I said I was an
Existentialist without quite knowing what it meant. Between the crevices of poetry
and philosophy, my life was worming its way. I hid my growing teenage form
behind big books – shy, afraid, unsure. Among those saviours was Jean-Paul
Sartre.
I admit the initial
fascination was for the great love story. Simone de Beauvoir seemed to be the
perfect foil. It excited me to know that people could have open relationships.
Later, I realised that such freedom does not prevent the tumult, the feeling of
being tied down, of role-playing.
What Sartre gave me was
intangible. An acceptance of nothingness. Confidence about angst.
But, was it just so pat?
“Anything, anything would be better than this agony of mind, this creeping pain that gnaws and fumbles and caresses one and never hurts quite enough.”
I recently told someone,
“What pain is pain if it does not stay alive?” This is not self-destructive.
The mind that keeps one agonising is what keeps one awake.
There are many views
about Sartre, some accusing him of not being true to his own ideas. I prefer
seeing it as ideas overtaking. He was not quite perfect, and would probably
find the thought of perfection reprehensible. I am not providing a detailed
essay on his works. I confess that at some point I outgrew them. He is indeed
the pop star of philosophy – to my mind a strange mix of Woody Allen, T.S.Eliot
and a brooding Marlon Brando.
I don’t want to go into
a detailed discussion on Existentialism. I would have to agonise over it, for I
am dealing with ennui. Sartre would comprehend this!
There is another quote I’d
like to examine:
“Life has no meaning the moment you lose the illusion of being eternal.”
This is so complete. If
I were to deconstruct it, then he has captured the very essence of existence.
Survivalists may not wish to even go there. The moment we think of life as an
open-and-shut case with death as the destination, then we are rather obvious
pragmatists. And fatalists, too. The eternal does not exist in real terms,
therefore one has to imagine it. Life cannot be defined, but it has meaning and
value only if we know that it is a continuum.
And he said it best:
“That God does not exist, I cannot deny, That my whole being cries out for God I cannot forget.”
Illusions. Eternal.
© Farzana Versey
FV
ReplyDeleteLoved reading this. I am not as well read as you are. Not even close. I had only heard the names Sartre and existentialism without knowing a thing about either. Thanks for this enlightening and immensely readable piece.
Parting shot: Waiting for the day you outgrow Narendra Modi. :)
FV, some illusions, like the eternal one about an eternal being, exist as a lightning rod to absorb concepts the mind cannot quite deal with, like the unpredictability and pointlessness of existence in general -- pretending there is a reason for existing makes the journey more purposeful, even if the purpose is all faked. I find it better to consider the journey itself as the purpose, a journey is just a journey, even without a destination in mind.
ReplyDelete-Al
F&F:
ReplyDeleteThank you. Glad you enjoyed it.
PS: I hope a little more than you enjoy waiting for others to outgrow what is like an ingrown toe nail for you?!
Al:
ReplyDeleteUnpredictability and pointlessness are two different dimensions. If existence is pointless, one would not even fathom or care about its unpredictability.
{ I find it better to consider the journey itself as the purpose, a journey is just a journey, even without a destination in mind}
Yes, to a large extent. But I'd consider every pause as a destination. Besides, who the heck can keep walking?!
"Unpredictability and pointlessness are two different dimensions. If existence is pointless, one would not even fathom or care about its unpredictability."
ReplyDeleteFV, yes. Did not mean they were related. These are two main forms of questions of existentialist angst posed my most people, "Why are these terrible things happening to me? There must be a reason for that in god's master plan" (unpredictable reality has no reasons) or "Why am I here on this planet? I must be placed here for a reason. I just need to find it and fulfil my destiny" (justification to escape pointlessness). People ask these questions to themselves rhetorically at different times depending on the context, mostly.
Some how and I can't say why or what for, this post reminded me of " the Unbearable Lightness of Being", perhaps because of the themes you have evoked and the thoughts it invoked within me. Also who isn't fascinated by the open relationship it is a natural form of intercourse then constricted ones imposed by the society. And all meaningful relationships have an element of tumult, it sprouts growth and there is pain in growing as is in birth. And as for myself, I don't spend time thinking where did I came from and where will I end up- all I have is here and now, like a flash in the pan being aware that there is a fire that fuels and burns.
