What do you think?
Rate this book
No Excuses: Existentialism And The Meaning Of Life
What is life? What is my place in it? What choices do these questions obligate me to make? More than a half-century after it burst upon the intellectual scene - with roots that extend to the mid-19th century - Existentialism's quest to answer these most fundamental questions of individual responsibility, morality, and personal freedom has continued to exert a profound attraction.
Now, in a series of 24 probing and thoughtful lectures, you can enrich your own understanding of this unique philosophical wave, the visionary thinkers it brought together to ponder and debate these questions, and the prominent role it still plays in contemporary thought.
"Existentialism is, in my view, the most exciting and important philosophical movement of the past century and a half," says Professor Solomon. "Fifty years after the French philosopher Jean-Paul Sartre gave it its identity and 150 years after the Danish philosopher Søren Kierkegaard gave it its initial impetus, it continues to win new enthusiasts and, in keeping with its still exciting and revolutionary message, vehement critics." Plumbing both sides of the debate, these lectures examine a wide range of Existentialist thought. You'll be exposed to the religious approach of Kierkegaard; the bold fiction of Camus; the warrior rhetoric and often-shocking claims about religion and morality posed by Nietzsche; the radical and uncompromising notion of freedom championed by Sartre; and the searching analysis of human historicity and finitude offered by Martin Heidegger. And you'll encounter the reluctance - often angrily expressed - of many of Existentialism's major figures to be thought of as part of any philosophical movement or even as intellectual allies!
Now, in a series of 24 probing and thoughtful lectures, you can enrich your own understanding of this unique philosophical wave, the visionary thinkers it brought together to ponder and debate these questions, and the prominent role it still plays in contemporary thought.
"Existentialism is, in my view, the most exciting and important philosophical movement of the past century and a half," says Professor Solomon. "Fifty years after the French philosopher Jean-Paul Sartre gave it its identity and 150 years after the Danish philosopher Søren Kierkegaard gave it its initial impetus, it continues to win new enthusiasts and, in keeping with its still exciting and revolutionary message, vehement critics." Plumbing both sides of the debate, these lectures examine a wide range of Existentialist thought. You'll be exposed to the religious approach of Kierkegaard; the bold fiction of Camus; the warrior rhetoric and often-shocking claims about religion and morality posed by Nietzsche; the radical and uncompromising notion of freedom championed by Sartre; and the searching analysis of human historicity and finitude offered by Martin Heidegger. And you'll encounter the reluctance - often angrily expressed - of many of Existentialism's major figures to be thought of as part of any philosophical movement or even as intellectual allies!
12 pages, Audio CD
First published January 1, 1995
About the author
Robert C. Solomon
112 books167 followersRobert C. Solomon (September 14, 1942 – January 2, 2007) was a professor of continental philosophy at the University of Texas at Austin.
Early life
Solomon was born in Detroit, Michigan. His father was a lawyer, and his mother an artist. After earning a B.A. (1963) at the University of Pennsylvania, he moved to the University of Michigan to study medicine, switching to philosophy for an M.A. (1965) and Ph.D. (1967).
He held several teaching positions at such schools as Princeton University, the University of California, Los Angeles, and the University of Pittsburgh. From 1972 until his death, except for two years at the University of California at Riverside in the mid-1980s, he taught at University of Texas at Austin, serving as Quincy Lee Centennial Professor of Philosophy and Business. He was a member of the University of Texas Academy of Distinguished Teachers. Solomon was also a member of the inaugural class of Academic Advisors at the Business Roundtable Institute for Corporate Ethics.
His interests were in 19th-century German philosophy--especially Hegel and Nietzsche--and 20th-century Continental philosophy--especially Sartre and phenomenology, as well as ethics and the philosophy of emotions. Solomon published more than 40 books on philosophy, and was also a published songwriter. He made a cameo appearance in Richard Linklater's film Waking Life (2001), where he discussed the continuing relevance of existentialism in a postmodern world. He developed a cognitivist theory of the emotions, according to which emotions, like beliefs, were susceptible to rational appraisal and revision. Solomon was particularly interested in the idea of "love," arguing against the notion that romantic love is an inherent state of being, and maintaining, instead, that it is instead a construct of Western culture, popularized and propagated in such a way that it has achieved the status of a universal in the eyes of many. Love for Solomon is not a universal, static quality, but an emotion, subject to the same vicissitudes as other emotions like anger or sadness.
Solomon received numerous teaching awards at the University of Texas at Austin, and was a frequent lecturer in the highly regarded Plan II Honors Program. Solomon was known for his lectures on Nietzsche and other Existentialist philosophers. Solomon described in one lecture a very personal experience he had while a medical student at the University of Michigan. He recounted how he stumbled as if by chance into a crowded lecture hall. He was rather unhappy in his medical studies at the time, and was perhaps seeking something different that day. He got precisely that. The professor, Frithjof Bergmann, was lecturing that day on something that Solomon had not yet been acquainted with. The professor spoke of how Nietzsche's idea asks the fundamental question: "If given the opportunity to live your life over and over again ad infinitum, forced to go through all of the pain and the grief of existence, would you be overcome with despair? Or would you fall to your knees in gratitude?"
Solomon died on January 2, 2007 at Zurich airport. His wife, philosopher Kathleen Higgins, with whom he co-authored several of his books, is Professor of Philosophy at University of Texas at Austin.
Early life
Solomon was born in Detroit, Michigan. His father was a lawyer, and his mother an artist. After earning a B.A. (1963) at the University of Pennsylvania, he moved to the University of Michigan to study medicine, switching to philosophy for an M.A. (1965) and Ph.D. (1967).
He held several teaching positions at such schools as Princeton University, the University of California, Los Angeles, and the University of Pittsburgh. From 1972 until his death, except for two years at the University of California at Riverside in the mid-1980s, he taught at University of Texas at Austin, serving as Quincy Lee Centennial Professor of Philosophy and Business. He was a member of the University of Texas Academy of Distinguished Teachers. Solomon was also a member of the inaugural class of Academic Advisors at the Business Roundtable Institute for Corporate Ethics.
His interests were in 19th-century German philosophy--especially Hegel and Nietzsche--and 20th-century Continental philosophy--especially Sartre and phenomenology, as well as ethics and the philosophy of emotions. Solomon published more than 40 books on philosophy, and was also a published songwriter. He made a cameo appearance in Richard Linklater's film Waking Life (2001), where he discussed the continuing relevance of existentialism in a postmodern world. He developed a cognitivist theory of the emotions, according to which emotions, like beliefs, were susceptible to rational appraisal and revision. Solomon was particularly interested in the idea of "love," arguing against the notion that romantic love is an inherent state of being, and maintaining, instead, that it is instead a construct of Western culture, popularized and propagated in such a way that it has achieved the status of a universal in the eyes of many. Love for Solomon is not a universal, static quality, but an emotion, subject to the same vicissitudes as other emotions like anger or sadness.
Solomon received numerous teaching awards at the University of Texas at Austin, and was a frequent lecturer in the highly regarded Plan II Honors Program. Solomon was known for his lectures on Nietzsche and other Existentialist philosophers. Solomon described in one lecture a very personal experience he had while a medical student at the University of Michigan. He recounted how he stumbled as if by chance into a crowded lecture hall. He was rather unhappy in his medical studies at the time, and was perhaps seeking something different that day. He got precisely that. The professor, Frithjof Bergmann, was lecturing that day on something that Solomon had not yet been acquainted with. The professor spoke of how Nietzsche's idea asks the fundamental question: "If given the opportunity to live your life over and over again ad infinitum, forced to go through all of the pain and the grief of existence, would you be overcome with despair? Or would you fall to your knees in gratitude?"
Solomon died on January 2, 2007 at Zurich airport. His wife, philosopher Kathleen Higgins, with whom he co-authored several of his books, is Professor of Philosophy at University of Texas at Austin.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 103 reviews
November 24, 2018
Another excellent course but a lot of it is quite philosophical. I found parts of it difficult to get my head round (but when I have listened to ten more professors on the same subjects, I will no doubt understand better!)
