Existentialism – Some Notes & Some Questions
Core existential ideas originated from three French writers and friends (Jean-Paul Sartre, Albert
Camus, and Simone de Beauvoir) and concern the isolation of the individual attempting to find
meaning in a hostile or indifferent universe. According to existentialists, we can’t access,
describe or understand the ultimate nature of the world through any comprehensive system of
thought as some religions, scientific theories, and philosophers (Kant, Hegel) propose;
understanding the nature of human existence is not an objective science but an everyday
personal crisis experienced by individual humans living in a meaningless, illogical, subjective, and
uncertain world.
EXISTENCE PRECEDES ESSENCE
[T]here is no inherent or essential meaning in the universe that precedes our individual coming
into existence. We are born into an ultimately incomprehensible world that is simply here, a fact
of the cosmos, spinning along without any deeper meaning […]. [W]hatever meaning or essence
there is in the span of our lifetime is simply whatever meaning we can make of it. Our deepest
yearnings—for the evidence of some ultimate principle of justice and reason at work—will
ultimately remain unanswered. […] The only thing we can know for sure is that we exist, hence,
existentialism. And the final irony is that we have been born with consciousness, which includes
the knowledge that we will also within a short time cease to exist. (Gillespie 179)
ABSURDITY
The human condition is purposeless; it’s impossible to make sense of it. We might experience
this absurdity in mechanical and deadening routines, in boredom, in the sense of blank time
passing, in a sort of perpetual haze of anxiety or dread, in a feeling of isolation from others.
But, CHOICE lies at the heart of the human condition. Individual humans must decide how we
will respond to our circumstances, what is true/false to us, what is right/wrong, what to
accept/reject. Even when we don’t consciously choose, we are still making a choice. This means
we have absolute freedom; this also means we have absolute responsibility.
Our imperative, then, is truthfulness: “to be authentic, to see things clearly, to cut away what
polite social agreement requires we do, to say what is so regardless of the consequences”
(Gillespie 181). The EXISTENTIAL MOMENT comes “when an individual has pared away
everything—all conventions, traditions, and encumbrances—and faced the harsh truth that we
are alone in this random universe. This is the moment when the individual has finally reached
full human consciousness. Then he or she must act freely, the only true act of integrity available
to us, the moment of naked existential truth” (Gillespie 181).
QUESTIONS
1) Why wallow in a world-view that sees the universe as a meaningless place of isolation
and absurdity?
2) What negative responses could result from existential awareness? How might these
negative responses be mitigated?
3) At the existential moment, is any fully conscious act a moral one?
4) In the absence of God or absolute values, can any behavior be legitimized? If nothing
really matters, does that mean anything goes?
5) Camus saw hopelessness as a luxury (not one that should be sought out; rather, an
inappropriate stance enabled by privilege). Do you agree? Why/why not?
6) What relationship do you see between existential and Buddhist philosophies?
7) What characters in contemporary literature or film could be seen as existential heroes?
How so?
8) How do you know when you are being authentic? What does full human consciousness
mean to you?
9) In what way are existential ideas explored in The Stranger?