ReplyDeleteSometimes I sits and thinks, but mostly, I just sits.
Oops, The anon post at 22/06/2013 20:33 was by me.
ReplyDeleteForgot to sign off...
-Al
Anon:
ReplyDelete{ who isn't fascinated by the open relationship it is a natural form of intercourse then constricted ones imposed by the society.}
I think all relationships are constricted. The 'open' ones wanting to become whole, in the sense of committed.
You mention Kundera. I thought a quote from this book conveys it best:
"Love is the longing for the half of ourselves we have lost."
"And all meaningful relationships have an element of tumult, it sprouts growth and there is pain in growing as is in birth.}
Agree with the tumult, but what pain in birth? The birther, not the birthed, experiences pain.
{And as for myself, I don't spend time thinking where did I came from and where will I end up- all I have is here and now, like a flash in the pan being aware that there is a fire that fuels and burns.}
If you know the pain of giving birth — or a wide berth! — and of growing then you are aware of where you came from and tentatively conscious about where you might land. And I am not misusing my power of observation to allude to fire and frying pan. Both, incidentally, know what's cooking...
{Sometimes I sits and thinks, but mostly, I just sits.}
If you are conscious that you just sits, then you is thinks about it. No?
PS: Are you new here? Git yoself a name, I feel so lost talking to who knows who from where who sits and makes me thinks...
Al:
ReplyDeleteErgo, I am on this planet so that terrible things can happen to me. Yo:)
PS: Good you clarified, or I'd never know it was you!
---
Mark:
If you are reading this, hope you are smiling at our 'deep' thoughts. Missing you!
Meriam must be shaking her head *what are these people going on about* Miss you, too...
FV, was wondering where mstaab had disappeared to.
ReplyDeletemstaab, if you be reading, here's a shoutout and props to a homie.
-Al
PS: I just used some urban slang on mstaab in "hey look at me I am so cool" kinda way. Trying to build some serious street cred with such lingo and jock-revealing, low riding pants...it may all be starting to work. People are definitely starting to look at me differently, and I believe the look in their eyes is respect....(ok, fine, I admit I just made all that up, so sue me)
"Ergo, I am on this planet so that terrible things can happen to me. Yo:) "
ReplyDeleteFV, Hah! nicely done, Yo :) I be touche-d
-Al
Hi Farzana, Al,
ReplyDeleteWazzaaap! :)
>>If you are reading this, hope you are smiling at our 'deep' thoughts.<<
Smiling through the pain? Well, perhaps. : )
>>“Anything, anything would be better than this agony of mind, this creeping pain that gnaws and fumbles and caresses one and never hurts quite enough.”<<
Well, for those abstainers from the “opiate of the masses,” so-called, there's booze or drugs or great lashings of sex (so to speak). There's the numbing soporific of routine in “work,” whatever that might be. As Al would seem to allude, there's special, designer chocolates for those for whom the ordinary will no longer quite do, i.e. the exotic or exclusive or avant-garde (or risque – i.e. “skirting the edge,” as they say). All of which, as you would seem to indicate, Farzana, may, on the one hand, be prompted by ennui; or, on the other hand, be prompted by some certain perception of an absence of “meaning” to one's existence. I can't say if “meaning” – by itself – is necessarily antidote for ennui, tho'. As the Anonimi appears to suggest (“Sometimes I sits and thinks, but mostly, I just sits”), there would seem some necessary requirement for “purpose” as well – our respective place, role, function, within the framework of that meaning. “Sits,” to me, implies a “waiting” (as for a bus, or train or, as they say, “for my ship to come in”) . . .
>>“That God does not exist, I cannot deny, That my whole being cries out for God I cannot forget.”<<
Perhaps “God,” in Sartre's estimation, was not so much meaning as a satisfactory purpose? Or is that too fine a distinction?
Mark
Hi Mark:
ReplyDeleteThanks for heeding to our pleas! This is a quick note to say I hear you, but it's the witching hour and I've just taken a ride on the broomstick :) Tired. Will reply later.
Meanwhile, there's always Al!
mstaab,
ReplyDeleteWhaddup, dawg!!