March 25, 2014
Existentialism
A fantastic lecture series, where the professor explains existentialism with passion and vigor. One of the best lecture series I’ve ever listened to. Period.
Basic points of Existentialism
1. Embrace personal responsibility – Sounds so simple when explained, but here’s the idea. You make choices. You are responsible for these choices. It’s a virtue ethics approach, as opposed to rule systems, motivation theories, or consequential ethics. What matters is the action. You chose it, you are responsible for it.
2. Live life passionately – Existentialists held very little faith in the possibility of an afterlife. Therefore if this is your one shot at life, make the most of it. There is the metaphor Kierkegaard makes of riding a wild horse vs. passively falling asleep in a wagon being pulled by a horse. Existentialists believe you should hop on the horse and ride. It is through passionate commitment that we give our lives meaning. Passionate commitment, say yes to life, commit to it with passion. It’s invigorating.
3. No belief in the afterlife – Neitche hated what he called the “otherworldly.” Existentialists thought that actions should be weighed and justified according to this world, and without relying on any others. This has to do with debating people who are religious, and in historical context this line of reasoning makes a lot more sense.
Other fun facts, I don’t think Camus’ The Stranger is enjoyable without understanding Existentialism. Nietzsche also isn’t as terrible of an atheist as his reputation would have you believe. I thought the lecture on Hesse’s Siddhartha wasn’t quite as strong as it could have been. I think the Kierkegaard section is the strongest, excellent lecture series overall.
Quotes
It is through passionate commitment that we give our lives meaning
People clamor for freedom of speech, to make up for the freedom of thought which they lack.
A fantastic lecture series, where the professor explains existentialism with passion and vigor. One of the best lecture series I’ve ever listened to. Period.
Basic points of Existentialism
1. Embrace personal responsibility – Sounds so simple when explained, but here’s the idea. You make choices. You are responsible for these choices. It’s a virtue ethics approach, as opposed to rule systems, motivation theories, or consequential ethics. What matters is the action. You chose it, you are responsible for it.
2. Live life passionately – Existentialists held very little faith in the possibility of an afterlife. Therefore if this is your one shot at life, make the most of it. There is the metaphor Kierkegaard makes of riding a wild horse vs. passively falling asleep in a wagon being pulled by a horse. Existentialists believe you should hop on the horse and ride. It is through passionate commitment that we give our lives meaning. Passionate commitment, say yes to life, commit to it with passion. It’s invigorating.
3. No belief in the afterlife – Neitche hated what he called the “otherworldly.” Existentialists thought that actions should be weighed and justified according to this world, and without relying on any others. This has to do with debating people who are religious, and in historical context this line of reasoning makes a lot more sense.
Other fun facts, I don’t think Camus’ The Stranger is enjoyable without understanding Existentialism. Nietzsche also isn’t as terrible of an atheist as his reputation would have you believe. I thought the lecture on Hesse’s Siddhartha wasn’t quite as strong as it could have been. I think the Kierkegaard section is the strongest, excellent lecture series overall.
Quotes
It is through passionate commitment that we give our lives meaning
People clamor for freedom of speech, to make up for the freedom of thought which they lack.
April 8, 2021
In these lectures, Robert Solomon provides a very nice exegesis of several main existentialist authors. The lectures start with Camus, as the most popular and easiest to understand author in the tradition; Solomon then backtracks to take on in order Kierkegaard, Nietzsche, Heidegger, and Sartre. In a sense, it pairs very well with Irrational Man: A Study in Existential Philosophy by William Barrett. This survey is meatier than many in that it engages with the philosophies of several major existentialist authors, where many books deal more with the lives of the authors. It's well done and Solomon shows his command and ease discussing the ideas and doctrines of often difficult philosophers. The biggest weakness is probably Solomon's emphasis on personal responsibility at the expense of the society and structures serving as the environment for the individual and freedom in the grand sense. You would want to have some prior familiarity with existentialism and be ready to think philosophically, after all this is a philosophy survey.
July 24, 2015
I don't like existentialism philosophy, but I liked this lecture series. It allowed me to understand other philosophers through the lens of Existentialism, and I got to understand Kant, Schopenhauer, and learn learn more about Kierkegaard, Nietzsche, and Heidegger. I liked the hour and a half he devoted to Heidegger so much, I ended up buying "Being and Time" from Amazon.
I would strongly recommend watching the BBC production of the play "Huis Clos" ("In Camera", or also called "No Exit") freely available on YouTube before or after listening to this lecture. I did and am glad for the understanding it brought. The heart of this lecture series is really Jean-Paul Sartre and a lot of what he thinks is within this highly watchable and freely available play.
Even if you think Existentialism is passe (a word the lecturer uses), and you don't particularly like Existentialism this lecture has more than enough to keep you entertained. As with almost all of these Great Course series, I don't know of anything else where I get as much value for my one credit, and because of this series I'm violating one of my rules and plan on reading a difficult book because this series has piqued my interest that much in Heidegger.
I would strongly recommend watching the BBC production of the play "Huis Clos" ("In Camera", or also called "No Exit") freely available on YouTube before or after listening to this lecture. I did and am glad for the understanding it brought. The heart of this lecture series is really Jean-Paul Sartre and a lot of what he thinks is within this highly watchable and freely available play.
Even if you think Existentialism is passe (a word the lecturer uses), and you don't particularly like Existentialism this lecture has more than enough to keep you entertained. As with almost all of these Great Course series, I don't know of anything else where I get as much value for my one credit, and because of this series I'm violating one of my rules and plan on reading a difficult book because this series has piqued my interest that much in Heidegger.
August 29, 2015
This was a bizarre presentation of the material. It's not that what the professor talked about was wrong or uninteresting, but in opposition to the title, it seemed he was making a lot of excuses to dwell in trivia and avoid talking about the meaning of life.
He goes out of his way to cover writers tangentially related to Existentialism (Kafka, Dostoevsky, etc.), and he tends to focus more on literary angles of novels, and on philosophical jargon than on real-world implications.
For example, for Camus, he talks about symbolism and writing technique in The Stranger and The Fall, etc. , but he doesn't really get into The Rebel and the meat of Camus's copious non-fiction that deals with how to live in a world full of evil. The lecture series wasn't boring, but I think unfortunately that in the end it confuses more than clarifies.
He goes out of his way to cover writers tangentially related to Existentialism (Kafka, Dostoevsky, etc.), and he tends to focus more on literary angles of novels, and on philosophical jargon than on real-world implications.
For example, for Camus, he talks about symbolism and writing technique in The Stranger and The Fall, etc. , but he doesn't really get into The Rebel and the meat of Camus's copious non-fiction that deals with how to live in a world full of evil. The lecture series wasn't boring, but I think unfortunately that in the end it confuses more than clarifies.
May 17, 2020
This is a series of lectures by TTC. I watched the video lectures and review them here.
After watching all of them, I realized that I have already read What Nietzsche Really Said by the same author. That book is in my opinion one of the best introductions to Nietzsche. It allows one to avoid many of the pitfalls that one can encounter with that philosopher.
As expected, this lecture series is itself very good. The presenter is explaining in a very clear and concise language, some very intricate ideas of this current.
The authors discussed are (in the order of apparition): Camus, Kierkegaard, Nietzsche, Heidegger and Sartre. The lectures are 30 minutes each, and each provides an introduction to some of the key concepts. As such, it should be a really easy introduction, but by no means an extensive or comprehensive introduction.
The depth and quality of the lecture varies. Camus for instance, is pretty deeply presented. There are a lot of insights to be gleamed from his presentation of 3 of his works (The Stranger, The Plague and The Fall). However, his only philosophical work, The Myth of Sisyphus gets only a very weak presentation. Only generalities are explained.
Kierkegaard is also quite poorly explained. What disturbs me is that while Camus is presented work by work, Kierkegaard is somehow amalgamated, and very imprecise.
