Sartre interview

rest in peace you beautiful, beautiful man.

"La Nausee" is probably my most favourite book ever, I can open it on any page, start reading and it seems great every time, any sentence can keep me interested, not to mention the scene in the park etc.... genius

Haha that is me in a nutshell. A high school, boy, freshaman, new to philosophy, but happy to learn. I made an attempt at reading "the will to power" but found it very hard and rather boaring. So I opted. with Satre and liked him very much. Now im trying to get a good grasp of what existentialism is. Although because it has so many aspects, that is proving rather difficult.

Real intellectual and literary work is never really finished. It's something one does life-long. I remember having several college courses in philosophy, where Nietzsche and Sartre are taught. Philosophy is one aspect of a full education. Science and history study also may come to bear on one's reasoning also.

Far from stopping at a superficial and subjective opinion about philosopher's and their writings, there are another important sides, which include the philosopher's assumptions and conclusions, and what the philosopher intends for mankind.

In a nutshell, the philosophy of existentialism according to Sartre asserts that an individual's existence is not pre-ordained or pre-planned by God or any other supreme being. Instead, man is that which he does (l'homme est ce qu'il fait), in other words, action defines a person's existence, not destiny or fate. A person's existence comes before their essence, thus granting the individual freedom to define him/herself and the world according to their own internal reality.

Here is something of substance, I would appreciate some sub titles :)

Sartre may have been your Humanist idol, but I prefer Nietzsche's Will and believe the kind of individuality reflected in Rand and others to be much more rewarding than Sartre's kind of social theory; therefore, I accept your invitation to "leave me with myself," a place where most men are much better off--men of substance, that is.

Your position here is so rudimentary (if not selfish and infantile) that it would take me a very long time to deal with most of the comments you make. My time is too valuable today. But, at least you mention "social theory." That might be a start. From a speculator's standpoint, Rand and Nietzsche is often seen as "rewarding" financially and egotistically, for those whom these philosophies do not destroy or make inert. Good luck to you.

"You are very generous at one thing: putting words in my mouth."
I merely quote you and destroy any hope you have for validity by pointing out fallacies you commit. Almost every comment of yours has ridiculous content. Obviously I have said nothing which is untrue; therefore, you rely on silly responses filled with childish cliches. I brought in Rand and Wittgenstein to prove a point--language makes philosophy possible at all.