/lit/ - Literature

>>22830329
Jean-Paul Sartre

Summarize the philosophy of Jean Paul Sartre in one sentence.

Somone remind me why this hideous, Stalinist, cucked, manlet pedophile or his groomer wife was ever taken seriously academically and on an intellectual level

He says that "existence precedes essence". I don't think it's true but I also don't think the contrary is true either. Any authors that argue about this?

Literally a shitty self-help guru. Probably even worse than Jordan Peterson.

>>19462261
>>19462743
This guy comes up and slaps your 8 year old son on the ass what do you do?

>>19358366

Is authenticity truly possible for the modern man who faces little to no opposition in his life. There are no mortal threats, and making a livelihood is easier than ever. Being socially acceptable just requires you to shut up and nod along

>misunderstands Heidegger
>misunderstands Hegel
>writes massive Philosophy books anyway
>becomes famous and loved by all
>has 19 girlfriends at all times
>writes hated introduction to Black Skins, White Masks. Still published.
>refuses to elaborate
>chain-smokes for 40 years until brain stops working
>dies

Was he the biggest chad in Philosophy?

reminder you will never have sartre's life

“Someone will say, "I did not ask to be born." This is a naive way of throwing greater emphasis on our facticity. I am responsible for everything, in fact,
except for my very responsibility, for I am not the foundation of my being. Therefore everything takes place as if I were compelled to be responsible. I am abandoned in the world, not in the sense that I might remain abandoned and passive in a hostile universe like a board floating on the water, but rather in the sense that I find myself suddenly alone and without help, engaged in a world for which I bear the whole responsibility without being able, whatever I do, to tear myself away from this responsibility for an instant. For I am responsible for my very desire of fleeing responsibilities. To make myself passive in the world, to refuse to act upon things and upon Others is still to choose myself, and suicide is one mode among others of being-in-the-world. Yet I find an absolute responsibility for the fact that my facticity (here the fact of my birth) is directly inapprehensible and even inconceivable, for this fact of my birth never appears as a brute fact but always across a projective reconstruction of my for-itself. I am ashamed of being born or I am astonished at it or I rejoice over it, or in attempting to get rid of my life I affirm that I live and I assume this life as bad. Thus in a certain sense I choose being born.”

What do I read first?

Hell is other people

>Dostoevsky once wrote"If God did not exist, everything would be permitted";and that, for existentialism,is the starting point.Everything is indeed permitted if God does not exist,and man is in consequence forlorn. For he cannot find anything to depend upon either within or outside himself.He discovers forthwith, that he is without excuse.For if indeed existence precedes essence,one will never be able to explain one's action by reference to a given and specific human nature; in other words ,there is no determinism-man is free, man is freedom. Nor, on the other hand, if God does not exist, are we provided with any values or commands that could legitimise our behaviour. Thus we have neither behind us,nor before us in a luminous realm of values, any means of justification or excuse. We are left alone,without excuse.That is what I mean when I say that man is condemned to be free.

People on /lit/ like to talk shit about Sartre, but they forget that Sartre BTFO'd trannies.

>>16427418
forgot pic

He's 10x better than Nietzsche

What is the difference between essence and being?

>i hate Ernst Jünger because he’s braver and cooler than I am
What the fuck was his problem?

Never believe that anti-Semites are completely unaware of the absurdity of their replies. They know that their remarks are frivolous, open to challenge. But they are amusing themselves, for it is their adversary who is obliged to use words responsibly, since he believes in words. The anti-Semites have the right to play. They even like to play with discourse for, by giving ridiculous reasons, they discredit the seriousness of their interlocutors. They delight in acting in bad faith, since they seek not to persuade by sound argument but to intimidate and disconcert. If you press them too closely, they will abruptly fall silent, loftily indicating by some phrase that the time for argument is past

Is existentialism philosophy for midwits?

>moral philosopher
>defends the soviet union
>wanted to abolish age of consent laws in France
why do people take Sartre seriously?

>2020 A.D.
>people still think Lolita is a book about pedophilia
Nabby was trying to attack American post-war "intellectual culture" and its uncritical worship of European thinkers. HH is a charlatan who takes advantage of Mrs. Haze's pretensions and naivete to make himself appear like the stereotypical "sophisticated European." In reality, he's a pervert whose entire understanding of art, literature, and aesthetics revolves around wanting to fuck little girls. The symbolism is so glaringly obvious that I can't believe people keep missing the point.
The best part are the critics who praise the book as "the greatest love story of our time," or whatever. Imagine writing such an accurate satire of someone that they don't even realize you despise them.