In simple terms, existentialism is a philosophical trend that puts a person's experience, his experiences, his existence in the first place. The opposite of existentialism is transcendence, a way of obtaining knowledge directly from the “cosmos” (in simple words), that is, bypassing the personal experience of a person. The existentialist checks everything, tastes it, and touches it. The transcendentalist does not need this, he knows from space what taste and what to touch))
Why do we live on Earth? What is the meaning of our lives? In the history of philosophy, we know a number of unsuccessful attempts to find answers to these questions. For example, the founders of existentialism argued that the life of each of us on Earth is just a ridiculous accident; moreover, none of us gave anyone our permission, consent — to live. They lamented this and saw only suicide as a worthy solution to this “ridiculous situation”. They were atheists. And many modern believers in the existence of God do not ask themselves this question at all. They… only dream of earthly well-being and escaping hell after the death of the body… and what do you have to do for this? – it turns out to participate in various “religious” rites, repent of true and imaginary sins, and also “pray”, that is, first of all, beg for “salvation” from hell — from God or from the “gods” and “saints”invented by representatives of these confessions. And this absurdity has always been actively promoted by the priests of such religious trends. They instilled in their “flock” the idea of God — as an evil Bogeyman who only does what punishes, and therefore it is necessary to be afraid of Him! And we, they say, the priests-we are your intercessors before Him: we “pray” for you and teach you how to “pray”correctly… Why do I call this form of pseudo-religion absurd? But because, in fact, we, according to the Will of God, should PERFECT OURSELVES (as souls) in accordance with His Teaching-and not cry out to Him about our sinfulness! And not to beg before Him for “earthly” goods — but to strive to become “perfect, even as our Heavenly Father is perfect,” in the words of Jesus Christ! And another thing: does fear help bring someone closer to someone else? No! – love! And it is not for nothing that Jesus and all the other Divine Teachers teach us not to fear, not to hate — but to LOVE! THERE is no DESCRIPTION OF GOD IN the entire Bible. And, accordingly, there is not even an indication of where to look for It in order to realize that very consubstantiality with It … Part 2. The Creator (or God the Father, Primordial Consciousness, Ishvara, Tao, Allah — and so on, no matter in which of the human languages we call Him) is the subtlest Part of the Universe, and it is the MAIN Part of It — INFINITE in size and ALWAYS existing. I will briefly say that spatial dimensions are like floors of the Universe (also called the Absolute), which differ from each other in the levels of the roughness — subtlety scale. The layer of the most subtle energies is God in the aspect of the Creator. It looks like an endless stretch of pure Light, similar to the light of the gentle and warm morning sun. There are no forms in it. Once in It, all forms immediately dissolve. At the opposite end of the above — mentioned scale of subtlety — coarseness is hell-the abode of the most disgusting souls: aggressive, evil, consisting of black energies. *** In fact, individual souls are-by their origin – not particles of the Original Consciousness, but particles of another component of the Universe. Namely, protopurushi. The task of these souls (that is, including each of us) is to advance in their development to the Original Consciousness, to the Creator. In the end, Souls who have reached Perfection flow into the Creator, enriching Him with Themselves. Having settled forever in the Abode of the Creator, now living in Fusion with Him, becoming His integral components, They continue to work, helping other evolving souls. In the world of incarnate beings, They now manifest Themselves as Representatives of the Creator, also called Holy Spirits (or, collectively, the Holy Spirit). This is the meaning of the existence of all Creation, as well as the meaning of our existence and the existence of all beings here! Well, the lot of those who do not go this Way, who, on the contrary, develop rudeness, malice, cruelty — their lot is hell. What you are hearing now is not an “invention” of the speaker now. No: this is the knowledge that God has at his disposal, what the Divine Teachers — that is, the Messiahs and Holy Spirits-have always taught incarnate people and are teaching them now. This was taught, among others, by Thoth-Atlantean (aka Hermes-Trismegistus in His next Divine Incarnation), and Pythagoras, and Krishna, and Gautama Buddha, and Jesus Christ, and the Divine Teachers of later epochs and our modern times. (This information is most fully presented in the book “Classics of Spiritual Philosophy and Modernity”). part 3. I will tell you about the fate of a famous scientist who was a stubborn, stubborn atheist. But he devoted his life to the Good, heroically, self-sacrificingly helping people with the highest knowledge and methods that he possessed. The premise of his atheism was that he, having the terrible brand of a Jew in Russia during the Brezhnev era, also lived