Jean Paul Sartre

[Hawkeye-X]

What would he think of this situation today?

I just watched a film - Sartre: the Road to Freedom -- gave me a lot to think about.

Hawkeye-X

[soupkitchen]

1. His No Exit hell would be a cabinent meeting

[molly]

2. Being and Nothingness

now?

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

3. I was always from the Camus school.

I think Sartre would have reiterated that "Freedom requires total responsibility."


edit: clarity.

[Isere]

7. I'm a Camus fan as well

And probably most activists are.

"Il faut s'engager....."

[NewYorkerfromMass]

4. I'm a huge fan of JPS

Basically he says we are no more than our actions. What we do is all.
Now, if actions are limited to speaking and trying to influence others to act...well then so be it.

[kodi]

5. never read him, therefore his opinions do not exist.

.

[NewYorkerfromMass]

6. your loss. nt

[kodi]

9. good gracious has detection of satire dropped dramatically recently?

anyone who has read satre would know that i was word playing on the existential argument of the sound of the tree falling in the woods.

lighten up.

[NewYorkerfromMass]

11. No, but correct interpretation of Sartre has apparently dropped

if your simplistic reading is any indicator. DesCartes and many others covered that ground long before JPS.

[Character Assassin]

12. Frankly, I find your deconstruction of his comments modernistic

If one examines such dialog, one is faced with a choice: either reject subtextual desituationism or conclude that the raison d'etre of the poster to who you replied is social comment. De Selby implies that we have to choose between pretextual cultural theory and precultural narrative. In a sense, an abundance of constructions concerning a self-sufficient totality may be found.

In your commentary, a predominant concept is the concept of dialectic narrativity. If Foucaultist power relations holds, we have to choose between Lacanist obscurity and submodernist textual theory. However, the failure, and thus the defining characteristic, of subtextual desituationism depicted in it is also evident in your motivation for posting it in the first place.

If one examines pretextual cultural theory, one is faced with a choice: either accept Lacanist obscurity or conclude that language is capable of significance. Several dematerialisms concerning postcapitalist discourse exist. But the subject is contextualised into a pretextual cultural theory that includes sexuality as a whole.

Marx uses the term 'subtextual desituationism' to denote the common ground between class and society. In a sense, a number of desituationisms concerning a mythopoetical totality may be revealed.

Lacan uses the term 'pretextual cultural theory' to denote the economy, and eventually the stasis, of semanticist art. It could be said that the characteristic theme of the works of Tarantino is the difference between sexual identity and society. The subject is interpolated into a neotextual narrative that includes culture as a whole. Thus, any number of materialisms concerning subtextual desituationism exist.

Derrida promotes the use of pretextual cultural theory to challenge sexism. Therefore, la Tournier would likely state that your comments are modernistic.

An abundance of narratives concerning the role of the artist as reader may be found. It could be said that the example of subtextual desituationism which is a central theme of Tarantino's Jackie Brown emerges again in Reservoir Dogs, although in a more deconstructive sense.

Blahblahblabhlahalbhablahblahblahblah......

Who freaking cares? Buch of drunken, self-satisfied louts, the lot of 'em.

The above text brought to you courtesy of http://www.elsewhere.org/cgi-bin/postmodern/ , slightly edited by yours truly.

[markses]

22. It's either a piss-poor algorithm

Or your edits stink. ;-)

Either way, the funniest part about your post is that the critique of such jargon-filled writing is all the rage now in the academic humanities - the jargon-filled writing itself being soooo 80's, as Lyotard might say.

But, to be more serious, I do think everyone mentioned in the posts has important things to say about culture, thought, and language. Certainly, one would have to have never read any Foucault to think he writes like THAT! Same goes for Derrida and Marx. I'll have to give it to you on Lacan ("friggin object petit-a" as the program may have said more humorously), although last time I checked, the term was Lacanian and not Lacanist, though that may be a function of the program. What any of these folks (with the exception, of course, of Marx) have to do with Jean Paul Sartre will remain a great mystery, however, since they are all opposed to his version of phenomenology, Foucault perhaps most vehemently.