"Smiling through the pain? "
Sorry to hear! hope it all passes soon.
"There's the numbing soporific of routine in “work,” whatever that might be."
Indeed, though "routine" may be not so routine and teach new things, so there is motion in the seeming stillness. Nice to read your thoughts again! :) Hang loose, brah.
-Al
"Meanwhile, there's always Al!"
ReplyDeleteFV, thanks you for your vote of confidence -- I shall aim to please! *takes a bow and curtsies with lungi*
-Al
Hey Al,
ReplyDelete>>Hang loose, brah.<<
That used to be an option. :)
>>"Meanwhile, there's always Al!"<<
Egad! And here I was thinking Farzana was referring to Artificial Intelligence, lol -- you know, video games . . . ?
Speaking of a couple of different ways to read something (and which may, at a stretch, perhaps, relate to Jean-Paul and Simone), I found this:
http://www.hurriyetdailynews.com/adams-and-eves.aspx?pageID=451&nID=49441&NewsCatID=324
M.
Hi Mark:
ReplyDeletePain? I thought it was an Existential sort of pain. Sorry if it is real and hope you are feeling better.
---
{Well, for those abstainers from the “opiate of the masses,” so-called, there's booze or drugs or great lashings of sex (so to speak). There's the numbing soporific of routine in “work,” whatever that might be. As Al would seem to allude, there's special, designer chocolates for those for whom the ordinary will no longer quite do, i.e. the exotic or exclusive or avant-garde (or risque – i.e. “skirting the edge,” as they say).}
=
And what about those who find all the activities mentioned above as routine, the exotic becoming archaic and dull? After taking a risk, the adrenalin rush will subside. The risque is the rush!
---
{All of which...prompted by ennui; or, on the other hand, be prompted by some certain perception of an absence of “meaning” to one's existence. I can't say if “meaning” – by itself – is necessarily antidote for ennui, tho'. As the Anonimi appears to suggest (“Sometimes I sits and thinks, but mostly, I just sits”), there would seem some necessary requirement for “purpose” as well – our respective place, role, function, within the framework of that meaning. “Sits,” to me, implies a “waiting” (as for a bus, or train or, as they say, “for my ship to come in”) . . .}
=
'Meaning' cannot be an antidote to ennui; rather it is the result of ennui in its purest sense of 'bored of oneself'. The 'purpose', therefore, cannot be looking towards meaning, but away from it. This moving offtrack from the package that is oneself would amount to the framework of other factors to fill the canvas with a hole.
'Sits' can mean wait for something, but then it would include thinking about the bus, the train or even someone. That wait is contextual and circumscribed.
---
{Perhaps “God,” in Sartre's estimation, was not so much meaning as a satisfactory purpose? Or is that too fine a distinction?}
=
It is a fine distinction, which is just fine. The purpose was in seeking; the meaning in 'awareness' of non-existence (or existence for another).
So, my asking 'Where is Mark?" is a satisfactory purpose; the awareness that Mark may be around to comprehend what I am saying is meaning - an awareness of oneself through another.
That's just an example. I know you think I am inscrutable :)
Ah, Al, I can trust you...I suffer from these bouts of ennui and self-absorption when I can't quite respond to my own work.
ReplyDeleteAnd the lungi shall be knighted in good time!
Hi Farzana,
ReplyDelete>>Pain? I thought it was an Existential sort of pain. Sorry if it is real and hope you are feeling better.<<
“Existential” is good; but it's more of an existential stitch, which might make AL's prognosis a little closer. :)
>>And what about those who find all the activities mentioned above as routine, the exotic becoming archaic and dull? After taking a risk, the adrenalin rush will subside. The risque is the rush!<<
It is indeed. And I can appreciate your distinction viz “the exotic *becoming* archaic and dull.” Those achieving to those . . . well, “heights,” perhaps, may wish to look upon it as a sign. Kinda like oxygen deprivation. :)
M.
"I suffer from these bouts of ennui and self-absorption when I can't quite respond to my own work. "
ReplyDeleteFV, I resemble that remark.
"And the lungi shall be knighted in good time! "
I shall respectfully address it as Sir Lungi de Checker thereafter and give it a special place in the laundry basket.