Nietzsche is again less properly explained, but the main themes of his philosophy are present. I have no doubt that professor Solomon IS able to explain all of them in much more detail, but I don't quite get why he didn't do a work by work analysis as in the case of Camus. It might be because the "theme by theme" analysis is not so easy for Camus as it is for the others.
Dostoyevski gets only cursory treatment. The only novels discussed are "Notes from The Underground", "The Idiot" & "The Brothers Karamazov". The interpretation given to the events is somewhat rushed. Why he excluded "Crime And Punishment" will be forever a mystery to this reviewer.
However, considering that Dostoyevski, Kafka and Hesse are all treated in the same lecture, I guess we can give him a break. What I really cannot understand is how comes he describes the end of "The Grand Inquisitor" completely wrong. Jesus walks away at the end!! He says that Jesus actually gets crucified a second hand, which doesn't happen!
Heidegger and Sartre are quite well explained. Especially Heidegger who is notoriously difficult, is nevertheless distilled in a way that is accessible to the non-professional.
For this reason, I need to say that the content is more often good, rather than bad. It is a bit on the commercial side of things but it is the better part of that side.
Also, I really like his voice. It is so relaxing, and soothing.
After watching all of them, I realized that I have already read What Nietzsche Really Said by the same author. That book is in my opinion one of the best introductions to Nietzsche. It allows one to avoid many of the pitfalls that one can encounter with that philosopher.
As expected, this lecture series is itself very good. The presenter is explaining in a very clear and concise language, some very intricate ideas of this current.
The authors discussed are (in the order of apparition): Camus, Kierkegaard, Nietzsche, Heidegger and Sartre. The lectures are 30 minutes each, and each provides an introduction to some of the key concepts. As such, it should be a really easy introduction, but by no means an extensive or comprehensive introduction.
The depth and quality of the lecture varies. Camus for instance, is pretty deeply presented. There are a lot of insights to be gleamed from his presentation of 3 of his works (The Stranger, The Plague and The Fall). However, his only philosophical work, The Myth of Sisyphus gets only a very weak presentation. Only generalities are explained.
Kierkegaard is also quite poorly explained. What disturbs me is that while Camus is presented work by work, Kierkegaard is somehow amalgamated, and very imprecise.
Nietzsche is again less properly explained, but the main themes of his philosophy are present. I have no doubt that professor Solomon IS able to explain all of them in much more detail, but I don't quite get why he didn't do a work by work analysis as in the case of Camus. It might be because the "theme by theme" analysis is not so easy for Camus as it is for the others.
Dostoyevski gets only cursory treatment. The only novels discussed are "Notes from The Underground", "The Idiot" & "The Brothers Karamazov". The interpretation given to the events is somewhat rushed. Why he excluded "Crime And Punishment" will be forever a mystery to this reviewer.
However, considering that Dostoyevski, Kafka and Hesse are all treated in the same lecture, I guess we can give him a break. What I really cannot understand is how comes he describes the end of "The Grand Inquisitor" completely wrong. Jesus walks away at the end!! He says that Jesus actually gets crucified a second hand, which doesn't happen!
Heidegger and Sartre are quite well explained. Especially Heidegger who is notoriously difficult, is nevertheless distilled in a way that is accessible to the non-professional.
For this reason, I need to say that the content is more often good, rather than bad. It is a bit on the commercial side of things but it is the better part of that side.
Also, I really like his voice. It is so relaxing, and soothing.
April 14, 2016
رابرت سالومون با ص��ای عمیق و شمرده به واکاوی افکار و کتابهای چهرههای برجسته اگزیستانسیالیسم میپردازد. درس با «بیگانه» آلبر کامو آغاز میشود هر چند او پیشگام اگزیستانسیالیسم نبود؛ اما بیگانه او مردی را توصیف میکند که در مراسم تدفین مادرش نمیتواند اشک بریزد. علاوه بر بیگانه که به تفصیل در دو درس ۳۰ دقیقهای برای روشن کردن موضوع درس بحث میشود، اثر دیگر کامو، در مورد «افسانه سیزیف» صحبت میشود که قهرمان آن تا ابد محکوم است تا سنگی را از تپهای بالا برد، آن را رها کند و دوباره سنگ را بالا برد و رها کند-تا ابد. سیزیف نماد انسان محکوم به زندگی بیهوده است. «طاعون» و «سقوط» در درس دیگر بحث میشود، به ویژه که «طاعون» نماد انسانی است که با همه تلاش خود قادر به درمان طاعون زندگی نیست.
پس از این آغاز طوفانی از کامو، سولومون به سراغ پدر اگزیستانسیالیسم میرود: سورن کیرکگارد. دغدغه و بینش او (بر خلاف آیندگان از جمله کامو و سارتر) مسیحیت بود- به عبارت دقیق تر چطور میتوان مسیحی «شد».
با توجه به اینکه (تا جایی که اطلاع دارم) تنها ترس و لرز او در مورد تعلیق اخلاق در بازهای که ابراهیم فرزندش را به کشتارگاه میبرد در ایران چاپ شده است، سه درس موجود در این مجموعه و صحبت در مورد کتابهای کیرکگارد برای آشنایی بیشتر با او و این که چرا بنیانگذار اگزیسنانسیالیسم است بسیار روشنگر است.
نیهیلیسم نیچه که بر خلاف کیرکگارد پاسخی متفاوت و ضد دینی به مساله زندگی است در چهار درس بعدی مورد بررسی قرار میگیرد- این که «خدا مرده است» در اندیشه نیچه و در آن کانتکست زمانی از روشنگری و اعتقادات مردم به چه معناست. پیش از آنکه در ادامه هایدگر و سارتر به عنوان مشهورترین چهرههای اگزیستانسیالیسم بحث شوند، یک درس سی دقیقهای به داستایوسکی و رمانهایش به اختصار میپردازد و این که چگونه تِم برادران کارامازوف از زبان ایوانِ روشنفکر و در انتهای داستان در بستر بیماری این است که «اگر خدا نباشد همه چیز مجاز میشود.»- رویکردی متفاوت به نیهیلیسم مورد توجه نیچه.
بحث اصیل (آوتنتیش) بودن در تفکر فلسفی پیچیده هایدگر، علاوه بر مفاهیم دیگر او همچون داس مان، زورگه و ... بسیار مختصر و مفید بحث میشود.
بحث انتهایی مربوط به سارتر و مسئولیت پذیری در کانتکست زمانی جنگ جهانی دوم است. اندیشه و کتابهای سارتر در شش درس سی دقیقهای به زیبایی بحث میشود که شاید برای تفسیر کتابهای او که بعضا به فارسی هم موجودند مفیدند، از جمله رمان «تهوع» او که داستان مردی است که وقتی سنگریزه ها را (دنیا) را لمس میکند، احساس تهوع میکند.
اگر سارتر و کامو با داستانهای متفاوت و سیاه خود برای ما آشنا باشند، این مجموعه نشان میدهد آبشخور فکری این دو چگونه در کیرکگارد و هایدگر ریشه دارد. به ویژه که سارتر رسما اعلام کرده بود که تحت تاثیر هستیشناسی هایدگر کتاب «بودن و هیچی» Being and nothingness را نوشته است.
پس از این آغاز طوفانی از کامو، سولومون به سراغ پدر اگزیستانسیالیسم میرود: سورن کیرکگارد. دغدغه و بینش او (بر خلاف آیندگان از جمله کامو و سارتر) مسیحیت بود- به عبارت دقیق تر چطور میتوان مسیحی «شد».
با توجه به اینکه (تا جایی که اطلاع دارم) تنها ترس و لرز او در مورد تعلیق اخلاق در بازهای که ابراهیم فرزندش را به کشتارگاه میبرد در ایران چاپ شده است، سه درس موجود در این مجموعه و صحبت در مورد کتابهای کیرکگارد برای آشنایی بیشتر با او و این که چرا بنیانگذار اگزیسنانسیالیسم است بسیار روشنگر است.
