PHIL304 Study Guide

Navigating this Study Guide

Study Guide Structure

In this study guide, the sections in each unit (1a., 1b., etc.) are the learning outcomes of that unit. 

Beneath each learning outcome are:

• questions for you to answer independently;
• a brief summary of the learning outcome topic; and
• and resources related to the learning outcome. 

At the end of each unit, there is also a list of suggested vocabulary words.

How to Use this Study Guide

1. Review the entire course by reading the learning outcome summaries and suggested resources.
2. Test your understanding of the course information by answering questions related to each unit learning outcome and defining and memorizing the vocabulary words at the end of each unit.

By clicking on the gear button on the top right of the screen, you can print the study guide. Then you can make notes, highlight, and underline as you work.

Through reviewing and completing the study guide, you should gain a deeper understanding of each learning outcome in the course and be better prepared for the final exam!

Unit 1: What is Existentialism?

1a. Define the term existentialism

• What does it mean to be concerned with existence?
• Why does the existentialist think reason cannot solve life's problems?
• What are the main problems existentialist is concerned about?

1b. Identify the key thinkers associated with the existentialist movement

• Name the main philosophers we associate with existentialism.
• What is the existentialist movement?
• What are the key concepts of existentialism?

Unit 1 Vocabulary

Be sure you understand these terms as you study for the final exam. Try to think of the reason why each term is included.

• divine
• existence
• existentialism
• meaning
• reason
• suffering

Unit 2: Søren Kierkegaard

2a. Identify key developments in Kierkegaard's philosophical thinking

• Why do many consider Kierkegaard the first modern existentialist?
• In what ways does Kierkegaard's biography form his philosophical thinking?

Many consider Søren Kierkegaard (1813–1855), the Danish philosopher, theologian, critic, and poet, the first modern existentialist. This is because he was one of the first to emphasize individual existence as a process of becoming and to discuss at length his understanding of key existential topics involving authenticity, responsibility, anxiety, and dread. Throughout his life, Kierkegaard endured much adversity and heartbreak, and he used these emotional experiences to support his belief that rationality cannot provide us with the means to comprehend suffering. Furthermore, as a religious existentialist, Kierkegaard invited readers to move from the aesthetic life to the religious life. To live an aesthetic life means living inauthentically, devoid of commitment to meaning, and being superficial. To Kierkegaard, living a religious life meant being authentically Christian even around others who were not.
 
To review, see Søren Kierkegaard, The Crisis of Religion, and Kierkegaard, Sartre, Heidegger, and Jaspers.
 

2b. Summarize Kierkegaard's version of religious existentialism in relation to Pascal's

• How did Kierkegaard's personal experiences with Christianity inform his religious existentialism?
• What are the key factors involved with the crisis within Christianity, according to Kierkegaard?
• How do Kierkegaard's and Pascal's visions differ regarding religious existential theory?

Kierkegaard had a rough childhood, which followed him into adulthood. It led him to make many personal choices based on the belief that he was spiritually cursed. It also made him think about his faith, spirituality, and the whole of Christendom. He believed that Christianity in Denmark had become fake, abstract, and shallow, so he tried to help people reaffirm their faith by focusing on the actual, subjective living experience of that faith.
 
Blaise Pascal (1623–1662), a French mathematician and philosopher, believed that people had the right to choose whether or not they rationally believed in a higher power, whereas Kierkegaard believed that reason was misguided because it is incapable of assisting us with understanding the absurd.
 
To review, see Pascal's Wager and The Sickness unto Death.
 

2c. Summarize Kierkegaard's analysis of faith

• What is the central problem in Kierkegaard's book Fear and Trembling?
• How does Kierkegaard justify Abraham's behavior?
• What, according to Kierkegaard, makes Abraham a knight of faith?
• What is the leap of faith?

In his book Fear and Trembling (1843), Kierkegaard wrote about the incomprehensibility of Abraham's willingness to sacrifice his son, Isaac. He believes that there is no objective characteristic in our lives that can determine whether Abraham (the Father of Faith) is a murderer or a servant of God. Abraham is a knight of faith rather than a knight of infinite resignation or a tragic hero since he obeyed God's commands and believed Isaac would return to him. The knight of infinite resignation would not have this hope. The tragic hero makes sacrifices in service of societal norms.
 
Abraham's sacrifice is not a complete abandonment of ethics but rather a teleological suspension of the ethical – sacrificing Isaac was his duty. Kirkegaard's concept of the leap of faith was a movement against reason itself, a movement that also placed Abraham outside of the ethical.
 
To review, see More on Søren Kierkegaard, Fear and Trembling, and The Knight of Faith.
 

2d. Define Kierkegaard's notion of despair

• What is the sickness unto death?
• What are the three forms of despair?
• How does Kierkegaard define the aesthetic, ethical, and religious?

Despair is the sickness unto death (the title of Kirkegaard's 1849 book) and is inherent to the human condition. Despair comes from an "imbalance" or problem within the self, and the only way to fix it is to have a relationship with God.
 
The three forms of despair are:

1. being unaware of being in despair;
2. being aware of being in despair but believing you cannot do anything about it; and
3. defiantly rejecting the concept itself.

People should work through the three types of despair to develop themselves as authentic individuals in a relationship with God.
 
Kierkegaard says that people must go through three stages of life to become their true selves. The first is the aesthetic stage, which is about simple pleasures and superficiality and can lead to despair. The ethical stage involves embarking on a journey of self-discovery and purpose-making. The final is the religious stage, which links back to the ethical stage but goes beyond it to embrace ethical decision-making and have a direct relationship with spirituality.
 
To review, see More on the Crisis of Religion.
 

Unit 2 Vocabulary

Be sure you understand these terms as you study for the final exam. Try to think of the reason why each term is included.