-Al
mstaab, Haha. nice toon that. Reminds me of a toon that went:
ReplyDeleteA: "There is a woman giving birth to a child somewhere on this planet every 8 minutes"
B: "We need to find out who she is and stop her"
-Al
Mark:
ReplyDeleteAlthough aware of oxygen deprivation, people still strive to reach heights!
Get well soon...
---
Al:
Wonder whether Sir Lungi would talk about dirty linen :)
FV"Wonder whether Sir Lungi would talk about dirty linen :) "
ReplyDeleteGood question, FV. :) But of course, being the perfect gentlelungi that Sir Lungi is, when in a laundry basket, Sir Lungi would make the "other" the topic of the conversation instead of self. Such is the demeanor of good breeding...errr.. I mean, good weaving.
-Al
Hi Farzana, AI,
ReplyDeleteI want to say it was the fish. :)
Apparently Sartre served in the French military at the outset of WWII, was captured, later escaped back to France, continuing his fight in resistance against the German occupation. On the one hand, given these life experiences – becoming accustomed to adrenaline highs, as you note – it's not much of a leap to suppose he kept chasing those highs, one way or another, in the years following. On the other hand, we hear of others seeming immune to the horror of their wartime experience, so we're left with the question, what's different, the man (or woman) or the nature of their respective service? Sartre fought – presumably “conventionally,” initially. Later, after his purported escape from the Germans, he likely fought quite “unconventionally,” i.e. as in some manner saboteur of the German war effort. Might there have been some necessary “expedient,” as they say, involving the life and limb of civilians, say, feeding his later, existentialist angst? Well, perhaps. I'm only illustrating (for some an antidote for ennui, lol) one of many approaches one can take in . . . well, “surveying” Existentialism. Another is that he (and/or Simone, perhaps) was having certain philosophers on – giving them a bit of a “send-up,” as they say . . .
Thanks for the kind sentiments for my recovery. :)
Mark
"Zindagani Ki Haqiqat Kohkun Ke Dil Se Pooch
ReplyDeleteJooye Sheer-O-Teesha-O-Sang-E-Garan Hai Zindagi"
(If you seek to know the reality of life, ask the mountain miner; Life is digging for a stream of milk from a heavy stone with nothing but a chisel)
This is existentialism of Allama Iqbal. Isn't that the same as the Myth of Sisyphus of Albert Camus? But Iqbal injects God in existentialism with this from the same poem:
"Kulzum-e-hasti sey ubhra hai tu manind-e-hubab;
Iss ziaN khaney meiN tera imtihaN hai zindagi"
From the vast ocean of existance, you have risen like no more than a bubble;
In this great wasteland, your life is nothing but a test for beyond"
So, existantialism + God is what life is all about. FV, point to ponder :)
Above was in response to this:
ReplyDeleteThere is another quote I’d like to examine:
“Life has no meaning the moment you lose the illusion of being eternal.”
Do examine this in the light of what Iqbal said!
"From the vast ocean of existance, you have risen like no more than a bubble;
ReplyDeleteIn this great wasteland, your life is nothing but a test for beyond"
So, existantialism + God is what life is all about. FV, point to ponder :)"
Zeemax, this is exactly the manufactured purpose that was mentioned earlier -- given the vastness of the universe, and the obvious irrelevance of the entire human race to the universe in general, "God" and "afterlife" or any such fantasy is the faked purpose to drive people to do things. After all, if our whole existence is pointless, then killing ourselves should not make a difference, and indeed it does not. The world moves on, the universe doesn't blink. So one could just as well believe any fantastical nonsense to justify our own existence and drive ourselves to do useful things. "God" is not the only answer unless one has limited imagination.
-Al
" we're left with the question, what's different, the man (or woman) or the nature of their respective service?"
