I don't know about you, but isn't Existentialism a bit pessimistic?

I'm an optimist for the most part. I like to see the positive things in life, but I read a lot of things posted in this forum, and I read a lot about pessimism. Can somebody clarify this?

 

Yes, it isn't being pessimistic, it's being realistic. And when you know you're being realistic, you can also be an optimist because you know how to rationally assess situations.

Or something.

 

That's understandable. I mean, I am realistic most of the time, but I like to keep an optimistic outlook. I just don't like the kind of people who are always pessimistic. They're always so glum, and they feel that life isn't gonna get any better for them, when it actually does. Like those poser goth kids on South Park.

 

Yeah, but... it doesn't really matter whether life gets "better" or not becuase in the end you're going to die. And the time between now and then is so insignificant that... well, it just isn't worth the concern.

 

I don't think that existentialism is pessimistic in general. I think that some people can make it sound pretty damn bad. But to me, this way of thinking makes life that much more worth it. It gets you realizing that you are responsible for your time here. You don't bitch and moan about what's happening TO you, you take responsibility, figure out how to improve things, and move on. You do rather than talk about doing. I think the pessimism is a side affect of thinking you're an existentialist and not acting like one.

 

It seems to focus on the negative because many existentialist writers focus on death and anxiety in the face of death. But they do this because they find it hard to get beyond themselves. Rather than pessimism, I think it is better categorized as skeptical. But all philosophy is skepticism. I think it was Nietzche who wrote that all modern philosophy is an epistemic skepticism.

Most all philosophy seems like that, to the layperson, but there are lots of constructivist philosophies out there. Existentialism is not one of them, however, because it is, by its very nature, more focused on the individual (well, maybe not Heidegger, but even still...). Existentialism therefore can't focus on any systematically constructive rhetoric, because it doesn't recognize much outside of the individual. Not because it is pessimistic in thinking that the world is a bad place, but rather because it is skeptical in thinking that there is reason to believe there is a universal and historically significant meaning that is able to be grasped by us, existing as individuals.

 

One has to be very wary that Casuality, Determinism, Fatalism and Nihilism doesn't crop into one's Existential life.

 

I am now just getting into existentialism. I dont think it is either pessimistic or optimistic. It's just a search for the answer without the heavy religious overtones.

 

She said it well. Umm.
We destroy negativity by seeing where posivity can replace it. Thus optomists.
As for the people who sound like they want to die, their just kidding.
Its this whole new pseudo intellectual thing, since we were born after such peaceful times.

 

I don't know. It depends how you look at it.


AHHHHH HA HA HA.



Kripke would have laughed. (what do you mean there isn't a thread on ol' Saul?)

 

Pessimism is the greatest kind of optimism for it means one should expect better.

 

Existentialism in my opinion borders on nihilism.

 

I completely disagree. They are total opposites.

 

if you really think that, you don't know what existentialism is about at all. Don't just read what these people here are saying, read what the philosophers who invented the idea were saying. Don't just read what other people say they said, either. That's cheating, and anyone who has actually read Neitzche or Sartre or Heidegger will know you are full of crap.

 

woooah slow down, spacers cool, he just might be a bit misinformed.

 

Well I've read a lot into existentialism after posting this. It does represent a lot of things that I believe in, but the part about "those who are happy are living a bad life" and vice versa, really put me off. Can anybody expand on that?

 

Actually, i don't quite get that part of existentialism either. I've just chosen to ignore it until now...please someone explain this.

 

I've read Thus Spoke Zarathustra and Nausea and they are the books that led me to form my opinion. It would also appear to me that alot of writers on the subject seemed to lead a nihilistic life. Also existentialism is completely morbid, it denies the idea of social responsibility and morals. It is also a bit like Zen Buddhism, most people just write and talk about it, rarely practising. Sorry if we don't agree on the subject and you still think I am full of crap.

Om Shanti.

 

not even the existentialists can agree on what existentialism is, it has so many faces. I can't remember who, I can look it up if you doubt me, but one of them that was always talking about doing what's best for Me ended up saying that what was good for one person is what is good for everyone, turning it into a sort of me-centered morality and system of ethics. Then someone else came around and expanded that idea and turned it around and said that if what you do isn't good for everyone, it's not good for you, either, in the big picture.


I'll add myself a little disclaimer, though. I am no existentialist. Totally hated having to study that stuff in college, but I did study it, and still have the books, and I still read them from time to time for some sick reason. But in college, I had a completely different idea of what those guys were trying to say than what I think about it now. See? Even one person's interpretations, of say, Neitzche's Beyond Good and Evil can disagree with what they thought it said the last time they read it. Two people's interpretations of those books cannot possibly ever agree. And two different philosophical viewpoints, like Neitzche and Sartre, couldn't be further apart, even though we give them the same label.

 

Nausea was a very pessimistic book, but from what i've heard, Sartre's actual intentions behind his writing and theories were much more positive. And as far as I see responsibility makes up quite a substantial part of existentialism. I think there is moral responsibility but not moral fundamentalism. Which is why i'm so attracted to some but not all of the ideas.