here in the cruel era of” militant atheism”, and from religious concepts he was familiar only with the one that, as an intellectually highly developed person, could not satisfy him in any way. He left his body in a feeble old age, suffering from it and realizing with heavy sadness that the “end ” was approaching. And you can imagine how stunned he was later when he realized that there was no “end”! Summing up his life, he said very sincerely: “After all, I have lived an honest life! I also gave my all to make people better! He, living in Russia for those decades, suffered a lot of troubles. And of course, he could not accept the “Christianity” that managed to officially curse all Jews and has always treated them with varying degrees of hostility ever since… He endured everything humbly, never getting angry. Only marveling in silence at the savage moral primitivism that surrounds them… And he was right! His abode is now paradise! But here is one of his closest colleagues, also a scientist and a Jew by nationality of the earth body, who did a lot in the last years of his earthly life to bring people to an understanding of the immortality of the soul, published a lot of publications on psychology, spent his life in endless fuss, made the main theme of his efforts to establish his name among other people at any cost, developed superliveness (even in the course of one conversation, he used to “lie”, exposing himself), insisted that” man is an autonomous, closed system”, who did not think of God and did not conform his life to His Being, who developed the “lower self” to the stage of “sticking out” in all directions of bright vices, who ended his earthly life from a brain disease — now, having disembodied, he is seen “distorted”, black and still deprived of rest. The hell he created for himself continues… I say this with great sadness: this man helped so many people on Earth to start looking for true Freedom. But it turns out that he wasn't looking for her at all… After all, a person remains in an out-of-body state exactly as he trained himself to be during his life in the body and as he was caught by the death of the body…
Although existentialism originated in Germany, it became a major philosophical fashion in post-war France (Camus, Sartre). This is far from accidental. France suffered little from the war in the material sense, but suffered enormous moral damage, putting up minimal resistance to the German army, then obediently accepting the occupation, readily serving the Nazis, including in the search and extermination of Jews.
Existentialism made it possible, on the one hand, to distance oneself from this national catastrophe, and, on the other, to find within oneself some (albeit illusory) grounds for restoring the integrity of the individual and at least some dignity.
another opinion about a person who finds himself in a strange world and survives in this jungle and probably smart people continue to experience the horror that the first people on earth experienced and tried to calm themselves first of all with words and gestures and come up with different ways to protect and create at least the appearance of a safe corner for their life a kind of nest that is hidden among the branches of a thin tree growing on the edge of a cliff in the shadow of a huge volcano
In simple words, the explanation may sound like this. Man is a social animal. Deprive him of this quality, atomize his life, and you will get a picture of a being with missing meanings in a space closed by him to himself. Such an analysis – as things in themselves-is known not only in philosophy. In economics, it is used in so-called robinsonades. It is always abstract, and sometimes even harmless.
More ignorant and not meeting the requirements, as well as the interests of a person, than the philosophical trend of existentialism in the 21st century, apparently does not exist.
If someone really wants to get answers to the questions that this philosophy deals with without any benefit, they will need to turn to the modern morphology of the human brain and realize their curiosity without much effort.
This is the most accurate definition of existentialism given by a person more than a hundred years before the word itself appeared.
“Being one or the other depends on us. Each of us is a garden, and the gardener in it is the will. Whether nettles, lettuce, hyssop, cumin, one or many things grow in us, whether they die out without care or grow luxuriantly-we ourselves are masters of all this.”(Shakespeare)
If krtako ,then existentialism is a philosophy of existence, which, as can be understood from the definition, focuses on the uniqueness of human existence.
If it is vulgar, existentialism is: the world that surrounds us is what we feel through the senses, the rest does not exist and the senses also do not exist, there are only our sensations.
Briefly, I put it this way: “An existentialist is a person who has realized that the world is meaningless, absurd, but finds the strength to live on.”�
In other words, existentialism leaves a person to himself, leaves him alone with his existence (existence) – in which there is no God, morality, values, goals, there is no meaning, since a person is mortal. But this person must explore everything around him and move on, move forward, without realizing for what purpose.
