[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 38 KB, 303x500, IMG_0420.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4546444 No.4546444[DELETED]  [Reply] [Original]

Sartre absolutely fucked me up.

>> No.4546460

The man with the antidote is called Doulas Adams

>> No.4546468

>>4546460
Except, I don't want an antidote. I see things clearly now. I no longer care for anything now. Can you relate? How did you feel after reading this? I was in shock. I felt so lonely, and raped. I thought of Sartre as such a frivolous person for exposing the truth of existence but, I've calmed down a bit.

>> No.4546473

>>4546468
Now read the rest of existentialists
Dostoyevsky, etc.
Then Foucault if you feel modern and hipster enough

>> No.4546476

>>4546444


this is coming from the guy who spent the later part of his career attempting to justify gulags on humanist grounds. he pretty much defines his own definition of 'bad faith'.

>> No.4546477

can't find nausea anywhere, can anyone help?

>> No.4546482

>tfw only read his drama because I studied theatre and a teacher once recommended No Exit to me

I should probably read this shouldn't I?

>> No.4546486

Why did publishers/main figures let this kind of books prevail when we have the bible? Isn't stupidity going to heal us? The dumber we are the less we think about existential crisis. Ignorance is bliss

>> No.4546490

>>4546486
>bible
>stupid

>> No.4546513

>>4546473
Haha speaking of dostoevsky, i started the brothers karamazov last week! I fucking love this book! I stopped on The Grand Inquistor. My favorite character is ivan although alexey has many admirable qualities. I dont want to get in depth on how amazing this book is because i am on my phone but yeah brah

>> No.4546518

>>4546513
This is op btw. I was on my computer now im on my phone

>> No.4546519

>>4546476

hi /pol/!

>> No.4546526

>>4546519


>only the fascists get to be truth tellers

good to know.

>> No.4546536

>>4546526

nigga, you posted the same damn thing in that stupid maoist thread, further calling de beauvoir the "shittiest 20th century philosopher."

don't pretend it wasn't you. i got your scent, bitch.

>> No.4546551

>>4546536


i was in the thread too friend, thats where i got it from, different poster though (im like the only one who doublespaces their posts).

>> No.4546554

>>4546473
Foucault transcended Sartre, that's why Sartre got all buttmad and called Foucault "the last defense of the bourgeoisie!" or whatever. Sartre, oh you overly zealous commie. Even de Beauvoir jabbed him for it pretty strongly.

>> No.4546555

>letting some cockeyed manlet cuckold influence you in any way at all
He was a fucking frog-eater to boot. Sartre is the kind of dickless worm that you tripped in the hallway during middle school.

>> No.4546566
File: 21 KB, 286x250, jane_goodall_jane3.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4546566

>...I have named this anon D-space, for his peculiar double spacing habit.

>Still no sign of Le Français.

>Papillon Poet may be about

>> No.4546569

>>4546468
hi, gil...when is your 13th birthday? I'll get you some doesty

>> No.4546588

>>4546566

http://thelastpsychiatrist.com/2010/07/why_parents_hate_parenting.html

>> No.4546601

>>4546566
>may be about
i've been lurking about, my little chrysalid escapologist of love, and probably quoting scripture to boot. i don't know why i should be itt, i've always disliked sartre. did you know goodall started a chimpanzee war by giving them bananas? are you trying to warn OP off the fruit of rhizomes? how kind if sartre fucked him up.

>> No.4546642

>>4546554
I really don't enjoy Sartre at all.

>> No.4546643

>>4546642
A lot of people don't, mostly because he applied psychological theory without scientific method, something like Freud. For scientific existentialism, see La Difference.

>> No.4546645

>>4546643
Gonna check it out. Thanks.

>> No.4546660

>>4546645
Sorry, I meant "La Distinction"

>> No.4546662

>>4546660
Well, Derrida wasn't bad either. Hahahaha, thanks again.

>> No.4546670

>>4546662
Derrida would be "differance" I think. He's fun to read, but you must remember that he mostly either invents his own words or uses existing words to make terminology that is not intuitive. If he published a dictionary for his work defining what he meant for each word, it would have been better for the readers.

>> No.4546701

>any year
>reading Sartre and his horrible misappropriation of Heidegger instead of the real thing
the only excuses I'll accept from you is if you're gay or French

>> No.4546769

>>4546468
>I was in shock. I felt so lonely, and raped

>> No.4546798

>>4546701
I second this post.

