|existentialism ° art ° poetry ° exquisite corpse ° chat ° search engine|
|( the cry ) Philosophy Discussion Board|
Posted by PJ on Saturday, November 30, 2002 at 01:05:06 :
In Reply to: Re: OW! my head hurts posted by ryan on Wednesday, November 27, 2002 at 02:28:13 :
: : something along those lines.
: : just to clarify, i'm thinking about determinism on the physical level, not biological, social, etc. eg when two atoms interact in such and such a way only one outcome is possible, and so the result is necessary.
: : actually... if my question doesn't make too much sense it might be because i'm not sure what i'm trying to ask. i spent a year or two studying existensialism (ala autodidact) but after that, i picked up a bit of cold hard determinism. i'm really just wondering how the two fit in together. last i checked, existensialism required God's nonexistence. but the existence of physical laws (eg universal gravitation) seems to substitute for that. so the two seem to be opposite as u described...
: Soren Kirkegaard was a devout Christian. There is definately both atheistic existentialism and christian existentialism. so God isn't the main focus of existentialism. the main focus, it appears, is subjectivity.
Existentialism doesn't really deal with God. Sartre barely mentions him. Kierkegaard was more of a theologian than a philosopher. Both were existentialists. What seems to most charcterize existentialist philosophers the idea of freedom producing anguish/dread/angst/whatever. In other words, for an existentialist, God can exist as long as he does not get in the way of freedom.
In answer to the original question, determinism, which is the complete absence of freedom, is diametrically opposed to existentialism (at least the existentialism of Sartre and Kierkegaard).
Post a Followup