Existentialism

Expressions researched:
"existentialism" |"existentialist" |"existentialists"

Philosophy Discussions

So how they can be philosopher if they have no ultimate goal?

Philosophy Discussion on Soren Aabye Kierkegaard:

Śyāmasundara: ...philosopher is called Kierkegaard. He was a Danish philosopher, last century. He is the father of what is called existentialism, which is a very prominent modern philosophy, probably the most prominent modern philosophy. Last time we were discussing the phenomenologists, who are interested in getting at the "whatness," or the essence of a thing. These existentialists, they are more interested in the "thatness," or the existence of a thing. So this Kierkegaard describes three steps of the life experience. The first step he calls the aesthetic step or stage of life. This aesthetic stage of life is characterized by two types of persons: that one engaged in sense gratification completely, unrestricted sense pleasure; and the mental speculator or philosopher. He said that in both cases that both persons are uncommitted to any specific goals and that they become bored with their activities, unrestricted sense gratification and philosophical speculation; that they are devoid of commitment—they are not committing themselves to anything, simply enjoying and speculating—and that this type of life, this aesthetic type of life, is...

Prabhupāda: So how they can be philosopher if they have no ultimate goal?

Śyāmasundara: He says they are not really philosophers; they are mental speculators.

Prabhupāda: So mental speculator anyone can become, without any aim. What is this? Ship without a rudder, a man without aim.

Intelligent man should be concerned first of all wherefrom this activity came. What is the origin of activity? That is philosophy.

Philosophy Discussion on Soren Aabye Kierkegaard:

Śyāmasundara: The emphasis of these existentialists is upon acting. They think that first there must come an active decision to say, be concerned one way or the other about something, and take an active role in dealing with life rather than aimlessly taking pleasure from it. But try to ethically become involved with life and make decisions, either this or that.

Prabhupāda: So these things are very nicely described in Vedānta-sūtra, and Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam is the right commentary on Vedānta-sūtra. Just like it is also philosophy, that what is the actual aim of life, or what is the Absolute Truth. So the Vedānta-sūtra is so nicely made, the answer is also there. The Absolute Truth must be that thing which is the origin of everything. Now Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam discusses what is the nature of that origin. This requires philosophical as well as authentic proof. Now, that origin, first of all the origin is conscious or not conscious. Origin, just like these some philosophers, they are tracing life from bones, tracing life. So now one should be intelligent enough to understand whether actually life can begin from bones and stones or life begins from life, actual life. So if the origin of everything, you can say the original source of creation or the creator, if you take it as creator, that we have to take. But creation does not take automatically. There is no proof. There is no proof. From matter, automatically creation takes place, that is not very perfect philosophy, neither one can support this view in the long run. Therefore Śrīmad-Bhāgavata says that the origin of everything must be conscious. And that consciousness, also, existence, existing eternally. Not that consciousness has developed under certain conditions. In this way Bhāgavata has explained, Vedānta-sūtra has explained the origin very logically and sensibly. So these answers are there in the Bhāgavata and Vedānta-sūtra.

Śyāmasundara: They... What they're more concerned with is that they find themselves here in this world as an active living being, and they are concerned more with the activities of life, how to...

Prabhupāda: But how the activity came? Then one should be..., intelligent man should be concerned first of all wherefrom this activity came. What is the origin of activity? That is philosophy.

However foolish it may be, you go on.

Philosophy Discussion on Soren Aabye Kierkegaard:

Śyāmasundara: Just like, just like Hitler, they might say, or actually the whole hippie philosophy comes from these men, these existentialists. It's not... It doesn't matter what you do, it's that you do it with conviction, determination, passion, freedom.

Prabhupāda: However foolish it may be. That is nice. (laughter) However foolish it may be, you go on.

Śyāmasundara: They would admire Hitler because at least he stuck to his principles.

Tamāla Kṛṣṇa: They would admire Hitler.

Prabhupāda: Ah?

Tamāla Kṛṣṇa: They would admire Hitler for sticking to his principles and acting upon them.

Prabhupāda: So what happened? Hitler became vanquished. That's all.

As spirit soul I am existing, and then, at my perfectional stage, I learn what is the essence of life. Essence of life is Kṛṣṇa consciousness. Therefore existence is first, and then to understand the essence.