>> No.4546834

>reading any books published after 1789

The fuck, are you suicidal m8?

>> No.4546846

>>4546834
that's quite a specific cut-off point. do you have a date and a time as well?

>> No.4546850

>>4546468
He hasn't exposed the truth of existence you poor, ignorant child. All he's done is to infect you with his own madness. This is what you get for reading books after 1789. Stop reading from books and listening to music from after 1789. Ever since 1789 the world has been in a constant state of revolutionary unrest, everybody is extremely anxious about the big bad government and the bloody revolution that's just round the corner. Everybody has become as deranged and psychopathic as Hamlet. If you have any sense whatsoever you will retreat to before 1789 and deny everything after it as a nightmare.

>> No.4546895

>>4546850
I'll briefly explain why.

Obedience is necessary for civil order. If you don't have obedience to authority you cannot have a society. The problem is when the higher authorities become corrupt and overthrowing them seems legitimate.
Ever since the revolution of 1789, the French Revolution, the world has become infected with a distrust of and disobedience towards all authority, a revolutionary spirit. This is often called "liberty", the desire for liberty, i.e. the desire to cut off the head of the King. This idea of liberty has become the dominant ideal all over the world since 1789. It is a false ideal, a destructive one.
Every society relies on obedience to authority. The family is a type of society. Since the revolution the integrity of the family structure has been attacked by so-called feminism. Just as a revolutionary wants to cut off the head of the king, the feminist wants to castrate her father or husband. All in the name of liberty, or, in even more Orwellian terms, "equality".
The thing that the oppressed plebs have never understood is that you don't solve anything by simply cutting off the head of the King. When you do that, you leave open a great chance that the New king who will step in his place will be even more despotic, which he will often have to be in order to control the revolutionary mob. When a feminist undermines the structure of the family she leaves it in a state of anarchy, and it will either collapse or she will take control.

It all comes down to blaming your problems on "society". People that blame their problem on society can overlook all of their own flaws and justify the most brutal treatment of those more fortunate themselves.

This revolutionary spirit has infected the arts and philosophy too. Sartre is an example of mental decay. What it ultimately leads to is the rejection of all objective truth, everything becomes what you make it: total epistemological anarchy.

Society hasn't become more free since 1789, it had become remarkably less so. In order to control the revolutionary mobs the STate must become more and more powerful, leading eventually to the seizing of all property into the hands of the State.

It is political and spiritual anarchy. It is death. It all comes down to people thinking, "better to reign in Hell than serve in Heaven." It's Satan's war on Heaven being played out on earth.

>> No.4546902

>>4546895
Read the opening of Shakespeare's Coriolanus. Pay attention to everything the orator says in order to calm down the mob; it is all true.

>> No.4546941

>>4546895
I'll give you a simple illustration.of the different century between good and bad society:

Good
I. The shepherd: benevolent to those beneath him and brave towards external threats that would endanger his dear flock.
II. The flock: loves and trusts the shepherd, humble and content with their low station life.
III. The sage: the intellectual class that seeks to maintain order and peace between I and II. He reminds I that he ought to lay down his life for II and that he is worthless if he loves himself more than his flock. He reminds II that they must be humble because the Shepherd does not control all circumstances and can only do his best to relieve the ills afflicting them. He tells them not to envy the Shepherd's superior station because those with higher station have heavy responsibility.

Evil
I The tyrant: cares only for himself, worships his own power. Regards those beneath him with sustain. Keeps company with flatterers and dissolute men.
II The mob: despises and envies the tyrant. Blame all their ills on his cruelty. Full if bitterness which often makes them spiteful towards one and other.
III The machiavellian: the intellectual task that seeks to maintain order through propaganda, bribery and other low means. He is ready to side with the tyrant to punish the mob's unruliness and he is ready to side with the mob and punish the tyrant's cruelty. He maintains a peace not through the distribution of love from top to bottom and from bottom to top, but by balancing opposing hatreds.

Marx was a Machiavellian btw. It's why I have so little patience with you young idealists who have been bewitched by the propaganda into thinking hatred of all superiority is justice.

>> No.4546945

>>4546941
Lots of solecisms, due to this infuriating device correcting me when it shouldn't be.