ReplyDeletemstaab, FV,
That is a new perspective about the "high" of being involved leading to a feeling of pointlessness, when one is no longer part of some bigger "plot". I have never been through such experiences to say for sure, but it would seem like it could leave a person feeling directionless once all of the purpose of every day is suddenly lost, when the war is over and the excitement of everyday living is lost in a relatively risk-free environment of peace. But I guess Sartre compensated for all of this by writing it all down :)
-Al
Mark, Al, Zeemax...how interesting! Thank you for new thoughts. Now give me some time :-)
ReplyDeleteMark:
ReplyDelete{Might there have been some necessary “expedient,” as they say, involving the life and limb of civilians, say, feeding his later, existentialist angst? Well, perhaps. I'm only illustrating (for some an antidote for ennui, lol) one of many approaches one can take in . . . well, “surveying” Existentialism. Another is that he (and/or Simone, perhaps) was having certain philosophers on – giving them a bit of a “send-up,” as they say.}
Indeed, it is possible that existential questions arose in a cause-effect sense to Satre's wartime activity and observations. But, then, does it happen with others? There is, no doubt, psychological damage and emotional wear-and-tear. But, to take and make it into a philosophical 'way of life' probably needs thinking beyond the emotion. A sort of detachment from the source.
Re he and Simone, ah well, they were the toast of town, and perhaps used Existentialism in ways to live it up, taking philosophy outside the realm of thesis. It also suited their more immediate needs :-)
ReplyDeleteZeemax:
It is interesting that you use the Iqbal quote to posit against Existentialism.
{"If you seek to know the reality of life, ask the mountain miner; Life is digging for a stream of milk from a heavy stone with nothing but a chisel"}
Let me quote Camus in The Myth of Sisyphus...
“There is scarcely any passion without struggle.”
However, the Existentialist would consider the stone as a dam. The milk needs to be channelised.
Your next Iqbal quote in response to Sartre on eternity:
{"From the vast ocean of existance, you have risen like no more than a bubble;
In this great wasteland, your life is nothing but a test for beyond"}
This is fatalism. Is the bubble an assertion of life or intimation of nothingness?
I'd think Camus conveys this:
“A man devoid of hope and conscious of being so has ceased to belong to the future.”
The future is more real than the beyond. Seeking as self-examination is not always about god, although it is possible to imagine of god as being in the details - god-like demeanour, creator empowerment.
Ultimately, it amounts to looking for what is not there:
"shaayad ke zamii.N hai wo kisii aur jahaa.N kii
tuu jisako samajhataa hai falak apane jahaa.N kaa" (Iqbal)
PS: Good you brought in this dimension here.
ReplyDeleteAl:
{After all, if our whole existence is pointless, then killing ourselves should not make a difference, and indeed it does not. The world moves on, the universe doesn't blink.}
A death wish is not about being pointless, but of being aware of the meaning of one's existence. It is detachment from the world that sharpens the senses and mind, so whether the world blinks or goes blind, it won't register. No, not even by wearing aviators!
PS: Re Sir Lungi, alas and alack, I cannot say what the Queen might have :-)
Hi Farzana,
ReplyDelete>>Indeed, it is possible that existential questions arose in a cause-effect sense to Satre's wartime activity and observations. But, then, does it happen with others?<<
I'm guessing by “others” you're referring to those experiencing some similar physical or psychical assault thoroughly upending of their sensibilities? Sure. I'd even go so far as to suggest that, even as a “practical” joke, the internal storm is real enough for the subject of such a lark. Perhaps the relief at having survived (or the relief that their turmoil had “only” been mischievously manufactured) is sufficient for the recovery of some . . .
>>There is, no doubt, psychological damage and emotional wear-and-tear. But, to take and make it into a philosophical 'way of life' probably needs thinking beyond the emotion. A sort of detachment from the source.<<
Yes. With reference to your earlier “the exotic *becoming* archaic and dull,” I can also appreciate your distinction, “A *sort of* detachment from the source.” :)
Mark
FV,
ReplyDeleteYour comment re the bubble and the ocean of Iqbal: This is fatalism. Is the bubble an assertion of life or intimation of nothingness?
This is really getting into the deep end without a life jacket! This, in my interpretation of Iqbal, is saying life IS nothingness itself; and the bubble is both an assertion of life as well as an intimation of nothingness, and this nothingness is God into which life merges after a short distinct identity of its own - just as a bubble merges with the "wasteland" of existence.
Through these couplets, Iqbal states what in his view life and God are all about.
