In “Existentialism,” I liked when the author talked about anguish. He first asks what is meant by anguish and then proceeds to claim that man is anguish. We, as a human race are and embrace anguish. He is obviously an observer of people when he loosely claims that even though some people claim not to be anxious, we say they are hiding it. I think that is absolutely true. Personally, I have never met anyone that wasn’t anxious about at least one thing. If not anxious, then nervous. Or, as Sartre put it, is someone with an “uneasy conscience.” We all have something that we’re unsure of or nervous about. There are always decisions to be made and different problems that come up daily. I thing that Sartre is trying to help us understand that when we throw this feeling off as unimportant or, in another case, become completely overwhelmed by an anxious feeling, we are not alone and he reminds us that all of human kind feels this way at some point or another. He makes the observation that, “anguish is evident even when it conceals itself.” I agree with this statement because I know that I have become pretty experienced at covering up my problems. I don’t want others to feel sorry for me or feel the need to reach out and help me at any time. That doesn’t mean that I don’t have any, it just means that I have, as Sartre says, concealed them. It’s helpful to read this passage and to remember that anguish is here and all too present in the human race.
I do not really think that these two readings are that similar, to me they completely discuss life with different approaches. I feel that Existentialism takes a more active and aggressive approach, while Zen Parables takes a more passive out take on life. In Existentialism one of my favorite parts is when he is talking about quietism and he says the attitude of quietism is "Let others do what I can't do." This statement I find supremely ridiculous and I could not agree more with his argument of "There is no reality except in action." This phrase basically states that if you want something done, you must do it yourself. As cliché as that sounds it's the truth and I tend to follow this philosophy quite strongly. I think what Sartre is trying to convey here is that people might use Religion such as Christianity as a crutch while disables them from reaching their own full potential. Furthermore it prevents man from taking on full responsibility for their own actions, giving them this being to fall back own, therefore stripping from being an adult if you ask me. As adults we have responsibilities that we ourselves are accountable for, children on the other hand have no responsibilities for their actions and are not moral agents. I think that’s a main point for existentialism, to grow up and accept or take responsibility for one’s own actions.
ReplyDelete