• aesthetic life
• aesthetic stage
• Blaise Pascal
• ethical stage
• faith
• Fear and Trembling
• knight of faith
• knight of infinite resignation
• leap of faith
• religious life
• religious stage
• sickness unto death
• Søren Kierkegaard
• teleological suspension of the ethical
• three forms of despair
• three stages of life
• tragic hero

Unit 3: Fyodor Dostoevsky

3a. Identify Fyodor Dostoevsky's place in the history of existentialism

• What is the historical context in which Dostoevsky's existentialist thinking emerges?
• How can one understand Dostoevsky's existentialist concerns in terms of Russia's social and political situation?

The Russian writer and philosopher Fyodor Dostoevsky (1821–1881) lived just before the Russian Revolution. The social conditions of that time had a big impact on his existential concerns. He worried about the social and political unrest that was causing social inequality, class wars, and the way religious faith was changing. It is against this social backdrop that he wrote his greatest literature.
 
To review, see Fyodor Dostoevsky, Dostoevsky's Life and Works, and Why You Should Read Crime and Punishment.
 

3b. Describe Dostoevsky's notions of freedom and revolution

• What is Dostoevsky's view of freedom?
• What is Dostoevsky's view of revolution?

Dostoevsky's novels demonstrate that his view of freedom was complicated and best observed through the characters he created. He examined atheism as a means of understanding freedom, as people must take responsibility for their creation, meaning, and actions because they cannot rely upon a religious institution to provide it for them.
 
Freedom provides the context for revolution (the forcible overthrow of existing norms or regimes) in socio-economic and political terms. He was concerned with the existential conditions and components of violent change (nihilism, terrorism, and destruction) and the implacability of the ideas that foment revolutions, the ideas that change revolve around.
 
To review, see The Possessed (The Devils) and Lessons from The Brothers Karamazov.
 

3c. Summarize the idea of Dostoevsky's Underground Man

• What are the main existential themes that can be drawn from the Underground Man?
• What is the alienation the Underground Man experiences?

Dostoevsky's Notes from the Underground compiles the fragmented memoirs or "notes" of a 40-year-old Underground Man. He appears spiteful, pitiful, and isolated from humanity. He despises himself and everyone else and complains about how miserable the world is.
 
The Underground Man represented what Dostoevsky thought humanity was producing rather than what he thought humanity should become. The "notes" show his ongoing struggle to connect with the world and himself: to defy, define, and be a part of something bigger than oneself. The reader is exposed to the narrator's various moods throughout the Notes, including his anxiety and despair.
 
To review, see The Underground Man.
 

3d. Analyze Dostoevsky's perspective on morality

• What is the problem of evil?
• How is freedom one possible response to the problem of evil?
• How is the notion of the best of all possible worlds one response to the problem of evil?

Dostoevsky tries to figure out what good and evil are by looking at human behavior and the different existential crises people face. He demonstrates that people can be good and evil and that reducing human complexity to simple dichotomies is inaccurate. Through his different characters, Dostoevsky shows that morality is more of an existential problem than a religious or social one.
 
The notion that humans cannot defeat evil presents a problem for morality. However, Dostoevsky does not want us to sink into despair, nihilism, or suicide; rather, he wants the opposite. He believes that suffering leads to redemption and gives our lives meaning.
 
To review, see Fyodor Dostoevsky on the Problem of Evil and Crime and Punishment.
 

3e. Explain Dostoevsky's critique of reason and notion of truth

• How is Dostoevsky's critique of reason central to his existential concerns?
• How are reason and truth related?
• How does absurdity undermine traditional conceptions of truth?

Reason is either limited or unlimited in scope. If it is limited, the unknown lies on the other side of the human boundary. If it is unlimited, we can progress to the point of divine-like perfection. In Crime and Punishment, Dostoevsky expresses his skepticism about the capabilities of human reason. Dostoevsky believed that overestimating our rational capacity would lead to disappointment, in contrast to the Enlightenment's faith in the power of reason to reveal fundamental truths about the universe and everything in it.
 
Truth typically refers to how we evaluate claims: Today is Wednesday, 2 + 5 = 7, I like coconut ice cream, God exists, and You acted ethically. We often consider truth objective. We make claims about good and evil, freedom and determinism, guilt and salvation as if they are all knowable and completely consistent with our other worldviews.
 
To review, see The Brothers Karamazov and The Grand Inquisitor.
 

3f. Summarize the main themes in Dostoevsky's "The Grand Inquisitor"

• What role does story play in Dostoevsky's notion of truth?
• What is Jesus accused of?
• What is the main argument against Jesus, as presented by the Grand Inquisitor?
• Why does Ivan, who is telling us the story of The Grand Inquisitor, reject God's absolute power?

Dostoevsky's novel The Brothers Karamazov is a Matryoshka nesting doll of stories. Within the story, two brothers, Ivan and Alyosha, engage in a conversation. Ivan tells Alyosha a story set during the Spanish Inquisition about a conversation between the Grand Inquisitor and Jesus, who has returned to earth. The Grand Inquisitor also tells Jesus a story. In all of these stories, Dostoevsky shows how fiction is paradoxical: it tells the truth, but it is not true because the events in it never happened.
 
The Grand Inquisitor accuses Jesus of having misunderstood human nature. He argues that freedom, which God granted humans, is a terrible intolerable burden for man. Humans only want food security: they happily trade freedom for bread and safety. "In the end, they will lay their freedom at our feet, and say to us, 'Make us your slaves, but feed us'" (p. 6). The Grand Inquisitor maintains that the Church has rectified God's error, "at last they have vanquished freedom and have done so to make men happy". With his return, Jesus threatens all of the Church's good work and, most importantly, human happiness.
 
To review, see The Grand Inquisitor.
 

Unit 3 Vocabulary

Be sure you understand these terms as you study for the final exam. Try to think of the reason why each term is included.

