Sartre n Simone

This, all the time.

Fear and tremble somewhere else, faggot

Oooh, of course, it all makes sense now.
Thanks man, it doesn't matter that it makes sense that you see weird shit in dreams, by your account, we have disproved every other religion and denounced every other philosopher except christianism (your specific interpretation of course) and fucking kierkegaard. Now we can just get rid of all those other citations and sources we normally use and just use kierk instead, because OBVIOUSLY everything that shows up in you dreams that looks like whatever the fuck you think god looks like says MUST be true!

Thank you rebel, for this amazing discovery, I really hope you keep posting here and emphasizing how kierkegaard is better than everyone else.

rebel, people who believe sleep-induced hallucinations are usually wrong. Why are you so special again?

He is ideologically conflicted
Just like me ;_;

At least you are able to separate your religion from your politics, rebel seems to have idolized kierk to godlike level, as if he's a second Jesus…

Kill yourself. First philosopher I studied in depth was Camus, hated Sartre ever since.

wasn't me you tard, pretty obviously was not me

It was a joke when I said that, duh.

bad faith was nothing original, much like everything Sartre said it was just a re-iteration of Heidegger or Kierkegaard, neither of which he understood.

ITT Rad-freedom fags get mad because Sartre is a poo

This is false. I've admitted that Kierkegaard was wrong on many things. First of all that he sperged out over Hegel.

You don't know what you speak of.

Oh, he was also bourgeois as fuck.

God is dead.

That lived in poor neighborhoods with little money ?

He is the best one to put existentialism to practice tbh
And his waifu Simone complete and expand his work in a rather cute way

Enjoy your gelatinous existence
joeledmundanderson.com/?p=523

Sartre? Don't think that's true at all. His upbringing at least was bourgeois. He was a lecturer too.

"Best one to put existentialism into practice".

There is no certain way of being an existentialist, no code to be an existentialist. Existentialism is a branch of philosophy more than an ideology.
He never added to the study of existentialism in any way.

Simone was okay, but Sartre is still shit

you realize having delusions doesn't make your life any more meaningless, correct?

more or less*

Memes. Pure memes.

That's not what I said at all you tistic bastard, lel.

You assumed that I was a christian because it helped give life meaning, yes?

No, I pointed out that having delusions doesn't make your life meaningful.
No matter what you do or do not believe our lifes are equally as "gelatinous."

And thus you assumed a gelatinous existence means a meaningless existence, and that I was therefore using religion to escape a gelatinous, and therefore meaningless existence.
Dw, I know pride is a terrible thing.

Gelatinous != meaningless. Gelatinous is a matter of being one's self, of having one's own principles. You want to be yourself don't you user?

I was taking gelatinous as being bland and pointless. Your arrogance precedes you.

Again why people who haven't read Sartre or Kierkegaard shouldn't presume to speak for them.
I did link an essay explaining it.

"arrogance"
holy shit, what is this opposite day?

Take that stick out of your ass.

He wrote of his life in the poor hotels and how he loved the noise there a lot bud you need to read being in nothingness

I know the ideology but for every philosopher there is a unique way to tackle this fact of being with out Essene
Camus "the absurd hero "
Nietzsche "the ubermensch"
Schopenhauer "the sage"
etc…
all of whom are imo not better than Sartre radical freedom

I might pick it up when I have absolutely nothing to read, but after 2 shit books (existentialism is a humanism and nausea) you don't look forward to reading another.

Well, first of all just to be a pedant because this is a pet peeve of mine, Camus didn't believe existence preceded essence was probably put off by Sartre.

Well first of all, you gotta understand that Sartre's radical freedom is literally just a re-iteration of Kierkegaard's concept of anxiety. Just he didn't understand the rest, because he didn't even tackle the issue of finding one's essence, just said "lol create it and be authentic" which makes me wonder why you don't just read Heidegger.

Just because one frees one's self of the fixed idea doesn't make one one's self. One must turn inwards to put one's infinite and finite elements in balance first.

Atheist existentialism, or rather, existentialism which has no relation to the infinite, is a perversion of existentialism ngl. People like to characterise S.K as just thinking "le faith fixed it". It's a lot more complicated.

Sartre described himself as an anarchist by the end of his life

only because of the influence of good boi Camus.

I think back to when Zizek said of Chomsky that it wasn't good enough that he changed his mind. We must have principles with which to defend ourselves against such disastrous mistakes.

Looking closer, Sartre fucked up the movement completely, in every single way. Damn. Might as well just go back to calling ourselves Socratics.

Christian-existentialists were really brought down by Sartre's retardation and given a bad rap. We need to break away from that movement, probably call ourselves neo-socratics and dedicate ourselves to destroying it and distinguishing ourselves.

I'd really love to write a Neo-Socratic Manifesto.

What?

Like Chomsky later said he made a mistake protecting Pol Pot, but Zizek said "well this isn't good enough, you need to not make the mistake in the first place".

It was a defence of his method.

Same here. If Sartre had taken a leaf from Camus' book and had some principles, he'd not make that mistake.

...

When was this?