The idea of a person as a phenomenon that determines its own existence: a person is left to himself ,only he decides what to do, and only he is responsible for his actions. Each person's existence is unique
“…just like for a fool” won't work. By asking in this way, you:
or (and most likely) imitate a fool – I'm not a stupid guy, but I really don't want to read and delve into various rubbish myself. I'd rather call the other fools and let them amuse themselves, tell me about existentialism. If I hear something interesting or useful , it's fine. If I don't hear it, it's a small loss: someone else's strength and time…
or (unlikely, but more interesting and promising) sincerely state your stupidity, wait for help from clever experts and … risk becoming a victim of someone else's cleverness and arrogance (=stupidity), i.e. remain a fool, already “squared”…
In both cases, there is no understanding of existentialism. For both the “vague object of desire” (existentialism) and the initial attitude towards it (“I don't understand”)are considered as such. and the optimistic perspective (“Oh, I got it right now!”) is conceived essentialistically, essentially, as a certain” what”, i.e. fundamentally anti-existential. Existence is not a “what”, but a “how”. And it is found (understood) in the movement (life) itself, and not in the instruction “How to move (live)?”that precedes it.
From this point of view, the second position (sincere stupidity) is more productive. Because:
it, unlike the first one (the crafty imitator), is not absolute: to recognize one's stupidity as something that must be overcome is no longer stupid (stupidity is not the lack of intelligence, but its inadequate use).;
from this point (again, unlike the first one), movement is possible and in any case it will be a movement “from” stupidity. As they say, “There is still a way out of pessimism, but there is no way out of optimism” 🙂 Good luck!!!
I understand it this way. Existentialists consider freedom of choice to be an inalienable and basic property of a person. No matter how you are influenced from the outside, you can always make a choice. Even in a concentration camp situation. Throw yourself on the guard with your fists or on the electric wire, or even think about the wife from whom you were separated. This is how Viktor Frankl described his discovery.
People are fleeing en masse from their freedom to make informed decisions to everyday automatism and conformity:
Why did you go to university? Мама Mom said.
Why did you start a family? Ну Well, so it is accepted, everyone started up and I.
There is a VK audio recording “Existential psychology-Leontiev” where the essence is clearly explained.
In simple terms, existentialism is a philosophical trend that puts a person's experience, his experiences, his existence in the first place. The opposite of existentialism is transcendence, a way of obtaining knowledge directly from the “cosmos” (in simple words), that is, bypassing the personal experience of a person. The existentialist checks everything, tastes it, and touches it. The transcendentalist does not need this, he knows from space what taste and what to touch))
Why do we live on Earth? What is the meaning of our lives?
In the history of philosophy, we know a number of unsuccessful attempts to find answers to these questions.
For example, the founders of existentialism argued that the life of each of us on Earth is just a ridiculous accident; moreover, none of us gave anyone our permission, consent — to live. They lamented this and saw only suicide as a worthy solution to this “ridiculous situation”.
They were atheists.
And many modern believers in the existence of God do not ask themselves this question at all. They… only dream of earthly well-being and escaping hell after the death of the body… and what do you have to do for this? – it turns out to participate in various “religious” rites, repent of true and imaginary sins, and also “pray”, that is, first of all, beg for “salvation” from hell — from God or from the “gods” and “saints”invented by representatives of these confessions.
And this absurdity has always been actively promoted by the priests of such religious trends. They instilled in their “flock” the idea of God — as an evil Bogeyman who only does what punishes, and therefore it is necessary to be afraid of Him! And we, they say, the priests-we are your intercessors before Him: we “pray” for you and teach you how to “pray”correctly…
Why do I call this form of pseudo-religion absurd? But because, in fact, we, according to the Will of God, should PERFECT OURSELVES (as souls) in accordance with His Teaching-and not cry out to Him about our sinfulness! And not to beg before Him for “earthly” goods — but to strive to become “perfect, even as our Heavenly Father is perfect,” in the words of Jesus Christ!
And another thing: does fear help bring someone closer to someone else? No! – love! And it is not for nothing that Jesus and all the other Divine Teachers teach us not to fear, not to hate — but to LOVE!
THERE is no DESCRIPTION OF GOD IN the entire Bible. And, accordingly, there is not even an indication of where to look for It in order to realize that very consubstantiality with It …
Part 2.