• atheism
• evil
• freedom
• Fyodor Dostoevsky
• good
• Matryoshka nesting doll
• reason
• revolution
• The Grand Inquisitor
• truth
• Underground Man

Unit 4: Friedrich Nietzsche

4a. Analyze the main existentialist themes in Nietzsche's philosophy

• What are the main existential themes in Nietzsche's philosophy?
• How does Nietzsche criticize the history of philosophy?

Friedrich Nietzsche (1844–1900) was an unapologetic critic of culture, society, religion, and philosophical dogma, which made him stand out from other philosophers throughout history. Nietzsche criticized the tendency of Western philosophy to be universalistic and rational. He explored existential themes involving truth, authenticity, subjectivity, and freedom.
 
​​According to Nietzsche, there is no such thing as universal truth – in his pursuit of truth, he values suspicion and skepticism over rationalism. His focus is on subjective individuality and the dangers of being absorbed into the herd and losing "freedom", and rejecting all of the usual crutches people lean on to escape responsibility. Personal experience and acting on one's own convictions lead to truth. Individuals must be strong enough to create meaning for themselves, unlike the common herd whose sense of purpose and meaning lies entirely in conformity to rules; the great people are those who "re-evaluate all values".
 
To review, see Friedrich Nietzsche and Nietzsche's Life and Works.
 

4b. Explain Nietzsche's critique of metaphysics

• What is Nietzsche's view about human reason?
• What is Nietzsche's criticism of metaphysics?
• How does Nietzsche's view of rationality relate to religious belief?

Nietzsche believed his philosophical predecessors were wrong to place so much faith in human reason. Their trust involved an implicit and explicit belief that knowledge is universal, or the same, at all times and places, for everyone. He believed that studying metaphysics, a branch of philosophy concerned with the nature of reality that grapples with abstract concepts, such as substance, God, and mind, did not focus enough on understanding our fundamental life struggles and the human drive to endure. In other words, traditional metaphysics lacked existential concerns.
 
Nietzsche was also concerned that the history of metaphysics describes a history of rationalizing theological, particularly Christian, dogma. He argued that using philosophical principles to justify and support religious belief was illogical.
 
To review, see Nietzsche and the Crisis in Philosophy and The Life of Friedrich Nietzsche.
 

4c. Summarize Nietzsche's idea of power

• How does Nietzsche use his story about the camel, the lion, and the child as an allegory to show how individuals can propel themselves beyond nihilism to a flourishing life that can realize the will to power?
• What does Nietzsche mean by a will to power?
• What does Nietzsche mean by the noble soul?

Nietzsche believes that human nature has a will to live, a constant striving to advance, a motion that both creates and destroys. He argues that the death of God results in nihilism, but there are three metamorphoses in his book Thus Spoke Zarathustra that demonstrates this will to live and flourish. Human beings can transform themselves from a camel (an obedient soul that carries and comes to resent its burdens) to a lion (a free spirit who is free from the past, tradition, and authority), to a child (who wills its own will, knows the joy of life, and enjoys the innocence of perpetual creation). This spiritual transformation characterizes Nietzsche's vision of a flourishing life.
 
Nietzsche's will to power refers to the human desire to assert domination or mastery over others, oneself, or the environment. The will to power Nietzsche describes can be beneficial or hurtful and describes a certain ambition, endeavor to achieve, or striving for excellence. For example, a philosopher or scientist directs their will to power to find the truth, an artist channels a will to create, and a businessman works to become rich.
 
In The Gay Science (1882), Nietzsche wrote that a noble soul has reverence for itself. He writes:

To review, see Self-Surpassing and The Will to Power.
 

4d. Describe Nietzsche's theory of morality

• What role do Apollo and Dionysus play in Nietzsche's thinking about morality?
• What is master and slave morality?
• What is the Übermensch (the Overman)?

According to Nietzsche, Apollo and Dionysus represent conflicting creative powers and principles of creation: the continuous dialectic, or logical discussion, of creation versus destruction. Apollonian creation is rational, while Dionysian creation (Bacchanalian creation) revels in the sensuous feeling which destroys rationality. They represent two oppositional powers, two kinds of contrasting art, that conflict in human life. Insofar as Greek tragedy envisions this conflict, affirming life in the face of individual destruction, Nietzsche sees a way for us to live: life becomes art. Hence, we "have our greatest dignity in our meaning as works of art".
 
The history of this process is the Overman (Übermensch) who creates values and lives life as a work of art: creation in the face of destruction. When he creates values, the Overman expresses himself. This individual contrasts with the person who accepts traditional ideas about reality and the good life, such as the Christian. This individual has goodness and values all wrong.
 
What is good, what is valuable, is not self-sacrifice for the greater good or doing one's duty for the sake of a moral principle. Rather, "good" is "the noble, the powerful, the superior, and the high-minded". In short, what is good, what is rightfully valued, is the morality of the "master". This is the individual who affirms life; the "slave" who exhibits traditional values denies it.
 
To review, see On Truth and Lies in a Nonmoral Sense, Nietzsche's Übermensch, and On the Genealogy of Morals.
 

4e. Explain Nietzsche's theory of eternal recurrence

• How does Nietzsche characterize the possibility of eternal recurrence or an endless life loop?

Imagine reliving every moment of your life for eternity. Nietzche, in this thought experiment or contemplation, encourages us to consider eternal recurrence, or "the greatest weight", because it forces us to confront how we live our lives in every moment. Nietzsche encouraged his readers to find inspiration to affirm life rather than wallow in timidity and regret. This concept of eternal return is of considerable existential import.
 
To review, see The Gay Science, God Is Dead and We Have Killed Him, Søren Kierkegaard and Friedrich Nietzsche, and The Gay Science.
 

Unit 4 Vocabulary

Be sure you understand these terms as you study for the final exam. Try to think of the reason why each term is included.

• Apollonian creation
• Dionysian creation
• dogma
• eternal recurrence
• Friedrich Nietzsche
• metaphysics
• noble soul
• Overman (Übermensch)
• Thus Spoke Zarathustra
• will to power

Unit 5: W.E.B. Du Bois

5a. Explain the main existential themes in Du Bois' philosophy

• Why might we consider W.E.B Du Bois an existentialist?
• What are the existential themes in Du Bois' philosophy?