>> No.4546947

>>4546850
>>4546895
>>4546902
>>4546941
>>4546945
The Soapbox - comming soon to your local streetcorner. Don't miss it!

>> No.4546968

>>4546941
If you're wondering what this has to do with Sartre: it has everything to do with him. This revolutionary spirit, as I've said, has, infected the mind. The rejection of the King in the civil arena equates to rejection of God in the rejection of Truth in the mental. Postmodernism is the logical outgrowth of 1789. So are Fascism/Stalinism. So are gigantic spy networks monitoring everybody's motion.

Your existential crisis is nothing but a revolutionary war against God and objective truth. You don't want to submit to an authority, you want to ve absolutely free. This freedom leads to despair and apathy because you have no reason to love one thing over another. Love is binding, whoever loves is not free. Free Love is a contradiction. An existential crisis is exactly what Satan is experiencing when he says better to reign in Hell, than serve in Heaven. In other words, "non serviam: I will not serve", in other words, "I refuse to love". The Holy Spirit is simply the love that the Father and Son have in looking upon one and other. Satan has no love for the Father, he considers the most glorious being in existence and is ready to slay the Father if he could.
Existential despair is nothing but demonic pride. You might not think so, you might say that in fact you hate yourself and regard yourself as worthless: that hatred of yourself is demonic pride. You are.looking at yourself with demonic eyes and saying, "God, how dare you make me so low. I am greater than this. This world is beneath me, it is all just pointless toys and games".
Read Kierkegaard's Sickness Unto Death, he goes over this.
Your problem is Pride. If you loved something you wouldn't be cursing existence.

>> No.4546978

>>4546536
you're so fucking feminine it ain't even funny

>> No.4546981

>>4546968
Sickness unto Death is post-1789.

>> No.4546983
File: 993 KB, 250x250, 1391121061453.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4546983

>>4546981

>> No.4546993

>>4546981
Yep.
Let me correct myself: don't read anything post 1789 unless I prescribe it to you.
Kierkegaard has the post 1789 sickness but he also has a slither of health. That is why Kierkegaard is the perfect antidote to 1789. He is like a medicine that contains the illness and helps build up your body's immune system. Kierkegaard is like a mental asylum for the post 1789 era. You go to him to regain your sanity and then run away from him and into the fresh air.

>> No.4546995

>>4546968
what if you love freedom?

>> No.4547000

>>4546993
Can I read Hegel?

>> No.4547002

>>4546995
You have to bind to something. If you refuse to bind to anything then you are in a state of nihilism, apathy. Nihilism and freedom are the same thing.

>> No.4547006

>>4547000
Absolutely not.

>> No.4547008

>>4546947
>Implying it isn't a lot funner/more interesting than the average shit that gets posted here

Leave Evola-kun alone

>> No.4547011

>>4547008
Leave anon alone I tell you! LEAVE HIM ALONE!

>> No.4547015

>>4547002
cont. also, loving "freedom", what's your idea of freedom? Open fields and clear skies? Nietzsche (I do not prescribe Nietzsche) was exactly right when he said that when most people say freedom what they actually mean is more power for themselves. Loving freedom could just mean a desire for power, ambition.

>> No.4547017
File: 22 KB, 168x251, 1390949497260.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4547017

>>4546834
>twf allowed to read leibniz

>> No.4547019

>>4547006
How can I become a sage philosopher who keeps peace between the shepherd and the herd and not a machiavellian propagandist? I am currently in school for philosophy. How do I change the system but not in a nihilistic post-Revolution mindset?

>> No.4547020

>>4546968
The only flaw in you argument is implying that you need authority in order to have some sort of binding.
I understand what's your point with love and binding. There's no need to have someone dictating what you have or have not to do, though.

The idea that there can be a benevolent shepherd is very unrealistic. Even if it wasn't, I don't see why he would be needed, people can all be shepherds with no sheep.
It's not that we should abstain from love, but we should be able to pursue what we love. That implies binding, but a self chosen binding, that you are free to break any time you want. That's freedom.

>> No.4547024

>>4547017
Leibniz is a infinitely better than Voltaire. Do not read Voltaire or Rousseau, they are 1789 personified.

>> No.4547025

>>4547015
I mean absolute power over myself by myself and no power over anyone else.

>> No.4547026

>>4547024
what if I just read it for the syphilis jokes?

