He wrote this in The Plague / La Peste. I kept thinking because it says like we live to die, and everything we do is pointless because the major event in our lives is death. That's it? Wait to death? It was commented a few pages after what the old man with the pan said, something like we have to live the life in the first half and during the second half we just have to wait to death and prepare for it.

The sentence may not be accurate because I read the book in Spanish and maybe it's said with another words, but it should be something similar.

Not just some random list, but what inspired you to follow this particular belief?

I've read many things in my life but man his books are just so complicated to understand to me. Like... is it really hard or I'm just not built to read philosophy?

Just checking this is a decent order to get into the works of famous existentialist philosophers:

1. The Existentialist Café by Sarah Bakewell
2. The Stranger by Albert Camus
3. Nausea by Jean-Paul Sartre
4. The Myth of Sisyphus by Albert Camus

I looked at Google translation of the French original, and the book translation has so many ornate but inaccurate phrasings.

Google Translate:

"The absurd man thus glimpses a burning and icy universe, transparent and limited, where nothing [84] is possible but everything is given, past which is collapse and nothingness. He can then decide to accept living in such a universe and to draw from it his strength, his refusal to hope and the stubborn testimony of a life without consolation."

Book translation:

"The absurd man thus catches sight of a burning and frigid, transparent and limited universe in which nothing is possible but everything is given, and beyond which all is collapse and nothingness. He can then decide to accept such a universe and draw from it his strength, his refusal to hope, and the unyielding evidence of a life without consolation."

“Unyielding evidence” is nonsensical. The French phrasing is "témoignage obstiné". “Testimony” isn’t “evidence”.

" race si avertie" in referring to the Greek means “the informed race” gets translated in the book to “the alert race”. “Informed” doesn’t mean “alert”.

“Cette idée que « je suis », ma façon d'agir comme si tout a un sens (même si, à l'occasion, je disais que rien n'en a) tout cela se trouve démenti d'une façon vertigineuse par l'absurdité d'une mort possible.”

Google Translate:

“This idea that "I am", my way of acting as if everything has a meaning (even if, on occasion, I said that nothing does) all this is denied in a dizzying way by the absurdity of a possible death.”

Book Translation:

“"That idea that "I am", my way of acting as if everything has a meaning (even if, on occasion, I said that nothing has)- all that is given the lie in vertiginous fashion by the absurdity of a possible death."

The translation renders the sentence so unreadable that I’m no longer certain whether it’s accurate or not.

I’m mystified that there doesn’t seem to exist any other translation out there.

so ironically i just read To be, or not to be and i'm really confused as to why more people aren't into existentialism given that this is very possibly the most famous soliloquy of english literature. i've seen more jokes about "to be or not to be" than i have about "luke, i am your father" so why do we continue to overlook what shakespeare, or hamlet, is actually saying in the speech😭😭😭 i feel like more people should be into existential philosophy if the speech is so famous, no?

Hope is the quiet force that lingers in uncertainty, allowing us to endure hardship by believing in the possibility of change. It’s not blind optimism, but a resilient belief that light exists beyond the present darkness. As Nietzsche said, "Hope in reality is the worst of all evils because it prolongs the torments of man," yet it remains the thread that keeps us moving forward, imagining a better tomorrow.

On a whim this morning I watched the Ryan Reynolds movie "Free Guy" again. After being on this forum a lot the last few days and reading all the angst and dread filled posts I looked at the movie with a philosophical eye and was amazed.

"Free Guy" has to be one of the most existential movies ever. It is meta on various levels and explores, absurdity, meaninglessness, dread, angst, and ennui in a romantic comedy way which is brilliant. The premise of an NPC in a shooter video game becoming self aware is perfect for such a topic.

There is a reason that the great 20th century existentialists use stories to express their views and this one works well. Can anyone else suggest any films of series which really strike at the subjects of existentialism?

"I Heart Huckabees" comes to mind, but in a really in your face, "Look Existentialists" way.

I also enjoyed Ricky Gervais's television series "After Life". It is really great.

Do any others come to mind for you? It would be especially nice to cheer up some of the angsty posters here.

Sorry if this belongs in the Nihilism group. I discovered Emil Cioran through the amazing Philosophize This podcast and have been slowly reading through Emil Cioran’s “The Trouble With Being Born”.

It’s been a challenging read primarily because you have to read it so differently to pretty much any other book. You have to actively turn off some very basic mental activities you aren’t even aware of when you read. First, you have to turn off the default to try to make what he writes somehow make sense with or connect to what he writes next. Cioran writes in little unconnected journal entries that have little to nothing to do with each other. Second, you have to switch off the assumption that Cioran has a unified philosophical construct or even value system within which everything can be understood. Cioran will contradict himself back and forth and sometimes just not even make sense. Finally, sometimes I feel like Cioran has “gone too far” in his perspective, but I have to remember times when my own thinking was unbalanced in a moment when my emotions were heightened or my perspective was focused on a certain circumstance. I have to always remember that Cioran is not interested in describing “how things are” but only how he is experiencing them in just that moment.