William Edward Burghardt Du Bois (1868–1963) was an American author, professor, and activist. While many do not think of him as an existential philosopher, he wrote during a time when people of color were struggling throughout the world to achieve liberation. W.E.B. Du Bois explored themes related to freedom, existence, alienation, and hardship attributable to living in America as a person of color. Philosophers of the Black experience engaged in philosophical reflection about the lived experience of racism and its intersections with other oppressions, including sexism and classism, which also present existential themes.
 
To review, see W.E.B. Du Bois and James Baldwin.
 

5b. Analyze Du Bois' theory of double consciousness

• What is Du Bois' theory of double consciousness?
• How does Du Bois' theory of double consciousness represent existential themes?

In his autoethnographic novel, The Souls of Black Folk (1903), Du Bois said, "It is a particular sensation, this double-consciousness, this sense of always looking at one's self through the eyes of others, of measuring one's soul by the tape of a world that looks on in amused contempt and pity".
 
Du Bois exposed the problem of Black suffering in American society as the concept of double consciousness – a philosophical, principally-existential issue. Du Bois wanted people to recognize that people of color are victims of structural oppression following enslavement, apartheid, and colonialism, which generates feelings of alienation, despair, dread, and anxiety, among other issues.
 
To review, see The Souls of Black Folk.
 

5c. Explain Du Bois' social construction of race

• How is race a social construction?
• What changes does Du Bois wish to make related to how race is philosophically defined?

Du Bois took direct issue with the notion that human nature is biologically fixed and defined according to the biological sciences. He wanted to show that racial categories are not based on biology but are created by society to divide people for socio-political and economic reasons – that is, that race is a social construction. The biological construction of race and the meaning assigned to each racial category can devalue one's humanity, create alienation, and promote one's double consciousness, all of which lead to despair.
 
To review, see The Conservation of Races.
 

5d. Identify Du Bois' notion of freedom

• How does Du Bois' notion of freedom affect aspects of social and individual freedom?
• What's one of the best ways individuals might attain freedom, according to Du Bois?
• What role might one's double consciousness play in attaining freedom?

Du Bois' believed one of the finest ways people could liberate themselves from misery, humiliation, and self-loathing was to express themselves through art and writing. Du Bois exercised his freedom when he wrote The Souls of Black Folk, where he revised history by providing a much-needed cultural critique. He hoped his writing would broaden society's empathy for and understanding of, Black American suffering.
 
Another way to free one's soul and achieve wholeness in an alienating environment is to embrace one's double consciousness. People should not abandon their double self through assimilation (giving up on part of the self) or separatism (giving up on the rest of society), but they should merge these activities into a "better and truer self" – one that does not deny history but builds upon it.
 
To review, see More on The Souls of Black Folk.
 

5e. Summarize Du Bois' views about nihilism and pessimism

• How do Du Bois' perspectives about nihilism relate to other existential thinkers?
• How might one avoid falling into nihilism and pessimism, according to Du Bois?

Du Bois spends considerable time discussing what it feels like to be "a problem" as a person of color within the social fabric of the United States. These feelings can lead one to fall into nihilism and pessimism, whereby one assumes life is meaningless and, therefore, not worth living.
 
Like other existentialists who came before him, Du Bois understood that nihilism and pessimism were a natural part of human existence. Like his contemporaries, he believed aesthetic art produces value and meaning for people. In the same way, we can mediate feelings of nihilism and pessimism with respect to life, perhaps we can also completely overcome them through aesthetic appreciation.
 
To review, see W.E.B. Du Bois' Life and Works and African-American Writers and Dostoevsky.
 

Unit 5 Vocabulary

Be sure you understand these terms as you study for the final exam. Try to think of the reason why each term is included.

• alienation
• double consciousness
• nihilism
• pessimism
• separatism
• social construction of race
• The Souls of Black Folk
• William Edward Burghardt Du Bois

Unit 6: Martin Heidegger

6a. Describe how Martin Heidegger's early years influenced his philosophical thinking

• What is phenomenology?
• How did the phenomenological method influence Heidegger's work?
• What makes phenomenological investigation hermeneutical?
• What is the ontological "question of being"?

The German thinker Martin Heidegger (1889–1976) turned his attention to philosophy after initially studying for the priesthood. Heidegger studied phenomenology, the philosophical study of how objects and ideas manifest in consciousness. The phenomenological method involves asking questions related to a first-person perspective. Heidegger applied the phenomenological approach to questions of being.
 
Like other philosophers we call existentialists, Heidegger focused on human existence, anxiety, death, and authenticity – themes his predecessors (Kierkegaard, Dostoevsky, and Nietzsche) and contemporaries (Sartre and Camus) shared.
 
Heidegger believed that phenomenological studies of being were always hermeneutical. This means that these philosophers used the same theories and methods to study and interpret texts, starting with the Bible, to study what something means. Heidegger believed that all phenomenological investigations about being are interpretive. The intentional nature of consciousness focuses interpretation on one aspect of being, as it closes off other aspects.
 
To review, see Martin Heidegger.
 

6b. Explain what Heidegger means by the ontological "question of being"

• What is the question of being?
• What does Heidegger call an Inquiry into Being?

Heidegger notes that only humans ask the question, "why is there something rather than nothing?" This describes Dasein, the German word for "being there" or disposition. Heidegger said, "we are the beings for whom Being is an issue". In our daily lives, we take existence for granted; it is the natural backdrop for everything that happens. Heidegger wants to bring this background to the fore and engage in the inquiry known as ontology (what it means to exist).
 
When we say something exists (let's say a dog or table), we typically mean an object exists that corresponds to the words "dog" and "table". We may say other things about these items, such as the dog is friendly or the table has four legs. However, when we say they exist, we are not adding anything that is not already there. We take existence for granted and go about our business. Heidegger wants us to focus on what it means for the dog and table to be or exist.
 