The Creator (or God the Father, Primordial Consciousness, Ishvara, Tao, Allah — and so on, no matter in which of the human languages we call Him) is the subtlest Part of the Universe, and it is the MAIN Part of It — INFINITE in size and ALWAYS existing.
I will briefly say that spatial dimensions are like floors of the Universe (also called the Absolute), which differ from each other in the levels of the roughness — subtlety scale.
The layer of the most subtle energies is God in the aspect of the Creator. It looks like an endless stretch of pure Light, similar to the light of the gentle and warm morning sun. There are no forms in it. Once in It, all forms immediately dissolve.
At the opposite end of the above — mentioned scale of subtlety — coarseness is hell-the abode of the most disgusting souls: aggressive, evil, consisting of black energies.
***
In fact, individual souls are-by their origin – not particles of the Original Consciousness, but particles of another component of the Universe. Namely, protopurushi.
The task of these souls (that is, including each of us) is to advance in their development to the Original Consciousness, to the Creator.
In the end, Souls who have reached Perfection flow into the Creator, enriching Him with Themselves. Having settled forever in the Abode of the Creator, now living in Fusion with Him, becoming His integral components, They continue to work, helping other evolving souls. In the world of incarnate beings, They now manifest Themselves as Representatives of the Creator, also called Holy Spirits (or, collectively, the Holy Spirit).
This is the meaning of the existence of all Creation, as well as the meaning of our existence and the existence of all beings here!
Well, the lot of those who do not go this Way, who, on the contrary, develop rudeness, malice, cruelty — their lot is hell.
What you are hearing now is not an “invention” of the speaker now. No: this is the knowledge that God has at his disposal, what the Divine Teachers — that is, the Messiahs and Holy Spirits-have always taught incarnate people and are teaching them now.
This was taught, among others, by Thoth-Atlantean (aka Hermes-Trismegistus in His next Divine Incarnation), and Pythagoras, and Krishna, and Gautama Buddha, and Jesus Christ, and the Divine Teachers of later epochs and our modern times. (This information is most fully presented in the book “Classics of Spiritual Philosophy and Modernity”).
part 3.
I will tell you about the fate of a famous scientist who was a stubborn, stubborn atheist. But he devoted his life to the Good, heroically, self-sacrificingly helping people with the highest knowledge and methods that he possessed. The premise of his atheism was that he, having the terrible brand of a Jew in Russia during the Brezhnev era, also lived here in the cruel era of” militant atheism”, and from religious concepts he was familiar only with the one that, as an intellectually highly developed person, could not satisfy him in any way.
He left his body in a feeble old age, suffering from it and realizing with heavy sadness that the “end ” was approaching.
And you can imagine how stunned he was later when he realized that there was no “end”!
Summing up his life, he said very sincerely: “After all, I have lived an honest life! I also gave my all to make people better!
He, living in Russia for those decades, suffered a lot of troubles. And of course, he could not accept the “Christianity” that managed to officially curse all Jews and has always treated them with varying degrees of hostility ever since… He endured everything humbly, never getting angry. Only marveling in silence at the savage moral primitivism that surrounds them… And he was right! His abode is now paradise!
But here is one of his closest colleagues, also a scientist and a Jew by nationality of the earth body, who did a lot in the last years of his earthly life to bring people to an understanding of the immortality of the soul, published a lot of publications on psychology, spent his life in endless fuss, made the main theme of his efforts to establish his name among other people at any cost, developed superliveness (even in the course of one conversation, he used to “lie”, exposing himself), insisted that” man is an autonomous, closed system”, who did not think of God and did not conform his life to His Being, who developed the “lower self” to the stage of “sticking out” in all directions of bright vices, who ended his earthly life from a brain disease — now, having disembodied, he is seen “distorted”, black and still deprived of rest. The hell he created for himself continues…
I say this with great sadness: this man helped so many people on Earth to start looking for true Freedom. But it turns out that he wasn't looking for her at all…
After all, a person remains in an out-of-body state exactly as he trained himself to be during his life in the body and as he was caught by the death of the body…
Although existentialism originated in Germany, it became a major philosophical fashion in post-war France (Camus, Sartre). This is far from accidental. France suffered little from the war in the material sense, but suffered enormous moral damage, putting up minimal resistance to the German army, then obediently accepting the occupation, readily serving the Nazis, including in the search and extermination of Jews.