Above interpretation is reinforced by another couplet, where he advises on what to do with such an existence? In his description of his Mard-e-Momin, a concept he developed from 'Übermensch' of Nietzsche, he states amongst this person's qualities:
"Phhonk daley yeh zameen-o-asmaan musta'ar; Aur khakistar sey aap apna jehan paida karey"
(Burns to the ground these borrowed earths and heavens; and builds his own universe from the ashes).
You might reconsider the comment that it is fatalism ...
He was called a Kafir because of verses like these, and earned many Fatwas against him for challenging God and denying a Hell and a Heaven in an afterlife!.
In my own personal view, life has no purpose but to lend beauty to a much larger identity during its lifespan, just as any living tissue in our bodies completes its respective lifespan, some long and some short, and then dies off one by one till we die. Does a single human hair have an afterlife? I guess not. It merely disappears and makes way for the new. This view is somewhat in line with Iqbal's description of existence.
To sum up, another couplet NOT from Iqbal :)
"Dayem abad rahey gi dunya; Hum na hon gey, koi hym sa hoga".
(Life will continue to go on; We won't be there, but someone just like to us will!)
I think Quantum Physics' parallel universes theory with complete randomness at its very core may prove correct someday. But that's another subject.
Cheers
Anonymous,
ReplyDelete"Zeemax, this is exactly the manufactured purpose ...".
Really? Maybe it is. But noone has come back to tell us whether it is or it is not!
But do consider the above thoughts.
FV,
ReplyDelete"shaayad ke zamii.N hai wo kisii aur jahaa.N kii
tuu jisako samajhataa hai falak apane jahaa.N kaa" (Iqbal)
Exactly. This has relevance to my comment about the possible parallel universes of Quantum Mechanics.
But then again, if you start peeling an onion, what do you get in the end? Nothing! And that's the only answer ...
ReplyDeleteCorrection:
(Life will continue to go on; We won't be there, but someone just like us will!)
The extra 'to' wasn't meant to be there.
"Really? Maybe it is. But noone has come back to tell us whether it is or it is not!
ReplyDeleteBut do consider the above thoughts."
Zeemax, unlikely that such thoughts can be validated one way or another, except internally -- response was after due consideration. :)
-Al
Zeemax:" the bubble is both an assertion of life as well as an intimation of nothingness, and this nothingness is God into which life merges after a short distinct identity of its own - just as a bubble merges with the "wasteland" of existence."
ReplyDeleteZeemax, at the atomic and subatomic level, everything just reorganizes/constitutes to form different lifeforms over time - most people are probably made of the some atoms and subatomic particles that constituted other beings. Seems to be a stretch to believe this reorganization is managed by some entity (god) but it doesn't really matter what one comes up with as the answer, as it turns out. A person's actions and thoughts can be driven to constructive purpose regardless of the answers to such questions.
-Al
Al,
ReplyDelete" it doesn't really matter what one comes up with as the answer, as it turns out. A person's actions and thoughts can be driven to constructive purpose regardless of the answers to such questions.
"
The answer is important because one man's food is another man's poison. Unless there's a moral imperative, deeply seated and ingrained, there can be no constructive purpose.
I mentioned 'Übermensch' of Nietzsche somewhere above. That was the inspiration of Adolf Hitler's manic belief of the Arian people's superiority above all others.
This was also the problem with Iqbal. Remember he said "Cheen-o-Arab hamara, HindustaN hamara; Muslim haiN hum watan hai, sara jehaN hamara"? In his early days, he believed roughly the same about Muslims as Hitler did of the Arians, but mellowed down later in life and found the moral imperative in religion. That led him to write the lectures of 'The Reconstruction of Religious Thought in Islam'. That is all Sufiism!
Above's the problem with existentialism. FV is right on the dot when she writes “Life has no meaning the moment you lose the illusion of being eternal". If life has no meaning and in fact is the Myth of Sysiphus, then some brilliant people try to give it meaning by trying to become an Übermensch.
Rgds
zeemax:"The answer is important because one man's food is another man's poison. Unless there's a moral imperative, deeply seated and ingrained, there can be no constructive purpose."