Being can be difficult to discern:

1. Tradition may cover it up or obfuscate it,
2. It may be difficult to focus on, such as when it is too close to see properly, or
3. It may be in "disguise", such as when it is too distressing to confront directly.

Heidegger says Western philosophy falls victim to one or all of these types of concealment. Previous interpretations, such as Plato's theory of a soul imprisoned in a body, or René Descartes' proclamation "I think, therefore I am" (the cogito), are inadequate. The question of being is a phenomenological question that requires interpretation.
 
To review, see More on Heidegger and Martin Heidegger's Life and Works.
 

6c. Summarize Heidegger's critique of Descartes

• What are René Descartes' beliefs about existence?
• How does Heidegger critique Descartes' dualism?

René Descartes believed that God endowed humans with certain innate knowledge from birth, including logic, mathematics, geometry, morality, and God himself, who must exist because we can conceive of his perfect existence. The concept of the self and our ability to think is also innate, a belief that led Descartes to make his famous statement, "I think therefore I am" (the cogito, ergo sum).
 
Descartes' concept of existence was two-fold: There are two types of finite substances: the mind and the body. The mind is fundamental; I can exist as a "thinking thing" without my body, but I cannot deny my existence without existing, so I am able to make that denial. More specifically, denial is an expression of my self-consciousness. So, to deny my existence as a thinking thing is self-contradictory.
 
In Being and Time, Heidegger sets out to "destroy" the tradition that Descartes exemplified in Western philosophy by prioritizing the theoretical knowledge of being. Heidegger criticized Descartes' approach as being too subjective: the process of arriving at the certainty of myself (as a thinking entity) involves a first-person examination. Heidegger believed Descartes does not get at Being, which always depends on context.
 
To review, see Being and Time, The Lead-Up, and Two Introductions and Heidegger and Descartes.
 

6d. Identify the different existential categories Heidegger proposes in Being and Time

• What is Dasein?
• Is Dasein related to Descartes' "I think, therefore I am?"
• What is the difference between Being and beings?

Translated from German to mean "being there", Dasein is the characteristic way of being for human beings. More specifically, "Dasein is that being for whom Being is an issue". We are aware of our lives; we care about how things are going and will go. Consequently, Dasein's Being is already "disclosed to it". Dasein understands (or is always open to) its own Being.
 
Do not confuse Dasein with Descartes' proclamation, "I think therefore I am", separated off from the world. Instead, Dasein, Being-in-the-world, is a Being with others. Being with is an existential category, one of Dasein's characteristics. So, because Dasein is Being-in-the-world, which involves a complex set of relations and activities, we cannot separate it from the "mind" or "I".
 
Investigating Dasein brings us closer to addressing the larger question of the meaning of Being. Dasein's Being is already "out in the open". Dasein understands its existence, albeit not comprehensively. That is because this understanding is based on its everydayness, which conceals as much as it discloses. An analysis of Dasein's basic structures provides the foundation for any ontology and for Being. This analysis is existential because it analyzes Dasein's essence, which is existence.
 
The existential analysis of Dasein is a pursuit of the fundamental categories of Being. The categories of existence are existential (that is, existential concepts). To begin, Dasein is essentially in the world. Dasein is not understood independently from its world; the world is where Dasein is ("being there"). Being in the world, the fundamental category of existence, has been concealed, or covered over, by philosophical tradition, which treats Being as a category distinct from what it is to be human. Being in the world is prior to, or more basic than, for example, claims about knowing what I am, fundamentally, as, for example, Descartes would have it.
 
To review, see Heidegger on Authenticity and Inauthenticity and "Sense" in Being and Time.
 

6e. Describe key concepts in Heidegger's philosophy of existence

• How does Heidegger define the concepts of mood, disposedness, care, thrownness, projection, fallenness, facticity, authenticity, and Being-toward-death?

Dasein is never without mood – we might say we never just are, but we are always a certain way. Disposedness describes Dasein's receptivity to having things matter, to care. As Roderick Munday points out, "Dasein's Being is always looking out toward the world and is therefore essentially manifested in care". Dasein is "thrown" into the world: we can say we did not choose to be born, but here we are.

In short, Dasein is determined by its thrownness. In this or that situation, however, Dasein finds possibilities for acting; these possibilities provide the fore-structures of projection or freedom.
 
Insofar as Dasein projects itself, it is always Being-ahead-of-itself. So, while Dasein's thrownness is part of its facticity (the facts about it), it is also dynamic. A possibility not actualized is just as much of Dasein's structural component as the one that is.
 
Both thrownness and projection are two of the three dimensions of care. The third is fallenness. "Dasein has, in the first instance, fallen away from itself as an authentic potentiality for Being its Self, and has fallen into the world", which is manifested in a lack of critically-examined discourse (idle talk), superficial or novel stimulation (curiosity), and insensitivity to the distinction between understanding and mere chatter (ambiguity). In this way, Dasein is inauthentic. Authentic Dasein is my own, or mine. It is a "my-self", rather than a "they-self". The latter is constitutive of Dasein's existence, so authenticity becomes a way of relating to others without being lost to them.
 
"[A]lthough Dasein cannot experience its own death as actual, it can relate toward its own death as a possibility that is always before it", its Being toward death. It is a possibility that can never be actualized (again, there is no way to experience one's own death), so death is always only a possibility.
 
To review, see Heidegger's Notion of Care.
 

6f. Compare Heidegger with his predecessors, particularly Friedrich Nietzsche and Søren Kierkegaard

• Describe a thematic comparison between Heidegger and Nietzsche.
• Describe a thematic comparison between Heidegger and Kierkegaard.

