songs of experience

Eric asked me what I left on my brother’s machine, but I don’t have a photographic memory (is there a word for ear memory - autogenic? phonographic?). Anyway, I can’t say exactly what my definition was, but it went something like this:

“Existentialism is a philosophy that originated in France in the early 20th century, made popular by Sartre and Camus. It was much more than a philosophy of thought; it was a way of life. Existentialists believe that there is no God and no afterlife and that all we have is the here and now of our existence. It is up to every individual to make the most of that existence, even in the face of total extinction. Some see existentialists as nihilistic and depressing, but I see them as brave.” beeeeeep!

I never made it to the part about essentialism being the counterpoint. Some (myself among them) believe we human beings are more than mere flesh and blood existing in time and space; we are also spiritual beings with an essence that will live on after our corporeal death. Essence precedes existence.

Jung, for instance, is a philospher I would say is an essentialist (though I don’t know if he is classified as such). I had a perfect Jungian, synchronous moment right after I hung up the phone on my brother’s anwering machine. I was in the middle of watching The Waking Life (two thumbs up!) and the very next segment was on existentialism. No lie.

So, Eric, here is a definition for you straight from the essentialist cosmos:

Philosophy Professor: “The reason why I refuse to take existentialism as just another French fashion or historical curiosity is that I think it has something very important to offer us… I’m afraid we’re losing the real virtues of living life passionately in the sense of taking responsibility for who you are the ability to make something of yourself and feel good about life. Existentialism is often discussed as if it were a philosophy of despair, but I think the truth is just the opposite. Sartre, once interviewed, said he never felt one minute of despair in his life. One thing that comes out from reading these guys is not a sense of anguish about life so much as a real kind of exuberance, of feeling on top of it, its like your life is yours to create. I’ve read the post-modernists with some interest, even admiration, but when I read them I always have this awful nagging feeling that something absolutely essential is getting left out. The more you talk about a person as a social construction or as a confluence of forces or as being fragmented of marginalised, what you do is you open up a whole new world of excuses. And when Sartre talks about responsibilty, he’s not talking about something abstract. He’s not talking about the kind of self or souls that theologians would talk about. He’s talking about you and me talking, making descisions, doing things, and taking the consequences. It might be true that there are six billion people in this world, and counting, but nevertheless -what you do makes a difference. It makes a difference, first of all, in material terms, to other people, and it sets an example. In short, I think the message here is that we should never write ourselves off or see each other as a victim of various forces. It’s always our descision who we are.”

from,