I'm finding the Sartre reading to be little bit easier going that that of Nietzsche.
World religions offer people meaning and purpose. Spiritually is something seen as preceding humankind. Existentialism, as described by Sartre, inverts this idea: "Man first of all exists, encounters himself, surges up in the world—and defines himself afterwards" (187). People created God in the quest for meaning.
It is an empty quest, because "Man simply is. Not that he is simply what he conceives himself to be, but he is what he wills...Man is nothing else but that which he makes of himself" (188). The sooner the idea of God is abandoned, the better, in the thinking of the French existentialist: "...what man needs is to find himself again and to understand that nothing can save him from himself" (206). Heaven is an idea that distracts from the real goal of "a future to be fashioned, a virgin future that awaits him" (192)...
Significance is not something to be found because it is not something that exists in and of itself. He states, "Life is nothing until it is lived; but it is yours to make sense of, and the value of it is nothing else but the sense you choose" (204).
As a Christian, my knee-jerk reaction* would be to critique existentialism as an "anything goes" description of life. After all, Sartre describes man as free, but he also describes him as "responsible for everything he does" which implies some sort of morality (192). I was intrigued by his description of existentialism as an optimistic philosophy of life. It is only by Christians "self-deception, by confusing their own despair with ours that Christians can describe [existentialists] without hope" (206).
* The knee-jerk reaction is a frequent malady of the Christian subculture that is often attributed to excessive time kneeling in prayer.
1 comment:
I studied alot of existentialism, particularly in the realm of existential counseling.
I find it quite similar to Christianity on some core levels.
Existentialism requires that you recognize you're not all that you could be...or should be. Not unlike the idea we have "fallen" away from God and have this ache until we get back. Existentialists walk up to the hopelessness of life and a decision has to be made, not unlike the Christian faith that says you have to walk up to that reality we are not all we could/should be because of sin.
In accepting that reality of hopelessness in our situation (both in existentialism and Christianity) there is then a faith that is required for both. Either God exists and will make up the difference or God does not exist and/or can not make up the difference. Either decision at that point on is a decision of faith, where no answer will be given "absolutely" in this life. One must decide if you believe there is a God and he will make meaning out of your life or there is not a God and you will make meaning out of your life.
Existentialism requires you put faith in yourself to make meaning of life, and Jesus requires you put faith in Him to make meaning of your life.
I think existential counseling is 2nd only to a judeo-christian world view in counseling, and if used well, it becomes an incredibly helpful foil in understanding the decision Jesus sets forth in the Bible.
Post a Comment