Heidegger's early work reflects a positive view of Nietzsche's concept of the will. However, his later work takes a significant turn. Heidegger shows in Being and Time that Dasein's will is an important part of its temporal experience, especially when he talks about Dasein's realization of its own death. Later, however, Heidegger believes Nietzsche's concepts of the will to power, truth, and the eternal recurrence of the same are co-extensive, or reflect elements of traditional Western metaphysics, which Heidegger rejects.
 
For example, if you decide to become a spouse, you may accept certain traditional aspects of the role you are thrown into (the particular role different societies dictate for you), or you can create your own social persona or change your role altogether if you wish. But it is still just a role. "It is never really you." What is essential about you is that "you can take a stand on your own being".
 
Kierkegaard believed that the person you are is based on any unconditional commitment you have, such as your love or commitment for another, be it another person, a group of people, or God. The temporal is easy – you are living in time, and you can reinterpret its meaning throughout your life – but the moment you profess an unconditional commitment, you create your own identity for life. The unconditional commitment you choose provides existential meaning and is eternal.
 
For Kierkegaard, one's unwavering devotion to God gives you a sense of who you are and is the highest stage of the self, which is linked to religion. The ethical self is the second highest, while the aesthetic self is the lowest. In some respects, Kierkegaard's aesthete is similar to Heidegger's condition of fallenness.
 
To review, see Anti-Modernism and Discourses of Melancholy.
 

Unit 6 Vocabulary

Be sure you understand these terms as you study for the final exam. Try to think of the reason why each term is included.

• authentic Dasein
• Being
• Being-in-the-world
• Being and Time
• Being toward death
• care
• co-extensive
• Dasein
• disposedness
• facticity
• fallenness
• Martin Heidegger
• mood
• ontology
• phenomenology
• projection
• thrownness
• unconditional commitment

Unit 7: Jean-Paul Sartre

7a. Identify Sartre's contributions to existentialism

• What did Sartre do for existentialism that previous philosophers had not?
• Name some important contributions Sartre made to existentialism.

Jean-Paul Sartre (1905–1980) did more to popularize the existential movement than any previous philosopher. Sartre's particular brand of existentialism, his popular 1956 lecture "Existentialism is a Humanism", and the horrors of World War II each brought existentialism into the mainstream.
 
Sartre was concerned with human freedom, choice, responsibility, and authenticity. We see in Being and Nothingness (1956) that these concepts are derived from his thinking about consciousness and his commitment to atheism. His most famous phrases, "existence precedes essence" and "man is condemned to be free", reflect the significant influences of George Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel (1770–1831), Nietzsche, Heidegger, and Karl Marx (1818–1883) and reveal the direction of 20th-century existentialist themes.
 
To review, see Jean-Paul Sartre and Sartre's Life and Works.
 

7b. Summarize Sartre's analysis of consciousness as a nothing

• Define ontology.
• What is Sartre's notion of being in itself?
• What is Sartre's notion of being for itself?

Ontology is the philosophical discipline that studies being or existence. There are two kinds of being: the in itself (en soi) and the for itself (pour soi). Things that are in themselves just are: they exist. However, we can use our intentionality of consciousness and directedness to interpret or negate the for-itself from the world.
 
Consciousness is not a thing in itself. In other words, consciousness has no essence, but it is our relationship, interpretation, or perception of the in-itself. To the extent that "categorization requires saying where the class ends: where the lack of that class lies", our consciousness can negate itself. And this is a part of the job of the for-itself, as the "source of all negation" (McClamrock).
 
Again, consciousness has no essence: it is part of the objects to which it is directed. In this sense, the in-itself occurs prior to consciousness. The essence of things, and our awareness of things, are really one and the same (because we apply our interpretation to what we perceive in the world as conscious human beings).
 
This leaves self-consciousness, the ego, or the I. There is awareness, and then there is reflected awareness; in a sense, we are aware of our awareness in a special way. For example, when we read a novel, we are aware that we are reading a novel. Our awareness is, ontologically speaking, transcendental; we are not in the world in the same way that being in itself or being for itself are.
 
To review, see Bad Faith and Cultural Values.
 

7c. Summarize Sartre's version of atheistic existentialism

• What is atheistic existentialism?
• How is Sartre's declaration "existence precedes essence" relevant to his atheism?
• How is the radical freedom to choose – a creative act, according to Sartre – relevant to atheism?

Sartre's declaration that existence precedes essence means that essence is a creative act; "there is no given human nature".
 
As Rob Harle, a lecturer from the University of Cambridge, explains, Sartre believed that if God were "a supernal artisan" and created human beings in His image, the essence of the person would be predetermined, and humans would not be free to make their own choices or define their own essence. Human beings would lack the ability to choose the essential what-it-is-to-be-me.
 
To review, see Existentialism Is a Humanism.
 

7d. Discuss Sartre's idea of freedom

• How does Sartre's view of freedom address natural determinism?
• How does Sartre's ontology relate to his idea of freedom?

Sartre acknowledges our facticity, that is, facts about ourselves, over which we have no control. For example, we have no control over when or where we are born. These facts are not relevant to our freedom. Some features of our lives are determined, but they do not make us free or unfree.
 
For Sartre, freedom correlates, from a practical standpoint, with our choices. Each choice we make is ours. No one else can choose for me, and our choices are not illusory: we do not erroneously believe we are making a choice when, in fact, we are not. Instead, these choices are real.
 
To review, see Freedom and the Structure of Experience and Being and Nothingness.
 

7e. Analyze Sartre's notion of authenticity

• Describe the relationship between Sartre's notion of authenticity and freedom.
• Describe the relationship between Sartre's notion of authenticity and bad faith.

According to Sartre, human freedom is unavoidable. Every choice I make is not only mine; it is also characteristic of who I am. Because every choice is mine, and mine alone, I am entirely responsible for what I choose and what I become. To recognize this responsibility is to be authentic. When, instead, I try to project blame and proclaim that my actions are dominated by my situation, I act in bad faith.
 