>> No.4547030

>>4546995
You cant love a non-entity, unless you want to attatch special qualifiers to "freedom" its seems to me like naming the Tao or something silly like that. Plus you need to realize that man is always, and always has been completely free to do as he likes, its only the concequences that change. To me it always seems strange when people say they love freedom, what would be more truethful would be to say they love doing as they please with only positive (or at least no negative) consiquences, and to that I'd argue that a fascist society or pre-modern society would be better for that result (in a fascist society mans will and desires would be that of the state or people, in which case his life would be constantly surrounded and affirmed by the people and culture around him), in a pre-modern society the government and moralising institutions (used to be the church, now the schools and SJW) would have little control over man and life could be spent hunting and doing whatever he wants.

>> No.4547032

>>4547019
You don't change the system my friend, it is above you and above nay single person, even the persons with enormous power. Don't seek to "change the world", that is hubris, it leads to colossal pride and corruption. Humble yourself, accept your low station. Love God with your whole heart, kind and strength and love your neighbour as yourself. By following those two precepts unwaveringly you will accomplish infinitely more than what the world accomplishes in all of its hustle and bustle and its extravagant displays and bombastic conflicts.

>> No.4547038

>>4547025
You gain power over yourself by loving virtue and despising vice. Don't concentrate on big virtues and big vices. No, the small virtues and small vices are the stepping stones to the big ones. Treat your neighbours with love and run away from idle pleasures, seek humble work, especially at the behest of others.

>> No.4547042

>>4547030
In our current society, however, some people have to endure less consequences than others, for very questionable reasons. That pretty much summarizes the problem. I don't like the idea that the consequences are dictated from above.

>> No.4547057

>>4547032
cont. really, don't ever feel like you have to change the world. I assure you that the world has not changed in its essence since time began. There are the same duties and same pitfalls as ever. The overthrow of nations and conflicts between powers are ephemeral. Those things are nothing but puffed up pride. They like to build mighty statues and majestic walls to convince you they matter, but they do not matter in the least. Read Shelley's (I do not prescribe Shelley) Ozymandias.
All knowledge will pass away. All statues and walls will crumble. Heaven and earth will pass away, only God who is Spirit, Love and Truth abides forever. This is the only One you should worship and nothing else. Everything else is an idol.

>> No.4547072

>>4546588

Love that guy.

>> No.4547080

>>4547025
The universe and life as you know and understand it is subjective

This subjectivity radiates from the self, not the other way around. Man experiences and interprets the universe, the universe has no experience or interpretion.

It follows that if you are the source of experience and interpretation in the universe, any realization or gain will come from within, as your interpretation changes, rather than without, which can't provide any trancendence without your already subjective interpretation of that trancendence.

It follows then that any spiritual gain, or desire for non material objects, can only be gained by personal tracendence and reflection, rather than an external ideology.

Power is not a material object but a realization or interpretation of the direction of the universe or your life in accordence to your desire

You already have absolute power, and it can only be obtained personally, rather through ideology.

As for the second part of your post you exist within the context of history and society you fucking pleb its impossible to not have infleunce or power over other people or not be subjegated to their influence and power unless you move into the woods and stop talking. Why do you even post here if you dont want to have power over other people?

Attain the ultimate emptiness
Hold on to the truest tranquility
The myriad things are all active
I therefore watch their return

>> No.4547082

>>4547038
Let me give you a little something to reflect on:

You see an ugly beggar slouched down against a wall on a street. He is dirty. You well dressed and in the company of friends who you esteem. You wall pass the beggar. You reflect for a split moment on his deprived state but then continue on laughing with your friends.
And then you got to a political rally complaining about the rich oppressing the poor.

Why do people expect King's to humble themselves and love their subjects when you will not humble yourself and love a beggar?

This is why Christ came into the world as a poor and despised man and said everybody would be judged according to how he treated the least among bretheren.

>> No.4547083

>>4547038
You are trying to tell me how I should behave, that's pretty much the problem with having a shepherd.

Let me try to explain to you the problem I see with authority based on your view.

Suppose you have a good shepherd that agrees with your views. He would rule according to them.
Now, let this hypothetical society be composed by half people that agree with you and half people that see no problem with idle pleasures and don't really care about working for the good of others.
This shepherd, given that he has the power to do so, may start creating rules to coerce people into not having idle pleasures and working for the good of all. This means half of society is screwed.