Philosophy Discussion on Soren Aabye Kierkegaard:

Śyāmasundara: There are some philosophies such as the phenomenologists, they say that essence is prior to existence, but these existentialists say that existence is prior to essence; in other words, that by existing we come to our essence. We realize ourself by going through stages of different existence.

Prabhupāda: Yes. That is our theory, that we are struggling or transmigrating from different species of life, and when we come to the perfectional stage of living condition, human form of life, so then we understand what is the aim of life. So as spirit soul I am existing, and then, at my perfectional stage, I learn what is the essence of life. Essence of life is Kṛṣṇa consciousness. Therefore existence is first, and then to understand the essence.

What is that existence? Foolishly driving? Does that mean existence cannot mean foolishly driving?

Philosophy Discussion on Soren Aabye Kierkegaard:

Devotee: Later existentialists, though, they said existential means that right now at any given moment, whatever I do is completely independent of all other sources, and I am just like a ship without a rudder; whatever I do is another path of action. At any given moment I can go any direction. And as soon as you have any idea that there is a God, then that is no longer existential; that is putting a direction on something which is actually (indistinct).

Prabhupāda: What is that existence? Foolishly driving? Does that mean existence cannot mean foolishly driving?

In university if you want to be a doctorate in philosophy, three other big philosophers are appointed to guide you, and then you present your thesis. But these people are thinking without any guidance.

Philosophy Discussion on Soren Aabye Kierkegaard:

Śyāmasundara: But this Kierkegaard, he was living in last century, he was prior to the modern existentialists, so he was still thinking about God. He came before God (indistinct). His final thought is that..., the final idea is that thought should be separated from existence, because existence cannot be thought, but it must be lived; that the thought process should be separated from the existing process or the acting process.

Prabhupāda: Our process is already guided (?). (indistinct). Just like in university if you want to be a doctorate in philosophy, three other big philosophers are appointed to guide you, and then you present your thesis. But these people are thinking without any guidance, (indistinct).

Changing is the mind, not the person. Changing positions is of the mind. So he is identifying the person with the mind; therefore he is not a perfect philosopher.

Philosophy Discussion on Jean-Paul Sartre:

Śyāmasundara: Today's philosopher is called Jean-Paul Sartre. He is a contemporary French philosopher, and he is the father of this existentialism philosophy, which deals with the fundamental problem of dualism—that is, subject and object. He calls the object, the things of this world, he calls them "beings" because they exist, and he calls the subject, or the consciousness, individual consciousness, "nothingness," "no-thingness." This is a thing, but the individual entity is no thing, because it is constantly changing.

Prabhupāda: Why it is not thing?

Śyāmasundara: Because the structure is not determinant. It is always changing. On both sides there is nothing.

Prabhupāda: Changing is the mind, not the person. Changing positions is of the mind. So he is identifying the person with the mind; therefore he is not a perfect philosopher.

If you are changing, I am changing, then the changing is existence. But I am different from that existence because I am changing.

Philosophy Discussion on Jean-Paul Sartre:

Śyāmasundara: Last time we didn't quite finish the last philosopher we're going to do in the modern times, namely Jean-Paul Sartre, a French philosopher. He is living now. His philosophy briefly is called existentialism. And last time we...

Prabhupāda: What does it actually mean, "existential"?

Śyāmasundara: It means that existence is prior to essence. In other words, the fact that I am first of all existing, living here, is the important thing, and that I determine what I am, my essence, as I unfold my life. Existence is the most important thing, prior to essence, what I am, my nature.

Prabhupāda: What is the essence and what is existence?

Śyāmasundara: Well, according to Sartre, existence... All I know when I am analyzing what I am, all I know is that I exist.

Prabhupāda: Everyone knows that.

Śyāmasundara: "I am." This is the first fact. What I am more than that is determined as I live my life, as I grow older...

Prabhupāda: That is no standard of why living. The dog is living. He also exists. The cat is living. He also exists. And man is also living, exists. So different types of living beings are existing in different consciousness. So what is the standard consciousness?

Śyāmasundara: There is no standard. He says that man's essence is nothingness or no-thingness. There is no-thingness about me. I am always changing. There is nothing determinant about my subjectivity.

Prabhupāda: If you are changing, I am changing, then the changing is existence. But I am different from that existence because I am changing. I am changing. Suppose I have just now changed my dress. So I am the same. Actually, I am existing the same, but I am changing different dress or different body. So this changing is not very important because it will be changed. I am important. I am changing.