نیهیلیسم نیچه که بر خلاف کیرکگارد پاسخی متفاوت و ضد دینی به مساله زندگی است در چهار درس بعدی مورد بررسی قرار میگیرد- این که «خدا مرده است» در اندیشه نیچه و در آن کانتکست زمانی از روشنگری و اعتقادات مردم به چه معناست. پیش از آنکه در ادامه هایدگر و سارتر به عنوان مشهورترین چهرههای اگزیستانسیالیسم بحث شوند، یک درس سی دقیقهای به داستایوسکی و رمانهایش به اختصار میپردازد و این که چگونه تِم برادران کارامازوف از زبان ایوانِ روشنفکر و در انتهای داستان در بستر بیماری این است که «اگر خدا نباشد همه چیز مجاز میشود.»- رویکردی متفاوت به نیهیلیسم مورد توجه نیچه.
بحث اصیل (آوتنتیش) بودن در تفکر فلسفی پیچیده هایدگر، علاوه بر مفاهیم دیگر او همچون داس مان، زورگه و ... بسیار مختصر و مفید بحث میشود.
بحث انتهایی مربوط به سارتر و مسئولیت پذیری در کانتکست زمانی جنگ جهانی دوم است. اندیشه و کتابهای سارتر در شش درس سی دقیقهای به زیبایی بحث میشود که شاید برای تفسیر کتابهای او که بعضا به فارسی هم موجودند مفیدند، از جمله رمان «تهوع» او که داستان مردی است که وقتی سنگریزه ها را (دنیا) را لمس میکند، احساس تهوع میکند.
اگر سارتر و کامو با داستانهای متفاوت و سیاه خود برای ما آشنا باشند، این مجموعه نشان میدهد آبشخور فکری این دو چگونه در کیرکگارد و هایدگر ریشه دارد. به ویژه که سارتر رسما اعلام کرده بود که تحت تاثیر هستیشناسی هایدگر کتاب «بودن و هیچی» Being and nothingness را نوشته است.
October 10, 2016
A great book. One of the most fluent reads. I loved it. Yet I didn't love Existentialism. It raises some great questions and ideas, yet it is a bit bitter and I cannot find any good reason for that.
The good thing about it was that I understood that I have to read more of Nietzsche works, and don't waste much time on Sartra any more.
The good thing about it was that I understood that I have to read more of Nietzsche works, and don't waste much time on Sartra any more.
January 17, 2021
Watch a detailed review along with my favorite ideas and takeaways at:
https://youtu.be/Q7b7k_ey_yg
https://youtu.be/Q7b7k_ey_yg
Read
May 24, 2023I cannot give this a rating, mostly because it took me forever to finish and I should just give up on trying to understand existentialism.
September 28, 2020
Приятный курс лекций, чтобы освежить в памяти философские идеи. В начале лектор подаёт прям очень разжёванно и гладко всё, начиная с «Постороннего» Камю — собственно за использование худлита как опорного материала уже как минимум одна звезда.
А вот когда начинается часть о феноменологии Гуссерля и Хайдеггера - *эмодзи с криком Ван Гога, три раза*
Собственно их приткнули в серединку, видимо это хардкорная часть для тру philosophy lovers.
Кончается всё довольно гладко Сартром, на мой взгляд опять же достаточно доступно и удобоваримо, как и в начале с Камю.
Важная пометка —Сартра, Камю (выборочно), Ницше, Кьеркегора и опять же выборо��но Хайдеггера я читала очень, очень давно. В университетском курсе были все, кроме Ницше (загадочно, почему?). Впрочем, кто же не читал Ницше.
Поэтому думаю если найти подборку ключевых отрывков из работ авторов, и перечитать их по ходу прослушивания, понимать курс станет значительно проще.
Собственно, автором так и задумано — к аудио идет 100-страничный буклет с кратким содержанием теории, рекомендованным чтением и вопросами полегче и посложней. В идеале перед каждой лекцией нужно читать указанную главу в источнике, но я в общем считаю себя молодцом уже хотя бы за прослушивание аудио)
Примеры вопросов попроще в конце лекции о «Мифе о Сизифе» и абсурдизме:
- What is “the absurd”? Camus gives us several possible ways of living
in the face of “the absurd.” What are they? Do you think that they are
equally meritorious? What is “philosophical suicide”?
И посложней:
- Camus, who considered himself a political moderate and a humanist,
states that “to abolish conscious revolt is to elude the problem.”
Elsewhere, he emphasizes the need for “metaphysical revolt.” Who or
what is Camus, an avowed atheist, revolting against?
- Would “the absurd” simply disappear in the face of irrefutable evidence
that God exists?
Ну и как уже можно догадаться, о смысле жизни лектор не даст однозначного ответа, несмотря на завлекающий заголовок (а как хотелось бы...).
В общем и целом, однозначно рекомендую, профессор Соломон — человек явно увлечённый темой, и слушать его приятно. Хотя мне и приходилось некоторые лекции по паре раз прогонять для полного понимания.
А вот когда начинается часть о феноменологии Гуссерля и Хайдеггера - *эмодзи с криком Ван Гога, три раза*
Собственно их приткнули в серединку, видимо это хардкорная часть для тру philosophy lovers.
Кончается всё довольно гладко Сартром, на мой взгляд опять же достаточно доступно и удобоваримо, как и в начале с Камю.
Важная пометка —Сартра, Камю (выборочно), Ницше, Кьеркегора и опять же выборо��но Хайдеггера я читала очень, очень давно. В университетском курсе были все, кроме Ницше (загадочно, почему?). Впрочем, кто же не читал Ницше.
Поэтому думаю если найти подборку ключевых отрывков из работ авторов, и перечитать их по ходу прослушивания, понимать курс станет значительно проще.
Собственно, автором так и задумано — к аудио идет 100-страничный буклет с кратким содержанием теории, рекомендованным чтением и вопросами полегче и посложней. В идеале перед каждой лекцией нужно читать указанную главу в источнике, но я в общем считаю себя молодцом уже хотя бы за прослушивание аудио)
Примеры вопросов попроще в конце лекции о «Мифе о Сизифе» и абсурдизме:
- What is “the absurd”? Camus gives us several possible ways of living
in the face of “the absurd.” What are they? Do you think that they are
equally meritorious? What is “philosophical suicide”?
И посложней:
- Camus, who considered himself a political moderate and a humanist,
states that “to abolish conscious revolt is to elude the problem.”
Elsewhere, he emphasizes the need for “metaphysical revolt.” Who or
what is Camus, an avowed atheist, revolting against?
- Would “the absurd” simply disappear in the face of irrefutable evidence
that God exists?
Ну и как уже можно догадаться, о смысле жизни лектор не даст однозначного ответа, несмотря на завлекающий заголовок (а как хотелось бы...).
В общем и целом, однозначно рекомендую, профессор Соломон — человек явно увлечённый темой, и слушать его приятно. Хотя мне и приходилось некоторые лекции по паре раз прогонять для полного понимания.
May 14, 2018
As far as a lecture goes, this was excellent. It was very well presented. Otherwise I found about the first half of the series to be very interesting, but that interest dwindled throughout the latter half, especially when he started talking about Sarte. I'm not entirely sure of why. I may have been more distracted during that period of my listening, but I also feel like the lecture series started to get a bit bogged down by discussing the views of existentialists from a historical perspective, rather than exploring the ideas themselves... this might be unfair, perhaps it's just that I didn't find the ideas being expressed in the latter half to be all that interesting or insightful. In any case, I found this to be a useful introduction to existentialism.
October 31, 2022
Mind Orgasm
Discussions ranging from Existentialist thinkers Sartre, Kierkegaard, Heidegger, Nietzsche, along with novelists like Camus, Kafka, Dostovesky with mix of Hegel, Kant, Mills, Marx and even Freud. Don't know about you, but this is what a mind orgasm looks like for me ! This is my third course on philosophy by Robert Solomon, the way he structures the topics,comparisons and presents even a postmodernist outlook on each lecture he takes is just admirable !