Now, let's exclude the shepherd. What happens? Everybody is gonna live like they want. The idle pleasures of the second half won't do no harm to the first one. The fact that they want to work for themselves may be worse for you, but it's just because you had a privilege before, based on the fact that they were obligated to work for everybody.

Also, there's the possibility that while doing work for others someone may gain some benefits that will make it more "profitable" than working for himself, so he'll do it, but cause he wants too.

Consequences will still be there, people will have to take them into account before they act. The only difference is that there's no shepherd dictating what the consequences are.
In fact, any disturbance in this "equilibrium", any attempt to gain power over anyone else, might be to all a threat to their own freedom. Therefore, nor only the majority will be smart enough to avoid such stuff, but there'll be obviously consequences to the ones that aren't.
For example, anything that you may consider vicious. It's pretty much none of your business as long as it affects only the vicious person. If it starts affecting you, it falls on what I've described.
Keep in mind, though, that "I hate the fact that he's doing this and I think is not right" doesn't count as affecting you, it counts as you being an asshole. :)

>> No.4547094

>>4547082
cont. so do you see how much hypocrisy it is to talk about "changing the world". The people that want to change the world are the exact same people thatbwant statues of them to be built.
If you love the poor you have already defeated the world and its pride.

>> No.4547095

>>4547042
The idea of "above" and "below" are meaningless distinctions as the only thing that matters is those concequences exist. As is the idea of "some people" and "other people", where only the individual person matters. The idea of there being a "reason", or of it being "questionable" is also silly, rationalizations are always subjective and if a disagreement between how two people subjectively feel about something exist no amount of questions or logic can cure that. The idea of justice is a dumb notion.

>> No.4547098

>>4547057
How do you feel about Ecclesiastes?

>> No.4547099

/lit/'s new rock star

>> No.4547108

>>4547095
The existence of consequences is not the only thing that matters, but also what this consequences are. The consequences being dictate by someone above (as in above the hierarchy of society) will turn to be consequences that try to maintain and legitimate their power, that's why the notion of above is meaningful.

>> No.4547118
File: 153 KB, 559x927, 1363120794615.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4547118

>> No.4547120
File: 166 KB, 305x479, sartree.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4547120

>> No.4547123

>>4547098
It's very beautiful but I haven't looked at it in depth. I think that a lot of what I've said is an echo of Ecclesiastes and the Gospel.

>> No.4547124
File: 54 KB, 465x414, sartre cookbook.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4547124

>> No.4547160

>>4547124
10/10

>> No.4547178

>>4547124
>be me
>be NEET
>make a blueberry pie with goldfish design because fuck it
>come on /lit/
>see this
>welp, good thing i have pie to console myself with
http://pvspade.com/Sartre/cookbook.html

>> No.4547181

>>4547124
>>4547160
I don't think the maker of this comic had ever even read Sartre. Nor the "10/10" poster.

>> No.4547182

>>4547124

that is so kafkaesque

>> No.4547184

>>4547181
I don't think the poster of this comment has ever laughed before.

>> No.4547188

>>4547184
fuck you camus nobody likes you

>> No.4547195

>>4547188
I think the sour of the Bouvier's cunny has made you a bitter man, JP. No matter how much sweet cheating pussy you get to plow, you'll never be anything more than a novelist.

>> No.4547246

>>4546444
>those facial descriptions

like someone throws a cold bucket of pure being down your neck

>> No.4547247

>>4546981
why was he so black metal, bros?

>> No.4547253

/r/ that copypasta that says all French philosophers do is ruin the work from superior German philosophers

>> No.4547258

>>4546477
it's behind you but you need to turn around really fast to find it

>> No.4549570

>>4546477
bookfi.org

>> No.4551602

this book is so feelsy

if you dont like it then fuck you

>> No.4551629

>>4546555
to be fair, he hates himself too obviously.

Maybe not a great guy but he just owns up to a lot of his shit.


you dont care about how he feels because he should stay in his station. you implicitly feel as though he is categorically beneath you, even though he is as human as you. he wrote the book in an attempt to explain his fucked up feelings over this. this was more or less the point of the book sort of.

>> No.4551648

>>4546968
>Your existential crisis is nothing but a revolutionary war against God and objective truth. You don't want to submit to an authority, you want to ve absolutely free.

An Existential crisis is not all about being free