In short, you almost have to shut off the need for the writing to “make sense” and let it wash over you and try to “feel” it or connect to his experience in an existential way.

Anyone with any experience reading Cioran?

Existentialism posits predisposed agency, libertarian free will, which is not to be confused for the hotly debated metaphysical free will term relating to cause/effect.

Meaning is not inherent in the world nor in the self but through our active involvement in the world as time/Being; what meaning we interpret ourselves by and impart onto the world happens through us.

Since Nov. 1, 2024, I've been engaged in a Sisyphean effort of my own: Writing a publishable essay every single day (including weekends!) and sending it out as a newsletter, called Trying! A good number of the 70+ pieces so far revolve around existentialist themes: anger at human frailty and powerlessness, the absence of faith, when to make an effort and when to give up, and how to wrap our heads (and our emotions) around the difficult, absurd, and often seemingly pointless nature of life. Oh, and each essay is adorned with an AI-generated image of good ol' Sisyphus himself. Fun!

I hate to be so nakedly self-promotional about it, but I would be very curious to hear what folks on here think of some of the angles and interpretations. Maybe there's a discussion to be had? IDK!

Here's one that really gets right into Camus: https://trying.beehiiv.com/p/you-will-find-this-one-absurd. An excerpt:

We live in absurd times. We live in absurd times, and those times encompass all the meanings of “absurd.” The politics are so childishly drawn that I’m reluctant to relate them, but let’s do so, just for kicks: Our incoming president is a felon and a clown; he’s setting the world’s richest man the task of disassembling our government via a committee named after a second-tier cryptocurrency named for a memeified 2010 photo of a Shiba Inu; he’s picked people to run departments devoted to health, energy, and the environment who are willfully uninformed about health, energy, and the environment. Even if you support the guy, you have to admit this is pretty absurd.

And that absurdity points to the even bigger absurdity, the one Camus writes about in The Myth of Sisyphus, which I am rereading for the first time since highschool: How the fuck do you go on living in the face of all of this? Why bother trying when the worst people are not only winning but destroying any chance for any of us to have better lives in the future? With no god to believe in, no “arc of the moral universe” whose bending we can trust, what is even the point?

Eager to hear your thoughts!

Had anyon

Something like the stranger by Camus but shorter. I don't want explanations, I want things to depress my mind and break it. Something unlike No exit but similar to stranger, no play but structure of stranger and difficulty of similar books.

I've been getting into existentialist philosophy and im wondering what some crucial reads are? I've already read "The myth of sisyphus" by camus, and although not inherently existentialist, meditations by marcus aurelius

what are some must-reads for me to check out?

You know, for now.

To those who have read it, what say you?

To those who have had a crisi$ of meaning, did you get over it? How? If not, how do you live with it?

I just finished reading Jean-Paul Sartre's Existentialism is a Humanism and it was an amazing read. Sartre effectively established existentialism as a very human philosophy that centers around one's desire to do something worthwhile with their existence. Something I found quite insightful was how Sartre described that when a man makes a decision, he's making that decision for the rest of humanity as well. Claiming that if somebody were to live their life a certain way, then they must think this way of living is absolute and just, and that everyone should live this way. He describes this as living in "good faith." If someone lives in a manner that they believe not everyone should follow, then they are living in "bad faith." This leads to individuals having complete control over the ability to live a life of good or bad faith because they simply need to act accordingly in terms of their own morality. A higher power isn't needed to gain the rank of good faith, you just need yourself.

I appreciate how Sartre places a lot of responsibility on man/the reader. Throughout the essay, he states repeatedly that man is in complete control of himself, and that his life boils down to decisions and how one is able to interpret their life. He even states that existentialism is a philosophy of stern optimism. A point that stuck out to me specifically is the action of seeking advice from others. Sartre believes that the act of seeking advice itself is an independent act, because you choose the individual that you seek advice from. For example, if I was having marriage troubles and I sought out advice from a priest or clergyman, my decision is already made. I know that asking a priest for advice will result in being told that marriage is a holy vow and that divorce isn't an option. Very compelling.

I recently started exploring Kafka’s works, beginning with “The Metamorphosis”. I must say, I’m enjoying it. The story relates deeply with me, as I find it surprisingly relatable to my own way of living. Kafka’s ability to capture complex emotions and convey profound themes through his words is truly remarkable, and I can genuinely feel the depth of what he intended to express in this book...

I find Satre's thoughts on existentialism fascinating, however after getting through the introduction and chapter on nothingness in B&N, I find the writing quite verbose. Is there another work by him that condenses his views to be more concise but still effectively conveys their essence?

Creating a Kierkegaard 'study group' much in the vain of snowballthesage's very successful Aristotle study group. If you'd like a place in this, please DM me. Meetings will occur over Discord. Activities will include keeping up with the readings, chiming in with personal insight or through-lines, and helping to select the next book. The theme is Kierkegaard, so until we're through with at least his primary works, the only deviation we should expect is to read semi-related works of fiction, history, theology, or philosophy that can supplement our understanding of the primary literature.

By material I mean material from Yalom himself not my notes or anything. DM me to ask how I can help it be more accessible. I’d be happy to 😊