Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.87 AVERAGE
3.87 AVERAGE
Put this in the American public highschool curriculum or i will shut down the government
fast-paced
Men in Suits do the Suits the other Suits do what Suits them. SQ I can don clownish trappings, the ol' 🔴... & If Sartre can't convince you of Power, I'm talking Personal Power & the guise of mascueing his anguish 📼 to consider a point of transigence. The second and 1st prolegomemnon are great, extemporizing the valid oratory of a student 'Naville'; for instance, Jean-Paul's shadow and paid actor; but, not a vigilante heckler as some are led to believe. but, Naville had the lines down pat, and asked even more brilliant questions than Dr. Sartre, slouching back in a recliner & vision of a John Barrymore meets 'the Lotus Eaters'; except Sartre is just too phallic for me to digest.
"I will not find any proof at all, nor any convincing sign of it."
Years upon years ago I did dabble in Capricious Camus 🐫 and an ex girlfriend of mine read passages of The Myth of Sisyphus to me. I was drinking those Orange Blossom wheat beers but I still dint no if they are seasonal øre no. She has a great purple dildo, the plastic kind and you can see the veins pulsing out of it, damn, like in my next life I want to be a dildo. Its giving sardines. But I filled her tank to get to San Diego. That was the first time a pertinent lady christened me Austin Powers.
Question: I do not consider the Communist Manifesto a popularization, but a combat weapon.
I kinda think Jean-Paul Sartre is an excellent armchair psychiatrist. The kind you'll find in a backwater hole in the wall he offers 'Happy End-O' & reputation precedes Him, since he's always hoisting a pince-nez, Aw, is John Williams's Stoner spośród abuttment 4 me. Men can surely draw profit from the oratory craft, cus they're sanctimonious and justified to influence the YMCA. So, thank you for manspreading- I I mean, mansplaining, choice and free-will, & all sorts of topics Alan Watts didn't get around to. Watts said one time that back in the roaring 20's and long before that men made women cover up and it wasn't a fun time in history. Sartre says,
"One can choose anything, so long as it involves free commitment."
Blake says, satiretunafire. Something is fishy about this author. I can't put my finger on it, exactly. 🧐
"I will not find any proof at all, nor any convincing sign of it."
Years upon years ago I did dabble in Capricious Camus 🐫 and an ex girlfriend of mine read passages of The Myth of Sisyphus to me. I was drinking those Orange Blossom wheat beers but I still dint no if they are seasonal øre no. She has a great purple dildo, the plastic kind and you can see the veins pulsing out of it, damn, like in my next life I want to be a dildo. Its giving sardines. But I filled her tank to get to San Diego. That was the first time a pertinent lady christened me Austin Powers.
Question: I do not consider the Communist Manifesto a popularization, but a combat weapon.
I kinda think Jean-Paul Sartre is an excellent armchair psychiatrist. The kind you'll find in a backwater hole in the wall he offers 'Happy End-O' & reputation precedes Him, since he's always hoisting a pince-nez, Aw, is John Williams's Stoner spośród abuttment 4 me. Men can surely draw profit from the oratory craft, cus they're sanctimonious and justified to influence the YMCA. So, thank you for manspreading- I I mean, mansplaining, choice and free-will, & all sorts of topics Alan Watts didn't get around to. Watts said one time that back in the roaring 20's and long before that men made women cover up and it wasn't a fun time in history. Sartre says,
"One can choose anything, so long as it involves free commitment."
Blake says, satiretunafire. Something is fishy about this author. I can't put my finger on it, exactly. 🧐
Trodde ikke jeg skulle like denne noe særlig men var positivt overrasket. Føler ikke at Sartre ga et veldig tydelig svar på problemstillingen sin men det er masse spennende å tenke på!
reflective
medium-paced
challenging
reflective
slow-paced
informative
inspiring
reflective
relaxing
medium-paced
Highlights:
“For many have but one resource to sustain them in their misery, and that is to think: ‘circumstances have been against me, I was worthy to be something much more than I have been. […] There remains within me a wide range of possibilities, inclinations, and potentialities, unused but perfectly viable, which endow me with a worthiness that could never be inferred from the mere history of my actions.’ But in reality and for the existentialist, there is no love apart from the deeds of love; no potentiality of love other than that which is manifested in loving; there is no genius other than that which is expressed in works of art. The genius of Proust is the totality of the works of Proust; the genius of Racine is the series of his tragedies, outside of which there is nothing. Why should we attribute to Racine the capacity to write yet another tragedy when that is precisely what he did not write? In life, man commits himself, draws his own portrait, and there is nothing but that portrait.”
•
“The existentialist says that the coward makes himself cowardly, the hero makes himself heroic; and that there is always the possibility for the coward to give up cowardice and become heroic [and vice versa.]”
•
“No doctrine is more optimistic [than existentialism], for the destiny of man is placed within himself.”
•
“There is no reality except in action”
•
“In one sense, the choice [to act] is always possible; but what is not possible is not to choose. If I do not choose, that is still a choice. […] It is impossible for me not to take complete responsibility.”
•
“Life is nothing until it is lived; but it is yours to make sense of, and the value of it is nothing else but the sense that you choose.”
•
“An existentialist will never take man as the end, since man is still to be determined.”
•
“Man is all the time outside of himself: it is in projecting and losing himself beyond himself that he makes man to exist; and, on the other hand, it is by pursuing transcendent aims that he himself is able to exist.”
