Existential Philosphy

Nihilism originated somewhere around the mid-1800s, it was a shift from the social philosophy around that time which viewed life with purpose and meaning which was found usually though God, or some religious doctrine, however Nihilism is the philosophy that dictates the meaninglessness in life; it leaves an empty and void existence. Nihilism is usually associated with German philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche is often although not a Nihilist himself Nietzsche wrote a considerable amount concerning Nihilism and its implications as a philosophy. Nietzsche saw Nihilism as a growing problem, he believed that as the world grew conscious of Nihilism it would destroy all morality and meaning man has created, this is because he would realize the meaninglessness of it all. Nietzsche argued that Nihilism would destroy society, as it would eradicate any meaning or purpose man sees in the world and create a moral less society that is chaotic and brutal, that would lead to humanities end.

While Nihilism takes and voids all meaning from all objective reality it fails to address the subjective meaning that exists. Nihilism suggests that a void and meaningless reality would mean a standstill of chaos with no progression, or that’s at least what Nietzsche warned us about. However any observations of everyday life are great example that contradicts this. A religious person for one is someone who lives a life of meaning, now although that meaning may be depended on the individual or subjective thought, it still positioned the way an individual’s life is lived. The very idea of people living life everyday suggests that actions to choose to live must mean that people have at least some subjective meaning, whether they are religious, atheist or nihilist...

... middle of paper ...

...e enough to conceive of Sartre’s freedom and does absolutely nothing to help those who do need help to achieve “true” or freedom that is to live life in the way you choose.

I think that Marcuse makes very valid criticisms of existentialism; I do not think that they negate the existential philosophy but they rather they render it to a very limited usefulness. The strongest point I think Marcuse argues is against Sartre’s depiction of freedom, Sartre argues that we are all free, but how valid is this freedom when people are born into facticity that doesn’t even give them the basic rights of food and water. The fact that people are dying from social injustice such as, hunger, disease, and war does not excuse us who are more fortunate to not intervene as these people are not really free and more importantly existentialism does not help those facing these problems.