[kodi]

14. but, he was recognized as a leader of existentialism & the argument.

and at least one other poster got the joke. you over-reacted towards my humorous post and it's darn funny watching you covering your tracks, and that's too bad, because you do seem lucid at times, but it is overwhelmed by your fixation to impress others with your mind.

you should relax just a little bit and use the site for enjoyment and knowledge, not as some sort of competition to impress others. perhaps you just need to spend more time hanging out in the DU Lounge. maybe you just need to get laid more often. regardless, lighten up.


now sing along.......

Immanuel Kant was a real pissant
Who was very rarely stable.

Heidegger, Heidegger was a boozy beggar
Who could think you under the table.

David Hume could out-consume
Wilhelm Freidrich Hegel,

And Wittgenstein was a beery swine
Who was just as schloshed as Schlegel.

There's nothing Nietzche couldn't teach ya
'Bout the raising of the wrist.
Socrates, himself, was permanently pissed.

John Stuart Mill, of his own free will,
On half a pint of shandy was particularly ill.

Plato, they say, could stick it away--
Half a crate of whiskey every day.

Aristotle, Aristotle was a bugger for the bottle.
Hobbes was fond of his dram,

And René Descartes was a drunken fart.
'I drink, therefore I am.'

Yes, Socrates, himself, is particularly missed,
A lovely little thinker,
But a bugger when he's pissed



<burp>

[NewYorkerfromMass]

15. but that wasn't his main focus

existentialism isn't simply about wondering about the wonder of it all (as your pithy little post implied)- it's about assessing the situation and DOING something about it. What you do is up to you. But the bottom line is to DO something. And that's (essentially) what Sartre was all about.

So have fun here all you want, but your first post seemed to indicate that you were proud of your ignorance.

[kodi]

17. rudely rushing to point out apparent ignorance in others has little value.

as to satre, "existence precedes essence" is more at what is implied, your term "assessment" may be a priori to action, but an assessment itself is posteriori and has as anticedent a determination of values, not all of which are internally derived because they are concepts derived from language and language is external. so calling forth for an assessment as a priori to action plays right back into the hands of what the existentialists were rebelling against, rationalism, reason, and logic. because there is no way to "assess" without these, unless the existential argument you hold falls back on pure emotion or "essence", but that was not stated clearly if it is your position.

satre, as i understand his works calls for an assertion of the significance of self, regardless of exterior factors, where again "existence precedes essence" refers to internal experience of the self, in this way the manner in which you have used the term "assessment" as a priori to action is unncecessary because exterior factors, especially those which are interepretations of life which seem to eliminate all significance and meaning don't matter.

[NewYorkerfromMass]

19. much better

you may now be excused. :)

[kodi]

21. thus as i said before, according to satre his opinions dont matter to me,

that was the basis of joke.

[NewYorkerfromMass]

24. If only you'd spell his name correctly I could take you more seriously

:shrug:

[Raenelle]

8. LOL.

Sartre was a Communist. I am quite sure he would be absolutely pissed off at US aggression. He was also drunk quite a lot--another possible road.

[Isere]

20. Yes, and he was a frightful misogynist!

Simone de Beauvoir was run ragged by the man....
in spite of her professed, ground-breaking treatise on feminism.

[Raenelle]

23. I liked both Sartre and de Beauvoir

I was noting a defect of his when I noted his common drunkenness, but being a Communist, especially back then--I didn't mean that as a slam.

Sartre was very imperfect--conceited, unfaithful. But he was also brilliant, important, and a lefty.

[Tom Yossarian Joad]

13. Okay, Descartes....

I think, therefore I am... I think. :evilgrin:



Feel safe.
Ashcroft watches over us all.

[Terwilliger]

10. Is the current situation in the US a scene from NO EXIT?

It's hard to see beyond the door, whichever one we take

[pippin]

16. Sysyphus

The world situation right now make me think most of what the existentialist said about Sysyphus.

:scared:

[CHIMO]

18. ? Haven't Seen The Film

But what situation in what part of the Universe are you refering to?

Global warming?

HIV AIDS?