Highly recommended ❤️
Discussions ranging from Existentialist thinkers Sartre, Kierkegaard, Heidegger, Nietzsche, along with novelists like Camus, Kafka, Dostovesky with mix of Hegel, Kant, Mills, Marx and even Freud. Don't know about you, but this is what a mind orgasm looks like for me ! This is my third course on philosophy by Robert Solomon, the way he structures the topics,comparisons and presents even a postmodernist outlook on each lecture he takes is just admirable !
Highly recommended ❤️
January 30, 2020
Educational and insightful.
December 8, 2018
For me this lecture series was a thrill, and changed what I assumed I knew about existentialism. According to this University of Texas professor, the late Robert Solomon, existentialism is a movement not a school, made up of Christians, agnostics, and atheists. It addresses those post-antiquities questions that grow out of individualism: Who am I? What am I to do? Will my life matter? The emphasis is on an informed, responsible choice, accepting the consequences, living life to the fullest vs. killing time.
Solomon illuminates existentialist ideas commencing with Camus and his novel The Stranger. Through Camus, Solomon provides an answer to a puzzle I’ve encountered a hundred times: “People without thoughts are people without emotions, and people without emotions are people without thoughts.” Loaded with metaphors, Camus’ main character has no emotions and no self. In prison, reflecting on other’s judgement of him produces a newfound sense of meaning. Supporting my hypothesis that purpose is internal while meaning is external, I was suddenly enthusiastic for the series and read the The Stranger in a way I’d not have done without this intro.
On to Camus’ next work, The Myth of Sisyphus, we find Sisyphus commanded by the gods to push a boulder up hill, let it roll down, only to push it up again without end for eternity. Such absurdity—as all lives will eventually encounter—makes death welcomed. Solomon makes a comparison to Ecclesiastes’ (very Sumerian) assessment that life is pointless vanity. But Sisyphus rebels against the gods, not through refusal, but embrace (Buddhist-like). Committed to his task, immersed in his duty, with passion and zeal, Sisyphus invents meaning. Or is that purpose? This makes clear what religious believers already know, and have since a handful of them poisoned Socrates: philosophic thinking is a dangerous business. Rational truth can be not only a threat to societal rules, norms, and belonging, but dehumanizing. Humans invent “meaning,” they can just as easily uninvent it. Great preparation for Nietzsche, who shows up later.
Next up, Camus’ The Fall, where the main character helps a blind man, then doffs his hat to a man who can’t see. He wonders why he did this, only to conclude he’s a fake, performing for the favorable assessment of onlookers. Reflection for this man becomes, not honest, but a disease. Socrates said, “The unexamined life is not worth living,” but can it be overdone, as a different kind of self-deception? I nearly let go the leash on my dogs when this one cracked like a high voltage discharge between my earbuds. Living in splendid isolation, too prone to pondering, the shock was a little too close for comfort, and I was glad for it. As Mark Twain said, “All men live lives of quiet desperation.” But maybe we shouldn’t. Which is of course the point of existentialism’s project: an informed, responsible choice, accepting the consequences, then from there, live to the fullest.
After a good strong drink of Camus, Solomon offers a chaser made from a mix of Kierkegaard, Nietzsche, Hegel, Dostoevsky, Kafka, Husserl, Heidegger, and Sartre. After a few shots of these names I can’t spell or pronounce, I was tipsy with ideas to occupy me for years to come. What a delightful high.
Solomon illuminates existentialist ideas commencing with Camus and his novel The Stranger. Through Camus, Solomon provides an answer to a puzzle I’ve encountered a hundred times: “People without thoughts are people without emotions, and people without emotions are people without thoughts.” Loaded with metaphors, Camus’ main character has no emotions and no self. In prison, reflecting on other’s judgement of him produces a newfound sense of meaning. Supporting my hypothesis that purpose is internal while meaning is external, I was suddenly enthusiastic for the series and read the The Stranger in a way I’d not have done without this intro.
On to Camus’ next work, The Myth of Sisyphus, we find Sisyphus commanded by the gods to push a boulder up hill, let it roll down, only to push it up again without end for eternity. Such absurdity—as all lives will eventually encounter—makes death welcomed. Solomon makes a comparison to Ecclesiastes’ (very Sumerian) assessment that life is pointless vanity. But Sisyphus rebels against the gods, not through refusal, but embrace (Buddhist-like). Committed to his task, immersed in his duty, with passion and zeal, Sisyphus invents meaning. Or is that purpose? This makes clear what religious believers already know, and have since a handful of them poisoned Socrates: philosophic thinking is a dangerous business. Rational truth can be not only a threat to societal rules, norms, and belonging, but dehumanizing. Humans invent “meaning,” they can just as easily uninvent it. Great preparation for Nietzsche, who shows up later.
Next up, Camus’ The Fall, where the main character helps a blind man, then doffs his hat to a man who can’t see. He wonders why he did this, only to conclude he’s a fake, performing for the favorable assessment of onlookers. Reflection for this man becomes, not honest, but a disease. Socrates said, “The unexamined life is not worth living,” but can it be overdone, as a different kind of self-deception? I nearly let go the leash on my dogs when this one cracked like a high voltage discharge between my earbuds. Living in splendid isolation, too prone to pondering, the shock was a little too close for comfort, and I was glad for it. As Mark Twain said, “All men live lives of quiet desperation.” But maybe we shouldn’t. Which is of course the point of existentialism’s project: an informed, responsible choice, accepting the consequences, then from there, live to the fullest.
After a good strong drink of Camus, Solomon offers a chaser made from a mix of Kierkegaard, Nietzsche, Hegel, Dostoevsky, Kafka, Husserl, Heidegger, and Sartre. After a few shots of these names I can’t spell or pronounce, I was tipsy with ideas to occupy me for years to come. What a delightful high.
August 8, 2015
Who are we? Why are we here? I am rather new to philosophy, but in my quest for the meaning of life, I listened to this Great Course on Existentialism. Who can resist a course that purports to understand the meaning of life? Robert Solomon was a listenable professor, and spoke clearly and well about this fascinating but complex subject. This is a 12 hour course taught in 24 lectures, I've had it in my car for the last few weeks.
I was glad that Solomon started at a point I understood, Albert Camus. Solomon starts with the well read novel, The Stranger which I had read back in college days. Mersault's predicament in The Stranger was a good starting point for understanding what Existentialism was all about. The first five chapters after the intro discussed this French author and his works including, The Fall, The Plague and the Myth of Sysyphus. From there, Solomon moved on to the Norwegian philosopher Soren Kierkegaard. Prior to this intro course, I had not heard of him (my background is not in philosophy) but Solomon did a good job explaining his works and philosophy.
Chapters 10-13 covered an existential philosopher I was familiar with, Friederich Nietzsche, and his famous works, The Anti-Christ, Beyond Good and Evil and his outlook on life. I was also pleased that the professor used other writers that I was familiar with to further explain the ideas behind existentialism, using Dostoevsky and Kafka.
Heidegger got a few chapters, and I found this section to be rather dense, as I wasn't at all familiar with this German philosopher. I learned that although he had some brilliant insights into existential philosophy, he was also a Nazi. The professor gave him no pass for that and noted that apparently Heidegger never renounced his former affiliations.
The final chapters were on Jean-Paul Sartre and I also found these interesting, although not easy to follow.
This lecture series opened my mind to a lot of concepts and had me wanting to learn more. I do not consider myself an authority on this subject after listening, but I am wiser than I was, and mostly I had a curiosity to learn more. I think someone with a stronger philosophical background than mine would jump right into this material and understand it better than I did. However, if you are a beginner, this course was dense and hard to understand at times. I liked it, I would recommend it, but either come in with some information, or be prepared to go out and learn more.
I was glad that Solomon started at a point I understood, Albert Camus. Solomon starts with the well read novel, The Stranger which I had read back in college days. Mersault's predicament in The Stranger was a good starting point for understanding what Existentialism was all about. The first five chapters after the intro discussed this French author and his works including, The Fall, The Plague and the Myth of Sysyphus. From there, Solomon moved on to the Norwegian philosopher Soren Kierkegaard. Prior to this intro course, I had not heard of him (my background is not in philosophy) but Solomon did a good job explaining his works and philosophy.
