Tuesday, January 13, 2009

The Existentialist

Malady, a word, a small indicator of the individual, of the pure possibility of the universe, and a word. 

Torment worries it, for the word that the whole freedom of choice, that man classifies as individual in every moment, was understood like nature, as the product of him, the world will revolt to solve the authorisation, and to consent to the adherence of its activities, without attention or company, the traditional sensitivity of morality, or faith, in man, and the man, that precedes the existence, the man is first and only results in this or that later, then this obligation of man must alone be the end to produce: it is within the world that plays and suffers and fights that it is defined, gradually. 

And the rest of the definition had been thereafter always unfinished: we cannot say what each man is, before the death, or, of this humanity he was before it, or after; it is then that individuals are free, from the moment of the present; they define him alone in his whole existence; he has a nature of a person, of whom has in the past made his form and this person who forms at the moment. 

Nobody is fully operative until the time of death, when the art of portraying one’s own explanation is halted; thus others construe, they base the individual on the strengths and the weaknesses of the individual, all the choices influence others, corporeally and poignantly; the traction of the social responsibility results from the interdependences of the individuals. 

Each living person performs the art of portraying the self and the other, the ethics recrudesce, therefore; here the free will demands of the existentialist, that one another and each one, respects the other’s freedom, based on the developed moral system, on the free human beings; of the matter mentioned, a superficial one, modified for particular requirements, raised during man’s life, that nevertheless just cannot be answered completely, therefore, the being of life is a passion, which is useless; that existentialism is a humanist form, and the freedom, the choice and the human being, the responsibility, which connect the philosophical theory, to life, literature, psychology and for man to be concerned servants.


  1. Ha! Not too sure Jean Paul Satre would be happy with this. I hope you are writing your blog with your tongue in your cheek. Keep up the good work. I will now hesitate calling myself an existentialist. Especially if we were to meet.

  2. Taken from the Guardian newspaper,Saturday 18th. June 2005. Letters in response to article "Hell is existential cliches."

    "Lisa Appignanesi states that existentialism "had its own music and garb of sophisticated black" ('Our relationship was the greatest achievement of my life', G2, June 10). It certainly did not: she is confusing existentialism with beatnik culture. This is the kind of dumbed-down image of existentialism that Sartre criticised in his lecture to the Maintenant Club in 1945, in which he attempted to summarise a very complex philosophy, and which was published the following year as L'Existentialisme est un humanisme. The beatniks were more than existentialism, but existentialism is very much more than the beatniks.

    And what does Appignanesi mean when she says Sartre and de Beauvoir were the "Bogart and Bacall" of existentialism? Sartre loved Hollywood, but this statement gives me an attack of the nausea."
    Tony Shaw

    "Your leader (June 11) identifies as "Kant's great insight" the removal of psychology from epistemology, but proceeds to describe that operation in a way that suggests the putting of psychology into epistemology. That is confused and confusing. Still, Kant can be said to do both things: to put psychology into epistemology - into, that is, the theory of knowledge - and to take it out.

    Kant did insist on what one might call a "mediation" of our knowledge by our faculties, but he also maintained that we cannot know "things in themselves"."
    Nicholas Joll
    Wivenhoe, Essex