Kevin Graeme wrote: >>Let's not confuse humane with humanist. > > > "The evil that is in the world always comes of ignorance, and good > intentions may do as much harm as malevolence, if they lack > understanding. On the whole, men are more good than bad; that, > however, isn't the real point. But they are more or less ignorant, and > it is that we call vice or virtue; the most incorrigible vice being > that of an ignorance that fancies it knows everything and therefore > claims for itself the right to kill. The soul of the murderer is > blind; and there can be no true goodness nor true love without the > utmost clear-sightedness." > > Camus. The Plague >
This is going to be fun. That is the beauty of EX, almost every thinker/reader has a personal lens to view EX through. EX = Existentialism. Perhaps this is because the all the famous authors have had very personal experiences which have triggered their EX ways. I can't be sure. But my feeling belief is this. Sartre was a humanist. He boldly spit in the face of God, as he thought the world to be a God-less place. What he did believe in was living for the sake of living. We are all doomed to die but we shouldn't be caught up in death. Once we know we are going to to die we can really start to live. He believed in the power of man. I can't help but notice more then a slight coloring of arrogance in his texts. Camus also believed in the absurd. He also believed that we do things for the sake of itself, not for a higher meaning. But he was also very humane. Compassion would be a good substitute for humane in this case. His acts of compassion are easily seen in his life. Although he didn't believe in the institution of marriage he had a life partner who he was very committed too. He spoke against cruelty to others; even in the aid of the German soldiers that destroyed his homeland. And perhaps most importantly, he believed in a multi-cultural society when such ideas were un-common. His last text, The First Man, (which I haven't completely read) is about a multi-cultural society. Perhaps I wasn't too clear, but I was referring to the authors themselves based on their writing and their texts. There is no doubt that Camus' work is rather dark. It would be hard to believe that the world could be a very horrible place after living through World War 2. But I think its really in line with his non-fiction texts. The true hero is the one, when faced with insurmountable Herculean task, boldly defies fate and dutifully attempts his task. So the world is crappy. It is one's task to be compassionate towards man. This is what makes you a hero. To really get at the meat of EX, one must read Fear and Trembling. I cannot stress this enough. On one hand F&T is easier to read because the training wheels are still on. Soren can always fall back on the idea of God. This makes any worldview easier to construct because you have the first cause. On the other hand, F&T is more difficult to read because the text itself isn't very entertaining and more of an academic persuit. PS This is kind of interesting. This is a good week for me. I have casually talked about Niebuhr and Camus. I might have to whip out my Engles/Marx reader to prepare for the topic of conversations for next week. -- 2004 - The year $184M couldn't buy a pennant. Ron Artest: Extremely flawed, very accidental, semi-martyr ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Special thanks to the CF Community Suite Silver Sponsor - RUWebby http://www.ruwebby.com Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:139941 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
