Introduction to Existentialim - part 1
by Ian R Thorpe.
2011-08-08
CREATIVE COMMONS: Attribute, non commercial, no derivs.
KEYWORDS: existentialism, belief, humanism, athist, religion, spirituality, faith, hindu, buddhist, wisdom, insight, blavatsky, cult, ideas, philosophy
Think of philosophers like Soren Kirkegaad, Martin Heidegger, Freidrich Neitzsche, Karl Jespers and Ludwig Wittgenstein and existentialim might seem a complex and scary topic to get into. If fact, though these guys were wrestling with ideas about the meaning of life and what differentiates humans from other animals.
We don’t need to go there of course in order to find in Existentialism a way of approaching life that is compatible with both religious and humanist beliefs.
To sum up the essentials of Existentialism in a nutshell:
1.The universe is meaningless and chaotic.
2.Human beings need meaning and structure in our lives.
3.We will therefore create this meaning and structure the best we can either in the form of gods and rituals or in complex social structures based on rules, mores and hierarchies.
That’s it, existentialism. Nothing to be scared of there: If you change item 3 to:
“People turn to religious teachings as a source of meaning and structure in their lives.”.you have most modern religions (as they are practiced) and a number of supposedly secular ideologies.
Add to that:
We have inside us a link to a higher meaning. Call it god, collective consciousness, the force, oneness, call it Joe the Divine Power or Lulu the Univeral Spirit whatever you like and you have spirituality along the lines of pagan, Hindu or Buddhist belief systems..
And if you take the view that there is nothing higher than humanity in the known universe you have humanism.
Secular humanism, it must be said is neither secular nor humanistic building as it does on a need for the state, the inner party, the Thought Police to assume the role of the higher power and provide an illusion that fearful individuals will be protected from the dangers, the risks and the uncertainty of everyday life.
Secular humanists only differ from followers of any faith or religion in that they cannot admit their need for a “higher power” to lean on stems from the same insecurity, the same need to feel they belong as leads others to embrace orthodox religions. It is noticeable however that "secular humanist" like to describe themselves as enlightened, naively unaware that God and Jesus in The Bible both describe themselves by saying "I am the light," while Ormazd (aka Aharu Mazda) the god of Zoroastrianism is actually called The Light (did you think it was coincidence that a brand of electric light bulbs was called Mazda?
Light also was important in all the pagan traditions which is why eternal flames were kept burning in places of worship.
Militant atheists are different again, these people are like religious fanatics in many ways, the difference being they have rejected existing gods and beliefs and created a new god, science. This god has all the requirements, a reputation for omnipotence and infallibility, unquestionable dogmas, an ineffable creed (the “scientific method”) which though often cited can never be defined in a few words as I have defined existentialism.
An existential lifestyle is not a choice for wimps. There is no great universal truth apart from: The answer to the big questions is usually “Sorry, no idea.” There are no comfortable certainties, no promise of life after death as with gods or of eternal life through drugs and surgery as with science. Existentialists know we are on our own, we must make our own choices (in fact we consider the making of our own choices to be a basic human right) without priest, politicians or government employees steering us as a sheepdog steers sheep to where the authority figure wants us.
Existentialists do not appreciate the finger wagging, hectoring advice of nanny state. How many billions of £$ have been spent on persuading people to give up smoking because smoking is offensive to non smokers and causes serious disease that place a financial burden on the state. An existentialist argument would be that by bringing on their early death smokers are behaving extremely responsibly.
Which is the greater burden on society, to provide palliative care to a smoker through two years of terminal lung cancer or twenty years of full time one-on-one care for someone who avoided smoking and alcohol and ate a healthy diet and still ended up with Alzheimer’s disease? I should say here that I am a non smoker but respect peoples’ right to make their own choice.
Like a true existentialist philosopher however I am also capable of arguing both sides of a case. There are no universal answers.