Existentialism made it possible, on the one hand, to distance oneself from this national catastrophe, and, on the other, to find within oneself some (albeit illusory) grounds for restoring the integrity of the individual and at least some dignity.
another opinion about a person who finds himself in a strange world and survives in this jungle and probably smart people continue to experience the horror that the first people on earth experienced and tried to calm themselves first of all with words and gestures and come up with different ways to protect and create at least the appearance of a safe corner for their life a kind of nest that is hidden among the branches of a thin tree growing on the edge of a cliff in the shadow of a huge volcano
In simple words, the explanation may sound like this. Man is a social animal. Deprive him of this quality, atomize his life, and you will get a picture of a being with missing meanings in a space closed by him to himself. Such an analysis – as things in themselves-is known not only in philosophy. In economics, it is used in so-called robinsonades. It is always abstract, and sometimes even harmless.
More ignorant and not meeting the requirements, as well as the interests of a person, than the philosophical trend of existentialism in the 21st century, apparently does not exist.
If someone really wants to get answers to the questions that this philosophy deals with without any benefit, they will need to turn to the modern morphology of the human brain and realize their curiosity without much effort.
This is the most accurate definition of existentialism given by a person more than a hundred years before the word itself appeared.
“Being one or the other depends on us. Each of us is a garden, and the gardener in it is the will. Whether nettles, lettuce, hyssop, cumin, one or many things grow in us, whether they die out without care or grow luxuriantly-we ourselves are masters of all this.”(Shakespeare)
If krtako ,then existentialism is a philosophy of existence, which, as can be understood from the definition, focuses on the uniqueness of human existence.
If it is vulgar, existentialism is: the world that surrounds us is what we feel through the senses, the rest does not exist and the senses also do not exist, there are only our sensations.
Briefly, I put it this way: “An existentialist is a person who has realized that the world is meaningless, absurd, but finds the strength to live on.”�
In other words, existentialism leaves a person to himself, leaves him alone with his existence (existence) – in which there is no God, morality, values, goals, there is no meaning, since a person is mortal. But this person must explore everything around him and move on, move forward, without realizing for what purpose.
The idea of a person as a phenomenon that determines its own existence: a person is left to himself ,only he decides what to do, and only he is responsible for his actions. Each person's existence is unique
What is the question is the answer.
“…just like for a fool” won't work. By asking in this way, you:
or (and most likely) imitate a fool – I'm not a stupid guy, but I really don't want to read and delve into various rubbish myself. I'd rather call the other fools and let them amuse themselves, tell me about existentialism. If I hear something interesting or useful , it's fine. If I don't hear it, it's a small loss: someone else's strength and time…
or (unlikely, but more interesting and promising) sincerely state your stupidity, wait for help from clever experts and … risk becoming a victim of someone else's cleverness and arrogance (=stupidity), i.e. remain a fool, already “squared”…
In both cases, there is no understanding of existentialism. For both the “vague object of desire” (existentialism) and the initial attitude towards it (“I don't understand”)are considered as such. and the optimistic perspective (“Oh, I got it right now!”) is conceived essentialistically, essentially, as a certain” what”, i.e. fundamentally anti-existential. Existence is not a “what”, but a “how”. And it is found (understood) in the movement (life) itself, and not in the instruction “How to move (live)?”that precedes it.
From this point of view, the second position (sincere stupidity) is more productive. Because:
it, unlike the first one (the crafty imitator), is not absolute: to recognize one's stupidity as something that must be overcome is no longer stupid (stupidity is not the lack of intelligence, but its inadequate use).;
from this point (again, unlike the first one), movement is possible and in any case it will be a movement “from” stupidity. As they say, “There is still a way out of pessimism, but there is no way out of optimism” 🙂 Good luck!!!
I understand it this way. Existentialists consider freedom of choice to be an inalienable and basic property of a person. No matter how you are influenced from the outside, you can always make a choice. Even in a concentration camp situation. Throw yourself on the guard with your fists or on the electric wire, or even think about the wife from whom you were separated. This is how Viktor Frankl described his discovery.
People are fleeing en masse from their freedom to make informed decisions to everyday automatism and conformity:
Why did you go to university? Мама Mom said.
Why did you start a family? Ну Well, so it is accepted, everyone started up and I.
There is a VK audio recording “Existential psychology-Leontiev” where the essence is clearly explained.