Chapters 10-13 covered an existential philosopher I was familiar with, Friederich Nietzsche, and his famous works, The Anti-Christ, Beyond Good and Evil and his outlook on life. I was also pleased that the professor used other writers that I was familiar with to further explain the ideas behind existentialism, using Dostoevsky and Kafka.
Heidegger got a few chapters, and I found this section to be rather dense, as I wasn't at all familiar with this German philosopher. I learned that although he had some brilliant insights into existential philosophy, he was also a Nazi. The professor gave him no pass for that and noted that apparently Heidegger never renounced his former affiliations.
The final chapters were on Jean-Paul Sartre and I also found these interesting, although not easy to follow.
This lecture series opened my mind to a lot of concepts and had me wanting to learn more. I do not consider myself an authority on this subject after listening, but I am wiser than I was, and mostly I had a curiosity to learn more. I think someone with a stronger philosophical background than mine would jump right into this material and understand it better than I did. However, if you are a beginner, this course was dense and hard to understand at times. I liked it, I would recommend it, but either come in with some information, or be prepared to go out and learn more.
February 20, 2017
Found this lectures very interesting.
October 2, 2019
The Great Courses captured a jewel of a lecture series with Professor Solomon's work. Solomon puts the focus on five European philosophers: Camus (French, 20th C.), Kierkegaard (Danish, 19th C.), Nietchze (German, 19th C.), Heidegger (German, 20th C.) and Sarte (French, 20th C.). Common threads of individualism, passion and freedom ties the work of all these philosophers together. Solomon's lectures are clear, in-depth, and fascinating.
This was the first title in my Audible collection (30+ titles) that I immediately listened to again once finished. The second listening I took notes, there was good information in nearly every minute of the recording. After finishing the course, I learned Dr. Solomon passed away in 2007 while vacationing with his wife (a fellow Philosophy professor) in Europe. I never knew him personally, but this recording seems to be a fitting tribute to a man who clearly cared about his philosophies and teachings. (The companion PDF authored by Solomon is excellent as well).
The remainder of the review will be scratch notes on the lectures. If you are interested in exploring beyond the Greeks in the realm of Philosophy, if you've ever felt frustrated with the "herd mentality" of society, or if you've ever wondered where the world of emotions/passions fit in our age of reason, this title doesn't disappoint.
---
* Albert Camus: Emotions and thoughts do not depend upon each other, as illustrated in "The Stranger." Perhaps emotions precede reason, in contrast to the Greeks. Guilt exists just by our being human. Your perspective is more important than "the benign indifference of the universe." The Myth of Sisyphus: he becomes one with his rock, refusing to accept the absurdity of the situation. Reason begets absurdity. "You get the war you deserve" as illustrated in The Plague. Philosophical suicide is dismissing the absurd and prioritizing a future utopian life. The utopian future trivializes the life you are living right here right now. The Fall illustrates a character that thinks too much, challenging Socrates' notion that the unexamined life is not worth living. Is pride a blessing (the Greeks) or a curse (the Christians)? The character can't overcome his guilt of reflection. (Mother Teresa offered as contrast: "I focus only on the person that I am with.")
* Soren Kierkegaard: Fear and Trembling. Subjective truths; leaps of faith. Trying to prove God exists is pointless. Keep subjectivity and objectivity separate. "I want a truth that I can live and die for." His truth was Christianity. He abhorred those who thought Christianity was their birthright or function of hometown. Passionate commitment: seems like an oxymoron but for Kierkegaard it's the decision and action that follows a passion that are important. Hegel's historical vs. existential dialectic. His planes of existence: aesthetic, ethical and spiritual. Boredom (aesthetic) and burnout (ethical) leaves only the spiritual.
* Friedrich Nietzsche. The public's misperception of "God is Dead." Relative truths exist, but perhaps no absolute truth. An immoralist: ethics are a matter of self virtue, not Kant's rationalism, not an order of God. Judge yourself, not others--aligns with Aristotle. Virtue is beautiful. Master/slave morality. Slave morality has eclipsed master morality, for the worse. Wealth, education and strength are looked down upon. Slave morality sees those as evil and focuses on self-denial. Proto-characters. Perspectivism. Birds of prey will never be lambs. Talents may exist, but must be self-realized. "Become who you are." The Will--universal by Schopenhauer. Nietzsche doesn't believe in free will/the ability to pull away from all the world. "There is just action; consciousness is overrated." Our control is used to cultivate new automatic actions. "Give style to your character; it is a great art." Nietzsche's test for living properly: if you had to live your life over and over ad infinatum, would you? Ubermensch is free of resentment, but aspiring to uber is not realistic. Goethe's life was near ideal: creative, spiritual. Will to power is self-mastery, not control. Will to power/Self-esteem is feeling energized by your own ideas. Will to power is a passionate life, in contrast to the Greeks. Martyrs are more motivated by their own righteousness than by the infinite afterlife. Love is control. Pity is superiority. Attachments to ideals and aspirations are what life is all about. Schopenhauer says life is nothing, Nietzsche disagrees.
* Martin Heidegger. Believes that the conscious and the world are not separate entities. Lines between realism and idealism are blurred. "Dasein." Our first thoughts are not "who am I," but "here is the world I am in." To think about the hammer makes it no longer a hammer. Authenticity: taking a hold of yourself, not Das Mann self. A return to your historicity after authenticity to avoid alienation. We've been thrown into the world. We never live in the present. This understanding leads to dasein. Acorns are not dasein: they have potential, but not perspective. Conscious says we could be more authentic, which gives rise to guilt. "Being unto death:" a recognition that leads to resolutions. Nazi ties: very controversial.
* Jean-Paul Sarte. Writes for responsibility; turns down Nobel prize. Human nature is found under stress. Sarte says screw making up excuses for yourself for any predicament. We are free in that we always have choices to make, no matter the situation--he should know, he was a Nazi prisoner. How do citizens see the moutain they live by? Threats to freedom are often internal. Choices lead to emotions. You decide whether to forget or dwell. "We all get the war we deserve." Consciousness is freedom, spontaneous and nothingness: like a beam of light that dynamically molds what it sees. Emotions structure consciousness, not an escape behavior. Being for itself, in itself, for others. Self is an accumulation of external actions. Transcendence: overreaching facts and the present, wanting to be God. My birthday is not a fact (re: fake ids). "Bad faith"--a stiff waiter. Sarte attacks Freud for not taking responsibiliy. Being for others--the play 'no exit.' We only know ourselves through other people. We may appear bad in one instance, but we also are being for ourselves so don't have to be judged. Leads to moral education. Being for others cannot be ignored. Facticity, transcendence and being for others always in tension, in contrast with Aristotle's society. This guilt is secular original sin. Hell is other people: the play No Exit. Wife abuser, female socialite and working class lesbian. Death makes us pure facticity. Seeing someone else in our private desert.
This was the first title in my Audible collection (30+ titles) that I immediately listened to again once finished. The second listening I took notes, there was good information in nearly every minute of the recording. After finishing the course, I learned Dr. Solomon passed away in 2007 while vacationing with his wife (a fellow Philosophy professor) in Europe. I never knew him personally, but this recording seems to be a fitting tribute to a man who clearly cared about his philosophies and teachings. (The companion PDF authored by Solomon is excellent as well).
The remainder of the review will be scratch notes on the lectures. If you are interested in exploring beyond the Greeks in the realm of Philosophy, if you've ever felt frustrated with the "herd mentality" of society, or if you've ever wondered where the world of emotions/passions fit in our age of reason, this title doesn't disappoint.