ReplyDelete"moral imperative" is all relative and contextual, and the level of "being ingrained" may actually be counter productive. There are plenty of real world examples where such "ingrained thinking" is actually the cause for destructive behavior. It is important to realize that we are the product of our environment which varies widely across the planet, so "morality" is relative, and "deeply ingrained morality" in different groups of people can clash with each other in destructive ways. "morality" usually depends on defining some "purpose" to life and the lays down the preconditions for improving the conditions required for furthering that purpose, and call it "morality". It all goes downhill, the moment people with different ideas of reality start to strongly believe their worldview more correct than that of others...sort of the reason why religion and morality derived from it usually causes more problems than it solves.
"I mentioned 'Übermensch' of Nietzsche somewhere above. That was the inspiration of Adolf Hitler's manic belief of the Arian people's superiority above all others. "
I think it is a little futile to try and understand normal people from the standpoint of a psychopath with extreme views. Hitler's and the Nazi view of eugenics based on a pretty stupid understanding of genetics, all of which has been trashed as utter nonsense by later research.
This Ubermensch concept is just about as delusional as beliving in a god -- people who believe the concept of the superiority of one being or one person or race usually do not comprehend the vastness and complexity of the universe, and start off with a false premise. As you probably know, once your premise is false,one can justify any nonsense with a set of false premises, which is what usually happens. To really comprehend the vastness of the universe, it is instructive to look at the output of the Hubble telescope and realize that the milky way is one of a trillion galaxies, each with a billion stars or more.
"Above's the problem with existentialism. FV is right on the dot when she writes “Life has no meaning the moment you lose the illusion of being eternal". "
Not quite. Life has the meaning you choose to give to it -- the problem usually is that it is a wide and complex reality every humans chooses to give a different meaning to it, based on the context in their heads, and lets that drive their behavior. Life actually has no meaning -- this planet will not exist in a billion years, and all of human development itself is about as relevant as mold on a piece of bread, albeit in a million year timeframe. Our limited presence on the planet for a few decades is hardly enough time to even comprehend reality, let alone understand the "imperative" if there is one. So we all fit in our own little realities and keep ourselves amused for the most part, or so it seems to me.
cheers,
-Al
Zeemax,
ReplyDeleteIf I may, it struck me that Al's emphasis may have been on “driven;” whereas yours is on a necessary moral “imperative.” Al's “driven,” to me, expresses some coercion in that “constructive purpose regardless of the answers to such questions;” whereas you (and/or Iqbal) suggest life as devoid of constructive purpose save for the “moral imperative” (from wherever it may issue forth – religion, apparently, for Iqbal). Would it be safe to say Iqbal was rather “drawn” to that moral imperative (as one might in the throes of existential angst)? While there may not be coercion in religion any longer (save, perhaps, for certain family-imposed distresses), can there be coercion in moral imperatives?
>>This was also the problem with Iqbal. Remember he said "Cheen-o-Arab hamara, HindustaN hamara; Muslim haiN hum watan hai, sara jehaN hamara"?<<
No, I didn't know that. In that google translate seems somewhat taxed of late, might I prevail upon you for a translation? :)
>>If life has no meaning and in fact is the Myth of Sysiphus, then some brilliant people try to give it meaning by trying to become an Übermensch.<<
Which these “brilliant people try to give it meaning” for whom? Give life meaning for himself or herself? Give life meaning for those similarly afflicted as are/were they? Presumably the aspiring Übermensch seeks to be a worthy expression in the flesh of his/her chosen moral imperatives? Or is it more an inner-experience – kinda like the proverbial internal-jihad?
Mark
Ps. I've just downloaded a .pdf containing Iqbal's 1908 doctoral thesis, The Development of Metaphysics in Persia. It looks interesting, thanks. :)
Mark,
ReplyDelete"Cheen-o-Arab hamara, HindustaN hamara; Muslim haiN hum watan hai, sara jehaN hamara" roughly translates, layman style,into: "China and Arabia are ours, India is ours; Because we're Muslims, the whole world is ours" :)
This is on the run. I'll comment later on yours and Al's very intuitive posts.
Rgds
Thank you, Zeemax. Hopefully, you're just jogging or trying to catch an Ambassador taxi and not on a flight with Bolivian President Evo Morales?
ReplyDeleteIt seems one cannot be too certain these days. :)
M.