Then the same hero, just like the insect hero. The same hero. The insect hero very boldly goes to the fire. He is no better than an insect, without any knowledge or discrimination.

Philosophy Discussion on Jean-Paul Sartre:

Śyāmasundara: Yes. The existentialists...

Prabhupāda: There are many, many thieves, they know how to go into the bank treasury scientifically. Is that all right?

Śyāmasundara: Yes. He is an existential hero, the good thief or the good killer.

Prabhupāda: Then the same hero, just like the insect hero. The same hero. The insect hero very boldly goes to the fire. (laughter) The same. He is no better than an insect, without any knowledge or discrimination.

"Thrown into the world," as soon you say like that, then the next question will be, "Thrown by whom?"

Philosophy Discussion on Jean-Paul Sartre:

Hayagrīva: Probably the most famous of the French philosophers. Perhaps the most well known philosopher in this century. He calls himself an existentialist. He calls himself an atheistic existentialist in that he believes existence precedes essence. That the essence of man... According to creation by design, God has the essence of man in His mind, and He creates man just as a paper cutter creates some kind of a figure. Sartre doesn't believe this. He says, "Atheistic existentialism, which I represent, is more coherent. It states that if God does not exist, there is at least one being in whom existence precedes essence, a being who exists before he can be defined by any concept, and that this being is man, or human reality." So that for Sartre a human reality is all in all.

Prabhupāda: So wherefrom the human reality comes? There are no realities also, so why he is stressing on human realities?

Hayagrīva: There again, he would emphasize accident—he uses the word—that man is thrown into the world, or cast into the world.

Prabhupāda: Thrown by whom? "Thrown into the world," as soon you say like that, then the next question will be, "Thrown by whom?"

Devotee: They don't like that question.

No, atheist, that is there should be reasonable proposal. If you speak something nonsense, that "I exist," why he, does he bring the word God, if God does not exist?

Philosophy Discussion on Jean-Paul Sartre:

Hayagrīva: Well, he says, "Existentialism isn't so atheistic that it wears itself out showing God doesn't exist. Rather, it declares that even if God did exist, that would change nothing. There you've got our point of view."

Prabhupāda: No, if you exist as others exist, then what is the fault there? God also exists. He exists. Others also existing. So if there is God, what is the fault if He exists? Why he is denying the existence of God? Let them all exist.

Hayagrīva: First of all, he feels that God does not exist.

Prabhupāda: Why? If you exist, if others exist, why God will not exist?

Hayagrīva: That is his position as an atheist.

Prabhupāda: No, atheist, that is there should be reasonable proposal. If you speak something nonsense, that "I exist," why he, does he bring the word God, if God does not exist? God is there, but He denies the existence. That is atheism. Otherwise, why bringing the word God? If God does not exist, why he is bringing the word God?

Hayagrīva: He wants, he's trying to...

Prabhupāda: That means God is there. He wants his existence; he does not want God to exist. That is his proposal.

When, if he can see that man exists in his own idea, so why not a superman who exists in his own idea, or his own capacity, completely independent of anyone?

Philosophy Discussion on Jean-Paul Sartre:

Hayagrīva: According to him he says, "The first principle of existentialism is that man is nothing else but what he makes of himself, since there is no God to conceive of human nature."

Prabhupāda: When, if he can see that man exists in his own idea, so why not a superman who exists in his own idea, or his own capacity, completely independent of anyone? Why, how he can deny that? That is not possible.

But he does not know what, what is the meaning of God. We have several times repeated this.

Philosophy Discussion on Jean-Paul Sartre:

Hayagrīva: So from this he concludes that without God, everything is possible. He says, "Indeed, everything is permissible if God does not exist. If God did not exist, everything would be possible. That is the very starting point of existentialism."

Prabhupāda: But he does not know what, what is the meaning of God. We have several times repeated this. God is the Supreme, Supreme Being. So we have defined in so many ways. Another thing that God is the Supreme, Supreme means He is supreme father. The Supreme everything means He is supreme father also.

1973 Conversations and Morning Walks

There is no nothing to lament, but why don't you exist? Why you struggle for existence?

Morning Walk -- December 15, 1973, Los Angeles:

Karandhara: Well they have a philosophy called existentialism, that so long something exists, we can place value on it, but when it ceases to exist, there is no remorse. There is nothing to lament.

Prabhupāda: There is no nothing to lament, but why don't you exist? Why you struggle for existence?