---
* Albert Camus: Emotions and thoughts do not depend upon each other, as illustrated in "The Stranger." Perhaps emotions precede reason, in contrast to the Greeks. Guilt exists just by our being human. Your perspective is more important than "the benign indifference of the universe." The Myth of Sisyphus: he becomes one with his rock, refusing to accept the absurdity of the situation. Reason begets absurdity. "You get the war you deserve" as illustrated in The Plague. Philosophical suicide is dismissing the absurd and prioritizing a future utopian life. The utopian future trivializes the life you are living right here right now. The Fall illustrates a character that thinks too much, challenging Socrates' notion that the unexamined life is not worth living. Is pride a blessing (the Greeks) or a curse (the Christians)? The character can't overcome his guilt of reflection. (Mother Teresa offered as contrast: "I focus only on the person that I am with.")
* Soren Kierkegaard: Fear and Trembling. Subjective truths; leaps of faith. Trying to prove God exists is pointless. Keep subjectivity and objectivity separate. "I want a truth that I can live and die for." His truth was Christianity. He abhorred those who thought Christianity was their birthright or function of hometown. Passionate commitment: seems like an oxymoron but for Kierkegaard it's the decision and action that follows a passion that are important. Hegel's historical vs. existential dialectic. His planes of existence: aesthetic, ethical and spiritual. Boredom (aesthetic) and burnout (ethical) leaves only the spiritual.
* Friedrich Nietzsche. The public's misperception of "God is Dead." Relative truths exist, but perhaps no absolute truth. An immoralist: ethics are a matter of self virtue, not Kant's rationalism, not an order of God. Judge yourself, not others--aligns with Aristotle. Virtue is beautiful. Master/slave morality. Slave morality has eclipsed master morality, for the worse. Wealth, education and strength are looked down upon. Slave morality sees those as evil and focuses on self-denial. Proto-characters. Perspectivism. Birds of prey will never be lambs. Talents may exist, but must be self-realized. "Become who you are." The Will--universal by Schopenhauer. Nietzsche doesn't believe in free will/the ability to pull away from all the world. "There is just action; consciousness is overrated." Our control is used to cultivate new automatic actions. "Give style to your character; it is a great art." Nietzsche's test for living properly: if you had to live your life over and over ad infinatum, would you? Ubermensch is free of resentment, but aspiring to uber is not realistic. Goethe's life was near ideal: creative, spiritual. Will to power is self-mastery, not control. Will to power/Self-esteem is feeling energized by your own ideas. Will to power is a passionate life, in contrast to the Greeks. Martyrs are more motivated by their own righteousness than by the infinite afterlife. Love is control. Pity is superiority. Attachments to ideals and aspirations are what life is all about. Schopenhauer says life is nothing, Nietzsche disagrees.
* Martin Heidegger. Believes that the conscious and the world are not separate entities. Lines between realism and idealism are blurred. "Dasein." Our first thoughts are not "who am I," but "here is the world I am in." To think about the hammer makes it no longer a hammer. Authenticity: taking a hold of yourself, not Das Mann self. A return to your historicity after authenticity to avoid alienation. We've been thrown into the world. We never live in the present. This understanding leads to dasein. Acorns are not dasein: they have potential, but not perspective. Conscious says we could be more authentic, which gives rise to guilt. "Being unto death:" a recognition that leads to resolutions. Nazi ties: very controversial.
* Jean-Paul Sarte. Writes for responsibility; turns down Nobel prize. Human nature is found under stress. Sarte says screw making up excuses for yourself for any predicament. We are free in that we always have choices to make, no matter the situation--he should know, he was a Nazi prisoner. How do citizens see the moutain they live by? Threats to freedom are often internal. Choices lead to emotions. You decide whether to forget or dwell. "We all get the war we deserve." Consciousness is freedom, spontaneous and nothingness: like a beam of light that dynamically molds what it sees. Emotions structure consciousness, not an escape behavior. Being for itself, in itself, for others. Self is an accumulation of external actions. Transcendence: overreaching facts and the present, wanting to be God. My birthday is not a fact (re: fake ids). "Bad faith"--a stiff waiter. Sarte attacks Freud for not taking responsibiliy. Being for others--the play 'no exit.' We only know ourselves through other people. We may appear bad in one instance, but we also are being for ourselves so don't have to be judged. Leads to moral education. Being for others cannot be ignored. Facticity, transcendence and being for others always in tension, in contrast with Aristotle's society. This guilt is secular original sin. Hell is other people: the play No Exit. Wife abuser, female socialite and working class lesbian. Death makes us pure facticity. Seeing someone else in our private desert.
August 4, 2010
I just finally finished reading Part I of this book, I had already read Part II last month. You just have to listen to this audiobook!, you must!
-Heroic ascribing of meaning to our absurd existence (or, "Will you embrace your life gladly and fully even if you knew that it replayed itself endlessly into eternity, and in the face of that, defiantly shake your fists against Fate?"),
-Freedom
-Will
-Choice
-Responsibility
- these are just some of the breathtaking existential themes explored by Camus, Kierkegaard, and Nietzsche, and elegantly storytold by Prof. Robert Solomon in his lectures in this audiobook.
These wonderful lectures advanced my ability to understand the philosophy of existentialism up by several notches!!
I've read several books on existentialism and it's all difficult reading for me, and my understanding has improved at a glacial pace, but when suddenly I get to understand the gist of Sartre's "Being and Nothingness" via one of Prof. Solomon's lectures in this audiobook, I'm so happy!
Contents of Part 2 I read earlier include: Husserl, Heidegger and Sartre. Also had a chapter on the existential writers Dostoevsky, Kafka, and Hesse.
-Heroic ascribing of meaning to our absurd existence (or, "Will you embrace your life gladly and fully even if you knew that it replayed itself endlessly into eternity, and in the face of that, defiantly shake your fists against Fate?"),
-Freedom
-Will
-Choice
-Responsibility
- these are just some of the breathtaking existential themes explored by Camus, Kierkegaard, and Nietzsche, and elegantly storytold by Prof. Robert Solomon in his lectures in this audiobook.
These wonderful lectures advanced my ability to understand the philosophy of existentialism up by several notches!!
I've read several books on existentialism and it's all difficult reading for me, and my understanding has improved at a glacial pace, but when suddenly I get to understand the gist of Sartre's "Being and Nothingness" via one of Prof. Solomon's lectures in this audiobook, I'm so happy!
Contents of Part 2 I read earlier include: Husserl, Heidegger and Sartre. Also had a chapter on the existential writers Dostoevsky, Kafka, and Hesse.
June 4, 2014
I'm so glad I came across this audio lecture series, I can't wait to see what else they have to offer! I saw it mentioned in a comment talking about Nietzsche, so I had to look it up. It's not only an incredible 12 hour crash course on the Existential philosophers (Kierkegaard, Nietzsche, Hesse, Husserl, Heidegger, and Sartre) but it also gets into the authors which I have been reading (Camus, Dostoevsky, Kafka)!
Diving into this branch of knowledge unaided and with no foundation has made me feel like I'm missing things, and not getting the most I could out of it. For example, Camus's The Stranger did nothing for me, I finished it thinking nothing happened, and was confused by the praise it got. But now I have a whole new appreciation for it, since I really did miss everything the book did.
I'm excited to read more Kafka, continue reading Dostoevsky, and to give Camus another shot!
Having only read Beyond Good and Evil, I look forward to exploring the rest of his works, and the other philosopher's works.
Diving into this branch of knowledge unaided and with no foundation has made me feel like I'm missing things, and not getting the most I could out of it. For example, Camus's The Stranger did nothing for me, I finished it thinking nothing happened, and was confused by the praise it got. But now I have a whole new appreciation for it, since I really did miss everything the book did.
I'm excited to read more Kafka, continue reading Dostoevsky, and to give Camus another shot!
Having only read Beyond Good and Evil, I look forward to exploring the rest of his works, and the other philosopher's works.
November 15, 2014
A wide-ranging discussion of Existentialism and its history, this set of lectures also contains a very large number of literary reviews, of every novel by Camus I think, plus good discussion of Dostoevsky, Kafka, Sartre and others.
I've been interested in Solomon for a long time, ever since I heard him declare, at a philosophical conference, "Sartre is the Socrates of the twentieth century!" I'm particularly interested in his theory of emotion, which he touches on in these lectures, and also writes about in another book I liked, The Passions: Emotions and the Meaning of Life.