Bad faith is self-deception. When I do not take responsibility for my choices and actions but foist the responsibility off onto someone or something else, I act as if I am a thing, not a conscious human being, which is determined by forces outside my control.
 
To review, see Sartre and Authenticity.
 

Unit 7 Vocabulary

Be sure you understand these terms as you study for the final exam. Try to think of the reason why each term is included.

• bad faith
• Being and Nothingness
• choices
• consciousness is not a thing
• existence precedes essence
• for itself (pour soi)
• in itself (en soi)
• Jean-Paul Sartre
• man is condemned to be free

Unit 8: Simone de Beauvoir

8a. Identify Simone de Beauvoir's place in the history of existentialism

• What is de Beauvoir's place in the history of existentialism?
• What was de Beauvoir's relationship with Sartre?

Simone de Beauvoir (1908–1986) said she was "the midwife of Sartre's existential ethics" and claimed she was an author, not a philosopher. However, the strength of her original ideas secures her place in the history of existentialism. While she and Sartre worked closely together and deeply influenced each other's thoughts, de Beauvoir's work stands on its own merits. Of particular note is her influential feminist work, The Second Sex (1949).
 
Scholars debate how Beauvoir and Sartre influenced one another and struggled to disentangle each philosopher's contributions, which followed 50 years of "discussions and critiques of each other's work". Their letters and de Beauvoir's diaries do not settle the matter. However, readers study de Beauvoir's literary and philosophical output to decide which philosophical ideas are her own.
 
De Beauvoir was active in France's mid-century intellectual circles. She was not only a philosopher but also a memoirist, novelist, playwright, travel writer, and reporter. The number of books she has written shows how deeply she cares about being in the world.
 
To review, see Simone de Beauvoir and Existentialism and The Meaning of Life.
 

8b. Summarize de Beauvoir's existentialist ethics

• What is the ethics of ambiguity?
• How did previous existentialists inform her philosophy?

Ambiguity includes the ideas of duality and uncertainty, and many people think that duality causes uncertainty. A human being's lived experience is one of ambiguity. For example, at the most basic level, we are aware of our own death as we live. When we think about life and death, we learn more about how the ambiguity of being human affects our moral choices. The ethics of ambiguity do not try to mask the problem or offer a false solution like an immortal soul. Instead, it looks at the problem head-on.
 
Because people make mistakes, ethics is possible because it gives us something to strive for. In other words, our fallibility should not prompt us to give up on improvement. Rather, our fallibility gives us reason to think about what improvement should look like.
 
To review, see From Absurdity to Authenticity.
 

8c. Define de Beauvoir's notions of woman and the feminine

• What is one of the fundamental critiques of patriarchal societies in The Second Sex?
• How does gender essentialism relate to the racial essentialism that Du Bois discusses?

De Beauvoir says that patriarchal societies have made it so that women have to meet impossible standards that often clash. These measures permeate all aspects of European literary, social, political, economic, and religious traditions. Understanding ourselves as embodied beings, "woman" becomes the other in this context. Woman is not man's equal, but his inferior. According to de Beauvoir, difference does not entail inequality.
 
To review, see The Second Sex.
 

8d. Analyze de Beauvoir's applied existentialism

• What is one relation between de Beauvoir's existential concerns and her feminism?
• How does de Beauvoir generate urgency related to phenomenology?

The phrase applied existentialism is redundant. Broadly construed as a philosophy of existence, existentialism is always concerned with being in the world or being human. We can think about the phrase in terms of de Beauvoir's existentialism, as honing in on the ways that our being (not ontologically distinct substances, such as a Cartesian mind and body) runs up against the restrictions of our situation. This is not to say de Beauvoir rejects the radical freedom Sartre presents in his work. Still, she incorporates phenomenology or the lived experience of being in the world as a person who cannot ignore their situation.
 
The concept of applied existentialism is particularly evident in de Beauvoir's argument against an abstract concept of "woman" in her book The Second Sex. There is no "woman," only individuals living under the yoke of oppression. Another way to explain this is to think of de Beauvoir's monumental contribution to feminism and applying existentialism to the problem of patriarchy.
 
To review, see Simone de Beauvoir and Franz Fanon.
 

Unit 8 Vocabulary

Be sure you understand these terms as you study for the final exam. Try to think of the reason why each term is included.

• Ambiguity
• applied existentialism
• fallibility
• feminism
• mask
• patriarchy
• Simone de Beauvoir
• the other
• The Second Sex

Unit 9: Albert Camus

9a. Identify the role of Albert Camus in the history of existentialism

• In what ways is Camus an existentialist?
• How does Camus pursue existentialist themes?
• What is the absurd, according to Camus?
• What is the correct response to the absurd?

Camus, like Kierkegaard, Nietzsche, Sartre, and de Beauvoir, was not an academic philosopher. He was a journalist, a playwright, and a political activist, among other things. He refused to be called a philosopher. While his essays were philosophical – the essay is the bread-and-butter work in a philosopher's career – many of his other works and concerns were also deeply philosophical. He did not "do" philosophy as it was practiced traditionally. In other words, he did not present a complete system of philosophy in the vein of, for example, Plato or Immanuel Kant.
 
Camus rejected the labels of philosopher and existentialist, preferring to think in terms of the absurd. In the realm of logic, absurdity is a contradiction. The claim "life has and does not have meaning" includes two contradictory phrases that cannot be true or false simultaneously. For example, we cannot logically say that "all dogs are animals" and "some dogs are not animals".
 
But the logical contradiction is not what Camus believed the absurdity to be. The absurd is just that feeling you get when you try to find meaning in a "silent" universe. Camus, like other existential philosophers, rejected traditional philosophy as a rational system-building project. He believed that reason and the systems it generates do not capture the human condition.
 
Even if it is not a logical contradiction, the absurd is a type of contradiction. Camus described an incompatibility between the human desire to seek meaning and the inability to find it because it simply does not exist. We have the burden of deciding how to live despite this absurdity. Camus looked to the Sisyphus myth to explain what we should do in the face of this conundrum.
 
