/lit/ - Literature

chicks dig it

>>5619024
Chicks should dig better books, then. This applies to anyone who reads and likes existentialism.

>France sucks!
>Germany's amazing!
That's all I see here, OP.

>>5619020
>It isn't good for your mental health

What books are good for my mental health?

>>5619037
Existentialism is particularly bad. It's written to expose the reader to existential dread.

>>5619034
A dismiss of france and adoration towards germany is the best way to spot a clueless arrivist

Also applies to classical music

>>5619034
But that is true. Germans are the children of the gods.

>>5619042
France has produced good things, but existentialism is not one of them.

So is there any good-for-you existential literature?
Stuff that isn't about dread or deals with the dread?

>>5619060
>So is there any good-for-you existential literature?
There are existential elements in all the philosophers I mentioned.
>Stuff that isn't about dread or deals with the dread?
My critique of existentialism is that it's bad philosophy while being bad literature, not that it's depressing. The bad philosophy bleeds through in Camus in the form of absurdism. Fighting against the absurd as a way of finding meaning is absurd. Living in a universe without meaning while constantly reminding oneself that the universe lacks meaning is contrary to living meaningfully. The acceptance of non-meaning is the result of existentialism, but there are other ways to accept that.

>>5619044
*lifts top hat*

>>5619087
And I do not say that as a German

>>5619076
What I meant is are there stories/authors that accept the meaninglessness and deal with with it in these "other ways"

[Must be off to work]

>>5619098
You had better be saying in tongue-in-cheek.

>>5619102
No. If everything is meaningless how do you find meaning through it? Makes no sense.

>>5619111
Oh, part of the plot maybe?
Character finds life absurd: [S/he read Camus] Character finds purpose of her/his own invention. Conclusion.

I don't think you need to ignore the 'Existentialists', just realize that they're a stepping stone. Most people read Camus and Sartre first because they're accessible writers who write stories that give catharsis with little struggle needed on the reader's part to grasp it. It's only when they stop there and don't reach further that they're doing themselves wrong. I agree with you that Absurdism is a flimsy philosophy but it's a good gateway to thinkers like Nietzsche, Kierkegaard, Hegel, who give the question a more thorough analysis.

>>5619020

>stop reading existentialism
>read Nietzsche

>>5619122
Than the character never found the life apsurd in the first place.

Existentalist literature is a bullshit term anyway that Sartre and Camus made up in order to tie themselves to the older exstentialists.


Whenever I hear that Camus is a good writter , I lol my ass off, because it is clear that the average pleb would not understand a fraction of Thus Spake Zarathustra or Repetition.

>>5619102
Also Sprach Zarathustra by Nietzsche.

>>5619157
>implying Nietzsche would have subscribed to plebstentialist doctrine

>>5619020
"The Plague is garbage, read Stirner instead"?

Definitely no, I like great books, not bad philosophy

sage because this thread is on like page 8 and hopefully dead soon

Bump

>>5619174
>Existentalist literature is a bullshit term anyway that Sartre and Camus made up in order to tie themselves to the older exstentialists.

Lmao you can tell this one REALLY knows what he's talking about

Kierkegaard and Heidegger are good philosophers.

Camus and Sartre won't be remembered in fifty years so there's no need to worry about them.

>Camus and Sartre won't be remembered in fifty years so there's no need to worry about them.

I refuse to take that as an argument

>>5619020
>I wish people would stop reading existentialist literature
>Existentialism is shit-tier philosophy and literature
>Read Stirner

>Stop doing what you want
>Do what I want
>What I want is for you to read a book that says do what you want

Even Stirner think's you've gone full retard.

>>5620043

This is 4chan. You need to become more mindful.

>>5620043
>>5620026
Frankly I think that he's right that the importance of at least Sartre's philosophical work is probably exaggerated today, especially as he sacrificed the entire phenomenological base for his marxism in his late career.
But Camus is an author before he's a philosopher, and I'm certain that his works in that regard will not be forgotten anytime soon.

>>5620068
Stirner a shit

>>5619020
>Hegel
as if you had any higher ground, jester

B-but the absurd is everywhere

>>5619020

What do you make the phenomenology that gave rise to peeps like Sartre, Heidegger, and Jaspers?

>>5620981
Heidegger's phenomenology and the tradition he was involved in is good.
The fact that Heidegger accused Sartre of misreading him is enough for me to reject Sartre.

>>5621003
Have you read much Sartre? I'm just curious and don't mean that in a pissing match kinda way. I know very little outside of a class I had with a Sartre-guy and I couldn't make much sense out of his theory of mind. I just sort of left him at that and never picked him back up. even though I've read all of Camus' stuff

>>5621061
I took an existentialist philosophy class last semester and we read one of his books. His theory of mind seems to be that what we call consciousness consists of images coming at us one after another without any apparent connection to each other. Existence precedes essence, etc. His ontological theory's foundation is basically that nothing is causing being, meaning that people/things that have consciousness exist in the world and can't find objective meaning or purpose in it because there's no essence to it except what they put and find in it.