I've been interested in Solomon for a long time, ever since I heard him declare, at a philosophical conference, "Sartre is the Socrates of the twentieth century!" I'm particularly interested in his theory of emotion, which he touches on in these lectures, and also writes about in another book I liked, The Passions: Emotions and the Meaning of Life.
February 8, 2017
It's striking how often scholars in the past two decades have said existentialism is so relevant to America and is a major problem for that society.
July 10, 2019
The lecturer failed to follow through with the ideas espoused by Nietzsche. One example was the "arrow of time". The fault of pre-Socratic philosophers was that they determined movement did not exist because they failed to acknowledge the other forces acting on the arrow's movement. The force of inertia acting on the arrow's movement over time caused it to cease moving.
November 17, 2013
Brilliant.. covers existentialism as a responsibility to one's self to act in the face of absurdity. I focused a lot more on Sartre after listening to this on audio.
July 23, 2014
I could only listen to the first part. Partly the narrator's fault.
January 7, 2016
What can you say? The Great Courses are (almost) always pretty great.
May 22, 2019
“I realize today that nothing in the world is more distasteful to a man than to take the path that leads to himself.”
― Hermann Hesse
And this is the simple truth - that to live is to feel oneself lost. He who accepts it has already begun to find himself, to be on firm ground.
- Soren Kierkegaard
To dismiss existentialism as a french fashion, Professor Solomon passionately edifies, is to dismiss the profound impact these thinkers have had in America. These series of lectures on five philosophers/writers (Camus, Sartre, Heidegger, Nietzsche, Kierkegaard) looks explores the way existential thought has been a refutation against passivity, collective thought and the social mores of their times.
Solomon's passion is fiery, reflective and instructive, and the practically of these thinkers ideas to impact our lives isn't some lofty abstract possibility. One can see how the writings of Sarte or Camus gave a perspective that allowed for agency and freedom even in the bleak horror of Nazi-occupied Europe. The ferver and fanatacism of Kiekegaard and to an extent the radicalism of Nietzche are examined. Solomon's easy hand as a professor makes so many of these ideas easy to understand and truly eye opening into the freedoms these thinkers offered.
Truly one of the best lecture series i've ever encountered. I use to listen to these on youtube...before they were packaged a "Great courses" series. My only complaint is that the last track "from existentialism to post-modernism", a visionary and heroic take by Solomon, is not intact in it's original glory.
― Hermann Hesse
And this is the simple truth - that to live is to feel oneself lost. He who accepts it has already begun to find himself, to be on firm ground.
- Soren Kierkegaard
To dismiss existentialism as a french fashion, Professor Solomon passionately edifies, is to dismiss the profound impact these thinkers have had in America. These series of lectures on five philosophers/writers (Camus, Sartre, Heidegger, Nietzsche, Kierkegaard) looks explores the way existential thought has been a refutation against passivity, collective thought and the social mores of their times.
Solomon's passion is fiery, reflective and instructive, and the practically of these thinkers ideas to impact our lives isn't some lofty abstract possibility. One can see how the writings of Sarte or Camus gave a perspective that allowed for agency and freedom even in the bleak horror of Nazi-occupied Europe. The ferver and fanatacism of Kiekegaard and to an extent the radicalism of Nietzche are examined. Solomon's easy hand as a professor makes so many of these ideas easy to understand and truly eye opening into the freedoms these thinkers offered.
Truly one of the best lecture series i've ever encountered. I use to listen to these on youtube...before they were packaged a "Great courses" series. My only complaint is that the last track "from existentialism to post-modernism", a visionary and heroic take by Solomon, is not intact in it's original glory.
January 31, 2023
Although life does not have a meaning, what is more meaningful that we have?
One of the beautiful books that Decries between the lines that death should be sought not at the end of existence but at the beginning of existence through the many trial channels it contains, and that it should be evaluated integrated with life.
Since the phenomenon of death is evaluated together with life, philosophy is involved in such a situation even if we do not want to. Since the way to understand death is through the act of living*, both phenomena are directly related to each other.
This must be the most painful tragedy of man. We are the only living being who knows that he is mortal and can never escape from it. That is why it has become the main topic of philosophy as the only way to understand death, to understand life correctly, which allows knowing this information, and to live life according to your tragedy that stands in front of you.
In the book, the death-life balance has been created by taking support from the views and words of many writers and thinkers such as Nietzsche, Heidegger, Confucius about death.
A book that is quite qualified and can improve your knowledge and thoughts about death-philosophy. I wish you a pleasant reading for the interested person already.
One of the beautiful books that Decries between the lines that death should be sought not at the end of existence but at the beginning of existence through the many trial channels it contains, and that it should be evaluated integrated with life.
Since the phenomenon of death is evaluated together with life, philosophy is involved in such a situation even if we do not want to. Since the way to understand death is through the act of living*, both phenomena are directly related to each other.
This must be the most painful tragedy of man. We are the only living being who knows that he is mortal and can never escape from it. That is why it has become the main topic of philosophy as the only way to understand death, to understand life correctly, which allows knowing this information, and to live life according to your tragedy that stands in front of you.
In the book, the death-life balance has been created by taking support from the views and words of many writers and thinkers such as Nietzsche, Heidegger, Confucius about death.
A book that is quite qualified and can improve your knowledge and thoughts about death-philosophy. I wish you a pleasant reading for the interested person already.
September 30, 2020
Thought-provoking and informative are two adjectives suitable for this Great Courses lecture series. The great philosophical thinkers share their thoughts and beliefs through the narration of Robert Solomon who also adds context to content by giving his audience a little background of each philosopher. These widely known, deep abstract thinkers include Albert Camus, Soren Kierkegaard and his worldview of Christianity; Friedrich Nietzsche on Nihilism and the death of God, among other topics, such as, morality; Husserl, Heidegger on Phenomenology, consciousness and one's interaction with their environment; and Jean-Paul Sartre on emotions and responsibility.
No study of Philosophy is complete without the inclusion of religion. Science takes man to understanding and possible belief. Kierkegaard postulates that since God is spiritual and separate from creation, being the Creator, belief requires a qualitative leap of faith. Solomon's closing lecture covers Existentialism, a philosophy about the control over one's life, to Postmodernism and its general distrust of any ideologies or worldviews.
No study of Philosophy is complete without the inclusion of religion. Science takes man to understanding and possible belief. Kierkegaard postulates that since God is spiritual and separate from creation, being the Creator, belief requires a qualitative leap of faith. Solomon's closing lecture covers Existentialism, a philosophy about the control over one's life, to Postmodernism and its general distrust of any ideologies or worldviews.
August 24, 2020
I listened to this whilst walking the dog and it blew me away. I found myself walking further so I could listen and think more.
Solomon has and engaging and clear way of explaining complex topics in Existentialism. I haven't read any of the texts myself nor have I studied the philosophers but I have studied other, more ancient areas of philosophy previously.
He starts with Camus, goes on to Kierkegaard then Nietzsche through to Heidegger and then finally, of course, Sartre. I found the concepts and ideas presented very interesting and useful in practical terms when thinking about my own motivations in life.
This is not something you can just pick up and listen to the odd bit here and there. You will need to dedicate time to listening and thinking about the content to get the most out of it. If you do then I promise you that you will get a lot out of the course. You may not agree with it all but it will give you plenty to think about!
Solomon has and engaging and clear way of explaining complex topics in Existentialism. I haven't read any of the texts myself nor have I studied the philosophers but I have studied other, more ancient areas of philosophy previously.
He starts with Camus, goes on to Kierkegaard then Nietzsche through to Heidegger and then finally, of course, Sartre. I found the concepts and ideas presented very interesting and useful in practical terms when thinking about my own motivations in life.
This is not something you can just pick up and listen to the odd bit here and there. You will need to dedicate time to listening and thinking about the content to get the most out of it. If you do then I promise you that you will get a lot out of the course. You may not agree with it all but it will give you plenty to think about!
Displaying 1 - 30 of 103 reviews