To review, see Why Camus Is Not an Existentialist and Albert Camus.
 

9b. Analyze Camus' The Myth of Sisyphus

• According to Camus, what is life's central question?
• Who is Sisyphus?
• How is Sisyphus the hero of the absurd?

Camus said that the most important question in life was also the most important question in philosophy: "Deciding whether or not life is worth living amounts to answering the most important question in philosophy". Camus believed the human condition is a philosopher's proper concern. While Heidegger believed that the existential starting point is an examination of "that being for whom being is an issue", Camus believes that the issue of being is central to life and death. In other words, the most important philosophical question is "whether or not life is worth living".
 
Unfortunately, we do not dwell on this issue. Instead, "We get into the habit of living before acquiring the habit of thinking". In other words, we get on with the business of living rather than contemplating what life is.
 
Camus pointed to the Greek myth of Sisyphus to concentrate our attention on what life means and how we should respond. Zeus punished Sisyphus, who was called "the useless worker of the underworld", by making him roll a huge boulder up a hill for all time. As soon as Sisyphus reached the top, the boulder rolled back down, and the process repeats indefinitely. The exercise has no achievable purpose, and his effort is futile. Camus believed this allegory represents life, which has no purpose and is futile. In short, life is meaningless.
 
Camus believes suicide is not an appropriate response to the meaninglessness of life. Although we know there is no meaning, that does not mean we should stop trying or give in to the absurd. Rather, the proper response is to learn how to live with it. When we learn to live with the absurd, we conduct an open revolt against meaninglessness and are rendered free of the preconceptions and artificial meanings life imposes on us. We begin to live fully and passionately in the present.
 
For this reason, Sisyphus, according to Camus, is the hero of the absurd. According to Camus, Sisyphus descended from the top of the hill to begin again. He was aware of his situation and knew that his job was pointless and would never end. Nonetheless, Camus proposed, he is content. He embraced his reality and, in so doing, defeated his own punishment.
 
To review, see The Myth of Sisyphus and More on the Myth of Sisyphus.
 

9c. Summarize Camus' departure from Kierkegaard and Dostoevsky

• In what ways is Camus' critique of rationality similar to his predecessors?
• What is the relation between Camus' critique of rationality and metaphysical commitments, such as the existence of God?

Perhaps what differentiated Camus from his predecessors was his rejection of the designation "philosopher", which he associated with systematic reasoning. Systematic reasoning, in turn, is associated with rationality. Since existentialists are generally skeptical of the power of reasoning, they are critical of the faith previous philosophers have placed in it. While it is true that Camus "did" philosophy, he did not engage in system-building or rigorous argumentation.
 
Camus thought that rationality was too simple, just like most of his existentialist predecessors, such as Kierkegaard and Nietzsche. It simply cannot capture the human experience in all its variety. Certainly, the human experience cannot be thoroughly systematized or rationalized, as many thinkers propose. The human condition simply resists this type of reduction.
 
Having said this, existentialists did not share the same views of rationality. For example, Pascal disagreed with Descartes' idea that we are born knowing things like logic, math, geometry, morality, and God. Other so-called rationalists agreed with Descartes. The concept of ourselves and our very being (his famous comment, "I think therefore I am") is also innate. Pascal believed we gained knowledge through our senses and observation, the empirical method.
 
Kierkegaard rejected rationality because he believed in the subjectivity of religious faith. Camus, on the other hand, didn't do this for the same reason. Like Nietzsche, Sartre, and de Beauvoir, Camus was an atheist. Camus viewed the world as fundamentally meaningless and so devoid of divinity.
 
To review, see Absurdism and Is Life Meaningless?.
 

9d. Discuss the value of The Stranger as an existentialist work of fiction

• Who is the stranger, according to Camus?
• Is there a connection between the absurd and Meursault's disposition before the murder?
• What does murder have to do with the absurd?

From the very beginning of The Stranger, it is clear that the anti-hero Meursault is not connected to life. He responds to his mother's death and the rituals surrounding it with a sort of noncommittal curiosity rather than grief. His lack of emotional distress is not the issue. Rather, he is not engaged with life at all. The death of his mother is neither distressing nor consoling. In one sense, Meursault, the main character, is the stranger.
 
To develop a notion of the absurd is to contemplate the answerless question, 'Why is there something, rather than nothing?' in connection with the fact that the human condition compels that question in the first place. The notion of the absurd includes the understanding that reality neither comforts nor frightens: it does nothing at all. Camus noted that reality is silent: it does not respond to the apparent human need to understand, let alone discern a purpose for existence. Before the murder, however, Meursault did not confront this fact.
 
On the one hand, should Meursault care about his life any more than he cared for the life of the man he murdered? Life is, after all, meaningless. There is no reason to be good or bad because there is no good or bad at all. Yet Meursault begins to care at the moment when escape becomes impossible and death is inevitable.
 
We know we will die from a young age. However, what death means and its impact on how we live do not necessarily come with this knowledge. Death does not resonate with us because we are detached. Who cares about death? I am alive now; what does death have to do with me? Indifference toward life and death is a blind acceptance, not a revolt.
 
Meursault's initial detachment may be, in fact, a revolt against societal rules. From the beginning, he refused to conform to social norms. He does not express sadness, let alone grief, over his mother's death. He does not engage with his girlfriend or develop other meaningful relationships. Worst of all, he violates the fundamental social prohibition against unjust killing and seems unperturbed by society's response: his being put to death.
 
Perhaps Meursault is not simply an emotionally-inept, socially-incompetent psychopath but represents what it means to live a life in full view of its utter lack of meaning.
 
To review, see The Stranger.
 

Unit 9 Vocabulary

Be sure you understand these terms as you study for the final exam. Try to think of the reason why each term is included.

• absurd
• hero of the absurd
• revolt
• Sisyphus
• The Stranger