Because of the way our brains have evolved after millions of years struggling for survival against bigger, stronger, better armed rivals, there are common traits to the answers we choose. Because these answers influence our behavior, they in turn will be will be subjected to memetic evolutionary pressures. Put simply, the answers that help us survive will be the ones that catch on in the long run, so we might as well keep this fact in mind when we’re thinking about our answers in the first place.
This seems like a good time to end part 1 of this series by repeating the existentialist mantra.
1.The universe is meaningless and chaotic.
2.Human beings need meaning and structure in our lives.
3.We will therefore create this meaning and structure the best we can either in the form of gods and rituals or in complex social structures based on rules, mores and hierarchies.
RELATED POSTS:
Theosophy for BeginnersPhilo and Sophia, are dedicated to spreading wisdom and understanding. It's natural then that their page here should include a sub menu on Theosophy, an almost forgotten belief system now although it was only founded in the nineteenth century. Theosophy is based on the ideas of Helena Blavatsky and while it drawns on the ancient wisom found in Hindu, Budhist and Zoroastrian teachings it is fully compatible with Protestant, Catholic and Orthodox versions of Christianity as well as Jewish and Muslim beliefs.
The War Between Science and Religion
When cosmologist Martin Rees was awarded the Templeton Prize for scientific work enhancing the spiritual side of life the militant atheists reacted with predicatable angry intolderance. Their intolerant attitude seems to have done more to harm the scientific community than to turn paople against faith and religion.
Alchemy For Beginners - Part 1: A Condensed history Of Alchemy
Religion and Science have in recent times not been comfortable bedfellows. Strange then that the earliest scientists were priests, people who chose todevote their lives to the pursuit of knowledge and understanding. One early science much derided by modern scientists was Alchemy, the quest to turn base metals like lead into Gold. But was the althemists idea reeally daft?
Quantum Metaphysics or The God Experiments
The noise from militant atheists is becoming unbearable as they scream and shout about superstition and magical thinking. So what if science came up with something that turns upside down everything we thought we knew about the nature of the universe. Well it has, twenty years ago. Quantum entanglements, non - separability, oneness, once it enters the public perception we will suddenly have to see ourselves differently.
Are The Cultural Poles FlippingReligion and Science (which some people have turned into their religion) have failed to provide the certainties, the sense of security, that many people seek. First religious convicion was eroded by science and then faith in science collapsed when it's certainties dod not stand up to the logical tests of the real world. Can existentialims offer a third way or is its acceptance of uncertainty to challenging?
The Flight From FreedomFleeing from freedom seems like a contradiction, after all we usually asdsiciate flight with escaping from captivity. In this first part of Existentialism for Beginners however the author identifies a human instinct that predisposes us to seek illusory safety by conforming and being part of the crowd rather than embarking on the lonely life of the free thinker, the person who truly makes their own decisions and follows their own path.
Can We Change? Mystics Say Yes, Science Says No - Or Does It?Medical science has always insisted we cannot change the way our brain works but now that view is changing. A number of scientific studies have proved various things that have nade a lot of science fanatics look silly. The brain can be rewired after traumatic injury, meditation can change the way we think, prayer, riyual and superstition are all beneficial and the placebo effect is a powerful healing tool.
Not Intelligent Design But A Designer Universe.At the risk of making to sciencyheads kick off about intelligent design we must enter the argument between science and creationism to pose the possibility that the universe did have a designer - not a god such as the creation myths describe but a race of intelligent (?) beings who, live ourselves could not resist meddling with things they did not fully understand thus incurring unforeseen consequences.
Liberal? What Does That Mean?What is a liberal? Is it something to do with the kind of politically correct thinking that obsesses over minority rights while seeking to marginalise mainstream society? Is liberalism an authoritarian system that seeks to impose politically correct left wing ideology on everybody. Or is a liberal, as is argued here, a very respectable political postion whose name has been usurped by people reluctant to acknowledge their inner Nazi.
Have We Forgotten How To BeThe introduction and menu page to Meditations, the Labyrinth's guide to rediscovering the art of just being
Science - Who To Believe
How To Criticise Science
Secular Stupidity
Philo and Sophia - the philosophy pages
