Modern existentialists?

[TheAnachronism]

So, I have never had a good time with philosophy. The first real philosophical work that I tried to read was Nietzsche's Also Sprach Zarathustra when I was 16, and I gave up reading it very soon after I gave up trying to understand it. I stayed away from philosophy for a few years, preferring instead to build my ideas about and relationship to the world around me through other literature.

When I next started reading philosophy, it was for a college course focusing on Existentialism which introduced Kierkegaard and Sartre and Camus, &c. Although I had a better time wading through the material, I still don't think I was receptive to what was being discussed in the works, and even a few years later I couldn't talk in depth about anything that was read.

Now I finally feel like I am ready to attempt Existentialism once more, but I really think it would do me more good to focus on modern existential writings, preferably from an atheist/agnostic perspective, though this does not have to be a prerequisite, although being accessible to a layperson is a must.

Would anyone be so kind as to recommend writers (or specific titles) that you think are worthwhile? Please feel free to use this thread to discuss the merits/demerits of different existentialists--perhaps you shall entice me to give them a try.

 

[D'rok]

So, I have never had a good time with philosophy. The first real philosophical work that I tried to read was Nietzsche's Also Sprach Zarathustra when I was 16, and I gave up reading it very soon after I gave up trying to understand it. I stayed away from philosophy for a few years, preferring instead to build my ideas about and relationship to the world around me through other literature.

When I next started reading philosophy, it was for a college course focusing on Existentialism which introduced Kierkegaard and Sartre and Camus, &c. Although I had a better time wading through the material, I still don't think I was receptive to what was being discussed in the works, and even a few years later I couldn't talk in depth about anything that was read.

Now I finally feel like I am ready to attempt Existentialism once more, but I really think it would do me more good to focus on modern existential writings, preferably from an atheist/agnostic perspective, though this does not have to be a prerequisite, although being accessible to a layperson is a must.

Would anyone be so kind as to recommend writers (or specific titles) that you think are worthwhile? Please feel free to use this thread to discuss the merits/demerits of different existentialists--perhaps you shall entice me to give them a try.

Careful with the word "modern". That's a term of art in philosophy. I assume you mean contemporary?

Camus is pretty much mandatory - particularly The Stranger, The Fall and The Myth of Sisyphus.

However, if you want to avoid Camus, try this excellent novel - Being Dead by Jim Crace.

 

[Loss Leader]

Would anyone be so kind as to recommend writers (or specific titles) that you think are worthwhile?

Here's a book about existentialism that's so good, you won't even realize you're learning philosophy.

Avoid the painfully boring movie, but this play is a very easy read.

I would think that The Stranger and The Plague are musts. They're not as fun as the two others I mentioned, though. And if you're not reading this for an assignment, you might as well read stuff that's enjoyable.

 

[TheAnachronism]

Careful with the word "modern". That's a term of art in philosophy. I assume you mean contemporary?

Yes, I meant contemporary. Sorry for the sloppy language.

However, if you want to avoid Camus, try this excellent novel - Being Dead by Jim Crace.

The book by Jim Crace sounds very interesting. I will see if my library has a copy.

Here's a book about existentialism that's so good, you won't even realize you're learning philosophy.

Thanks for another good read!

 

[blobru]

... When I next started reading philosophy, it was for a college course focusing on Existentialism which introduced Kierkegaard and Sartre and Camus, &c. Although I had a better time wading through the material, I still don't think I was receptive to what was being discussed in the works, and even a few years later I couldn't talk in depth about anything that was read. ...

Was your course text Barrett's Irrational Man? Even though almost fifty years old, it's still the best introduction to the subject I know of (there are lots of beginner's guides out there now that may distill the material better, I don't know -- the ones I've seen tend to be a bit cartoony and/or jump around too much for my tastes).

Whichever texts you decide on, you'll want to have some philosophical background to know what Existentialism was a response to; otherwise, it will seem completely insane (it is insane, but not completely, and in a good way, more or less). In brief, Existentialism is a response to the tendency in philosophy to restrict meaning to logic, math and reason: to treat people as blank slates (Aristotle's tabula rasa) or abstract, thinking things (Descartes' cogito) whose goal is to gather true knowledge about the world; or to reduce them to functioning parts in a larger, more important system (Plato, Hegel, et al).

The Existentialist claim is that human meaning, what is meaningful to us in our lives, is very different from the meaning that is talked about in traditional philosophy. These human sources of meaning aren't rational, so philosophy had tended to dismiss them, yet they are inevitable. However much we might like to or feel that we should, we can't avoid human concerns -- questions of personal identity, social integrity, emotional attachment, fear and loathing and "who am I?", love and life and death -- because before we are rational beings, we are human beings: we exist as we are, in spite of what various "philosophies" (ethical, political, professional, religious) might want us to be. Life is messy. Existence precedes essence. Human existence precedes any human essence any philosophy might imagine, and always overflows that predefined essence.

Or so the existentialists claim. Many of them, the best of them, are indeed crazy, driven crazy by their own questions, perhaps (and isn't everyone, a little); with some background, some insight into why they're "crazy", why their writings sound as much like poetry as philosophy, they're also a terrific read. Good luck and happy reading.

 

[Abdul Alhazred]

Manalive by GK Chesterton. A Roman Catholic existential novel.