I find the principles of Sartre’s existentialism quite
compelling because he speaks in a very brutally honest way, saying we must act
without hope because there is no final truth. I personally have no idea what happens
when we die and don’t believe in looking for an answer because I truly won’t
know until I do die. So I suppose my ideals go against his because he makes it
sound like there’s not really any point because we’re all going to just die in
the end. I think we should live as best we can until death.
In blog 2 I identified that I have a principle that we
should treat others how we also wish to be treated. I suppose it fits with
Sartre when he says that every individual is responsible for all humanity
because I feel that by me being nice to people even if they are cruel to me it
sets a good example for others, which in part shows I’m being considerate for
everybody else.
I wouldn’t say it conflicts with my principles because I
actually agree with a lot of his writings, for example that man is responsible
for his own passions and that every act contributes to what it means to be
human.
I definitely think I could live according to both because it
is a very “live in the moment” kind of philosophy and it’s not extreme. I would
do so by practicing how to take full responsibility for all of my actions, by
not arguing when something is blatantly my fault. Also by taking advantage of
everything it means to be human like our ability to think beyond and create, I
could do this through my art work.
This week I commented on http://dallaslrsmith.blogspot.com/ and http://lukedemuro.blogspot.com/
This week I commented on http://dallaslrsmith.blogspot.com/ and http://lukedemuro.blogspot.com/
I picked Sartre's existentialism for the topic of my blog entry as well. I would agree that living by the Golden Rule probably fits well into Sartre's philosophies, and that humans are responsible for their actions because according to Sartre there is no such thing as human nature. Though I'm not sure that I agree with the fact that it is not extreme. I think you really have to be aware of your actions at all times because you want them to accurately reflect how humans are, and that to me is not so laid back. However if you took responsibility for all your actions as you said then you would still be consistent with existentialism.
ReplyDeleteI like that you are able to agree with Sartre but still be able to have your own views. It is very hard for some people to choose what aspects work for them. I like how you explained how someone attempting to practice the ideas of existentialism can be successful in doing so. Very good job.
ReplyDeleteI also found Sartre's existentialism very interesting, but also very hard to practically use. To hope when one is beyond all hope is a hard thing to grasp and even harder still to apply. I find myself in the same situation because while his views seem logical and practical in principle or theory actually putting them into ones life seems challenging.
ReplyDeleteMany martyrs for what is a progressive society but some are in the brink of crossing the line thus bringing the importance of morals. Let us not forget why there is meaning of life, when you have oppression people tend to think that life isn't worth it because they are being controlled strictly by a high person power.
ReplyDeleteThe whole concept of living without hope upsets me. The idea of living without meaning means that theres no point in working so hard in school, life and with family. At the end no of it will matter. Sarte has a way of really just telling you things straight to the point and in the face, and bluntly. I've read his stuff before and I guess my views contradict those of his because I feel as if i should be living to something, maybe creating my own little world in my head where what I am doing will matter in the future.
ReplyDelete