How Camus and Sartre split up over the question of how to be free
1–10 of 69 posts
Re: How Camus and Sartre split up over the question of how to be free
#2what are the public academic debates that we are having today? creationism vs evolution? populism vs neo-liberalism?
I hate to reminisce but having two existentialist philosophers debating about socialism vs communism makes me jelly.
Re: How Camus and Sartre split up over the question of how to be free
#3Those guys were writers, not philosophers in the first place.
Unlimited, pure freedom does not exist and hence the absolute Free Will. It is an empty concept. Freedom is bound by the mind, the mind is bound by biology. Biology is bound by physics and other constraints of the environment. The Universe of Ideas is mere a hallucination. Suicide as an ultimate act of freedom, which is the canonical illustration - the only freedom man have. Not much freedom, after all.
Re: How Camus and Sartre split up over the question of how to be free
#4It's worth noting Sartre spent 9 months as a POW, that influenced his outlook on freedom a fair bit.
Re: How Camus and Sartre split up over the question of how to be free
#5Those guys were writers, not philosophers in the first place. Unlimited, pure freedom does not exist and hence the absolute Free Will. It is an empty concept. Freedom is bound by the mind, the mind is bound by biology. Biology is bound by physics and other constraints of the environment. The Universe of Ideas is mere a hallucination. Suicide as an ultimate act of freedom, which is the canonical illustration - the onl…
Camus said the only freedom is suicide. (The Myth of Sisyphus)
Re: How Camus and Sartre split up over the question of how to be free
#6Those guys were writers, not philosophers in the first place. Unlimited, pure freedom does not exist and hence the absolute Free Will. It is an empty concept. Freedom is bound by the mind, the mind is bound by biology. Biology is bound by physics and other constraints of the environment. The Universe of Ideas is mere a hallucination. Suicide as an ultimate act of freedom, which is the canonical illustration - the onl…
Camus said the only freedom is suicide. (The Myth of Sisyphus)
I think you are mistaken. At least from my reading of The Stranger I remember Camus stating suicide is a cowardly act. Wikipedia[1] states Camus viewed suicide as a rejection of freedom. Also the myth of sisyphus doesn't have much to do with suicide does it? I may be mistaken. I thought it was more of an analogy to the condition of man, not so much a suggestion to commit suicide to avoid it.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy_of_suicide#Absurdis...
Re: How Camus and Sartre split up over the question of how to be free
#7Those guys were writers, not philosophers in the first place. Unlimited, pure freedom does not exist and hence the absolute Free Will. It is an empty concept. Freedom is bound by the mind, the mind is bound by biology. Biology is bound by physics and other constraints of the environment. The Universe of Ideas is mere a hallucination. Suicide as an ultimate act of freedom, which is the canonical illustration - the onl…
> Those guys were writers, not philosophers in the first place.
It's interesting that you begin with a comment like this to seemingly dismiss Satre and Camus as not being real philosophers, and then you proceed to put forward your own terribly unfounded philosophy with no supporting argument.
Re: How Camus and Sartre split up over the question of how to be free
#8Those guys were writers, not philosophers in the first place. Unlimited, pure freedom does not exist and hence the absolute Free Will. It is an empty concept. Freedom is bound by the mind, the mind is bound by biology. Biology is bound by physics and other constraints of the environment. The Universe of Ideas is mere a hallucination. Suicide as an ultimate act of freedom, which is the canonical illustration - the onl…
> Those guys were writers, not philosophers in the first place. It's interesting that you begin with a comment like this to seemingly dismiss Satre and Camus as not being real philosophers, and then you proceed to put forward your own terribly unfounded philosophy with no supporting argument.
Show me a flaw in my logic before judging my style.
Speculations is not a substitute for philosophy. Philosophy, originally, was the quest for "reality as it is", which eventually destroyed religious dogmas and was a precursor for specialized sciences.
Arguably, with Hegel, at least in the West, the term philosophy lost any meaning and became mere abstract fancy speculations, similar to theology and mysticism.
Fortunately, there is Eastern philosophy too and the branch which is called philosophy of science. Camus and Sartre have nothing to contribute here.
Re: How Camus and Sartre split up over the question of how to be free
#9Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Those guys were writers, not philosophers in the first place. It's interesting that you begin with a comment like this to seemingly dismiss Satre and Camus as not being real philosophers, and then you proceed to put forward your own terribly unfounded philosophy with no supporting argument.
Show me a flaw in my logic before judging my style. Speculations is not a substitute for philosophy. Philosophy, originally, was the quest for "reality as it is", which eventually destroyed religious dogmas and was a precursor for specialized sciences. Arguably, with Hegel, at least in the West, the term philosophy lost any meaning and became mere abstract fancy speculations, similar to theology and mysticism. Fortun…
There cannot be a "flaw" in a sequence of statements which do not form a silogism. There is no flaw in your logic because there is no logic.
Re: How Camus and Sartre split up over the question of how to be free
#10Earlier quoted context omitted.
Show me a flaw in my logic before judging my style. Speculations is not a substitute for philosophy. Philosophy, originally, was the quest for "reality as it is", which eventually destroyed religious dogmas and was a precursor for specialized sciences. Arguably, with Hegel, at least in the West, the term philosophy lost any meaning and became mere abstract fancy speculations, similar to theology and mysticism. Fortun…
There cannot be a "flaw" in a sequence of statements which do not form a silogism. There is no flaw in your logic because there is no logic.
No one writes in formal way on a discussion board. Which statement in particular you personally do not like?