•
“Existentialism is humanism, because we remind man that there is no legislator but himself; that he himself, thus abandoned, must decide for himself; also because we show that it is not by turning back upon himself, but always by seeking, beyond himself, an aim which is one of liberation or of some particular realisation, that man can realise himself as truly human.”
“For many have but one resource to sustain them in their misery, and that is to think: ‘circumstances have been against me, I was worthy to be something much more than I have been. […] There remains within me a wide range of possibilities, inclinations, and potentialities, unused but perfectly viable, which endow me with a worthiness that could never be inferred from the mere history of my actions.’ But in reality and for the existentialist, there is no love apart from the deeds of love; no potentiality of love other than that which is manifested in loving; there is no genius other than that which is expressed in works of art. The genius of Proust is the totality of the works of Proust; the genius of Racine is the series of his tragedies, outside of which there is nothing. Why should we attribute to Racine the capacity to write yet another tragedy when that is precisely what he did not write? In life, man commits himself, draws his own portrait, and there is nothing but that portrait.”
•
“The existentialist says that the coward makes himself cowardly, the hero makes himself heroic; and that there is always the possibility for the coward to give up cowardice and become heroic [and vice versa.]”
•
“No doctrine is more optimistic [than existentialism], for the destiny of man is placed within himself.”
•
“There is no reality except in action”
•
“In one sense, the choice [to act] is always possible; but what is not possible is not to choose. If I do not choose, that is still a choice. […] It is impossible for me not to take complete responsibility.”
•
“Life is nothing until it is lived; but it is yours to make sense of, and the value of it is nothing else but the sense that you choose.”
•
“An existentialist will never take man as the end, since man is still to be determined.”
•
“Man is all the time outside of himself: it is in projecting and losing himself beyond himself that he makes man to exist; and, on the other hand, it is by pursuing transcendent aims that he himself is able to exist.”
•
“Existentialism is humanism, because we remind man that there is no legislator but himself; that he himself, thus abandoned, must decide for himself; also because we show that it is not by turning back upon himself, but always by seeking, beyond himself, an aim which is one of liberation or of some particular realisation, that man can realise himself as truly human.”
I first read the essay "Existentialism is a Humanism" as a college freshman in an introduction to philosophy course. A shortened form of it was in the textbook we used for the class. I read [a:Albert Camus|957894|Albert Camus|https://images.gr-assets.com/authors/1606568448p2/957894.jpg]'s [b:The Stranger|49552|The Stranger|Albert Camus|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1590930002l/49552._SY75_.jpg|3324344] not long before or not long after. I was beginning to have some awareness of Existentialism, and I was intrigued. I still am.
This slim volume includes the full-length version of that same essay, based on a lecture Sartre gave in 1945, along with the Q/A session that followed it, which is mostly [a:Pierre Naville|1535263|Pierre Naville|https://images.gr-assets.com/authors/1362006158p2/1535263.jpg] braying on and on about Existentialism's lack of commitment to the Marxist cause. Naville raises a few good points, but comes off mostly as someone in love with the sound of his own voice.
The volume also contains Sartre's excellent "A Commentary on The Stranger," in which Sartre masterfully analyzes that novel in light of Camus essay, "The Myth of Sisyphus."
Both the preface and the introduction attempt to put the original lecture-turned-essay into its historical moment while heaping praise, rightly, on the Camus essay. Oddly, the preface and introduction disagree about the value of the essay which gives its title to the book, one lamenting that it oversimplifies Existentialism, while the other praises it for getting to the heart of it in an accessible way.
It's a beautiful little volume and an excellent, if quirky, introduction to the basics of Sartre's conception of Existentialism and Camus' concept of "The Absurd." (Re)reading it makes me want to read more Sartre. Camus was always my favorite, and I spent much more of my younger years with his works--reading all that I could get my hands on. Maybe it's time to make up the gap. There's something quite delightful about following along with Sartre's thinking and his often beautiful prose. I'm in a better position to enjoy that now than I was when I was twenty.
This slim volume includes the full-length version of that same essay, based on a lecture Sartre gave in 1945, along with the Q/A session that followed it, which is mostly [a:Pierre Naville|1535263|Pierre Naville|https://images.gr-assets.com/authors/1362006158p2/1535263.jpg] braying on and on about Existentialism's lack of commitment to the Marxist cause. Naville raises a few good points, but comes off mostly as someone in love with the sound of his own voice.
The volume also contains Sartre's excellent "A Commentary on The Stranger," in which Sartre masterfully analyzes that novel in light of Camus essay, "The Myth of Sisyphus."
Both the preface and the introduction attempt to put the original lecture-turned-essay into its historical moment while heaping praise, rightly, on the Camus essay. Oddly, the preface and introduction disagree about the value of the essay which gives its title to the book, one lamenting that it oversimplifies Existentialism, while the other praises it for getting to the heart of it in an accessible way.
It's a beautiful little volume and an excellent, if quirky, introduction to the basics of Sartre's conception of Existentialism and Camus' concept of "The Absurd." (Re)reading it makes me want to read more Sartre. Camus was always my favorite, and I spent much more of my younger years with his works--reading all that I could get my hands on. Maybe it's time to make up the gap. There's something quite delightful about following along with Sartre's thinking and his often beautiful prose. I'm in a better position to enjoy that now than I was when I was twenty.
challenging
reflective
slow-paced