/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.4920500]

What do /lit/izens think of this man? His life and philosophies are intriguing, no?

[Anonymous No.4920509]

>>4920500
Sure, if you`re too lazy for real philosophy and just want to smoke pot with your fellow students.

[Anonymous No.4920513]

>>4920509
Hahaha, and Sartre's philosophy isn't real. Your being is nothingness, pleb.

[Anonymous No.4920516]

Sartre gets a bad rep when it comes to philosophy, but I think that comes from the preconception that if a thinker is wrong he is also not worth studying. It's quite a common prejudice since it makes plebs feel better about themselves.

[Anonymous No.4920518]

>>4920500
i kind of like this googly eyed motherfucker

[Anonymous No.4920519]

Here, have a laugh:
http://www.writerspie.com/data/61.en/59/essay_sartre.pdf

[Anonymous No.4920527]

>>4920519
A withering refutal, everything is made for us. Just look at this wonderful place! Sartre was fucking ugly, no wonder he hated God. God made him ugly, knowing how bad he was, so other people wouldn't listen to him.

[Anonymous No.4920808]

Bump for serious discussion. Let's talk about this man's philosophy, specifically his concept of 'being for others'.

[Anonymous No.4921953]

sartre's digestion of heidegger rubs me the wrong way, but his ardent communism and book/essay existentialism is a humanism is great.

[Anonymous No.4921966]

>>4920808
this is honestly his most worthwhile salvaged concept from heidegger. the value is on solidarity in the one's revolutionary struggle. Camus is in agreement on this point, but without explicit political (and (communist) party) platforms.

[Anonymous No.4922019]

I like a lot of aspects of his philosophy, but his absolute self-determination falls apart without free will, which he rabidly defended. I think Free Will in any form is baseless nonsense, so I can't agree with him.

Its weird, that he was a self proclaimed Marxist, but rejected economic determinism. I don't think his attempts to reconcile the two ever came to anything.

[Anonymous No.4922049]

>20th century philosophy

No thanks.

[Anonymous No.4922740]

>>4922019
Well I haven't read much, but I like Sartre's conception of free will because, if I remember it correctly, it sounded quite poetic: to be condamned to be free. It might not sound like a big deal or too wity to say that man is determined by something else to be free, but think how nicely it describes those situations where you have a duty and yet it feels wrong, especially if you are somewhat aware of your biases and tendencies. It can also be read, although not in a sartrian way, as "man's determination is to forever feel free" which sounds a lot like Nietzsche's take on the power relation contained in the theological and condamning version of free will. We feel free because feeling free is a feeling of power which makes us more powerful. It might not have a theoretical basis, but it might be related to how depressed people tend to feel like they have no power (no freedom to change their situation) making them think (but in a non-theoretical way, just a feeling) in a deterministic fashion.

I don't know if what I just wrote is any good or if it is trivial or if I'm getting good at philosophy or just making a conceptual salad or why I can feel my hat (baseball cap, not fedora) even though I'm not wearing it, but I do know one thing: I missed this feeling. I forgot that McDonalds has some good products. Am I narcissistic in this very moment thinking that I'm creative? And if so, is it just the accentuated determination of daily life? And also, why would it be postmodern to not accept acclaim after stoping a terrorist by saying "in another universe it could have been the other way around" if postmodernism considers the posibility that we are determinations (as in, the state we are in now is who we are, not a transcendental subject - including subconscious states in those determinations) ? It would not be "me" that is "him", but "him" being "me".

[Anonymous No.4922873]

>>4922049
then 21st ce philosophy?