Existentialism: Construct or Truism?

[hellas1]

Hi all,

Existentialism: Do you think that it is just a philosophical construct which is meaningless? OR
Do you believe that it is such a real human truism or that it comes from such a true longing to even raise such a question/philosophical stance?

Why and How do you view existentialism?

Caveat: If you bring in the human brain and thinking, please back up statements made by academic sources not speculations.

That's all, Ciao
hellas1

[Ummon]

Delirium is rarely meaningless.

[removeduser_426582376423734]

Existentialism - that of confusion and bewilderment at the outside world - is mindblowing. These constructs that we put in our head are all seemingly very strong and well founded until you realise the foundations they are built on are all assumptions. In this way, Existentialism and 'cogito ergo sum' are very similar.

[chriscase]

Existentialism: Do you think that it is just a philosophical construct which is meaningless?

Like all philosophical constructs, it's an artifact of the mind, manufactured to shield us from the harsh realities of the world.

QED

[bushbush]

i did read albert camus' book in gr.12. I was very confused by it LOL....and threw it away.

[removeduser_426582376423734]

How is existentialism - a philosophy that concludes that the world is harsh - meant to shield us from the harsh realities of the world? Surely it opens them up to us.

[Denny Crane!]

Hi all,

Existentialism: Do you think that it is just a philosophical construct which is meaningless? OR
Do you believe that it is such a real human truism or that it comes from such a true longing to even raise such a question/philosophical stance?

I don't think its either I think its a psychological truth that you can either recognise accept, be ignorant of or dismiss.

Why and How do you view existentialism?

I view it as an integral part of buddhism, that existentialism and buddhism are closely related as they seek to strip away illusion and the misconceptions that are gospel thanks to the construction of the false self.

Like all philosophical constructs, it's an artifact of the mind, manufactured to shield us from the harsh realities of the world.

QED

errr...what? Its a philosophy that states we shield ourselves from the world through false perceptions and ideologies.

How is existentialism - a philosophy that concludes that the world is harsh - meant to shield us from the harsh realities of the world? Surely it opens them up to us.

Indeed.

[chriscase]

Ierrr...what? Its a philosophy that states we shield ourselves from the world through false perceptions and ideologies.

Indeed.

Sheesh, you guys are no fun.

But I stand by my original statement. It's still a conceptual framework, a thought system we can place between ourselves and raw perception.

[Ummon]

errr...what? Its a philosophy that states we shield ourselves from the world through false perceptions and ideologies.

Since we cannot perceive the world without categories, existentialism is merely a case of pot calling the kettle black.

I view it as an integral part of buddhism, that existentialism and buddhism are closely related as they seek to strip away illusion and the misconceptions that are gospel thanks to the construction of the false self.

No self is a true self.

[eventhorizen]

The root point is that we argue for or against in moments of hypothetical musing our complete acceptance of a basic reality upon which all else of ourselves is built upon. The ongoing contruction and deconstruction of systems of understanding is merely a salute to the basic fact that we find ourselves in a world, whether it is true or otherwise.

So the answer to the question in the OP is ultimately both. The answers may be unconvincing so far as completeness and revelation of the unarguable go, but the questions remain and in the absence of their contemplation we remain faced with their primacy, or rather daily life goes on.

In a philosophy forum perhaps we should be arguing continuation rather than merit?