being! Humanism:

1. The theory that human beings matter and that their choices matter (Mark’s
standard definition).
2. The Sartrean definition: Humanism means that what matters in the world
is what human beings do! (from the second-last paragraph of the text!)
3. Dictionary.com definition: “any system or mode of thought or action in
which human interests, values, and dignity predominate.”
4. An alternative definition that’s pretty good: first paragraph at
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humanism.

E. Ex. does not make man into an object (as most versions of materialism do,
including Marxism).
 F. Ex. treats man as a subject.

G. But it is not an individualistic subjectivity. One discovers others, and not

only oneself, when one freely chooses.

H. Existentialists are charged with being unable to judge others.

I. But an existentialist can certainly say that some choices are founded on
errors.

J. Moreover, an existentialist “can pronounce a moral judgment.” For freedom

is an end in itself. Thus actions taken in bad faith (not out of freedom) are
contrary to the end—immoral!

A version of the Golden Rule appears towards the of the text!

A. I value my own freedom.

B. Others have the same freedom.
C. So their freedom is also to be valued.

(By the way, Sartre, in interviews with Benny Levy towards the end of his life, admitted
that he now believed in God. This doesn’t affect this particular text, although it matters to
the study of Sartre.)