# data[].attributes.body
Stort problem:
Livsåskådning är ett väldigt svenskt ord. Det gör det lite svårt att hitta bra beskrivningar av vad det är. Engelska är ett så överdrivet mycket bättre vetenskapligt språk. :(

Som tur är kan livsåskådningar typ liknas vid tre andra ord, filosofi, ideologi och religion.
Alla livsåskådningar du har att välja mellan är i första hand filosofiska perspektiv.

Finns självklart en väldig massa mer att säga om detta, men fuck it, du ska inte skriva en avhandling så ta't lungt.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
What is Philosophy?: Crash Course Philosophy #1

# data[].attributes.body
Philosophy vs Ideology

There are very fundamental differences between philosophy and ideology. Ideology refers to a set of beliefs, doctrines that back a certain social institution or a particular organization. Philosophy refers to looking at life in a pragmatic manner and attempting to understand why life is as it is and the principles governing behind it.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Slavoj Žižek: The Sublime Object of Ideology

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
En livsåskådning eller livssyn är en människas eller en organisations övertygelse eller föreställning om hur människan eller samhället är eller bör sträva efter att vara, en etik. Övertygelsen kan vara politisk, religiös eller ideologisk och kan även vara färgad av vanföreställningar och vidskepelse. Livsåskådningen omfattar i regel också motiven för denna övertygelse eller föreställning, men de teorier och hypoteser som livssynen bygger på kan sällan bevisas. Empiriska belägg saknas därför oftast. Livsåskådningar innehåller därför oftast mer av tro än av kunskap.

Livssyn kan indelas i två huvudgrupper med olika värdegrund, i vilka olika företeelser kan vara förknippade med en människas livsåskådning: konfessionella och sekulära. Livsåskådningar som inte stämmer överens med varandra kan likväl omfatta samma värden såsom " rättvisa", " jämlikhet" och " demokrati". I hur dessa begrepp definieras, framträder skillnaderna mellan livsåskådningarna. Värdena måste brytas ned till en rad mätbara egenskaper, om livsåskådningen ska kunna studeras med vetenskaplig metod.

Med livsåskådning likartade begrepp är aldrig helt synonyma, men stämmer någorlunda gör till exempel de svenska trosuppfattning, ideologi, " tro", " filosofi" samt "uppfattning om livets mening". Det engelska uttrycket för livsåskådning är " life stance", det spanska " concepción de la vida" (livskoncept). Livssyn kan också kombineras med en världsåskådning.

Konfessionell syn (bekännelseorienterad)

Hit hör bland annat följande:

Religion - här avskalad religion separerad från fördomar, efterbildningar och förvrängningar.

Vidskepelse - individen bygger sin livsåskådning på nationella, ekonomiska, politiska, rasmässiga eller religiösa fördomar. Uppfattningarna har inte någon grund i fakta. Exempel är föreställningen om rasöverlägsenhet, syndabockstänkande (tendensen att peka ut ett land eller ett folk som skyldiga så fort någonting går fel) eller på en tro - inbakad i exempelvis religioner - som innefattar moment som måste upprepas på samma sätt varje gång för att äga giltighet. Denna typ av vidskepelse kan ärvas från generation till generation med små förändringar gällande hur hela samhället bör vara, respektive vilka påbud den enskilde bör rätta sig efter.

Vanföreställningar, en inbillad övertygelse orsakat av exempelvis ett sjukdomstillstånd, genom manipulation eller propaganda, där de fakta och/eller föreställningar som individen, organisationen eller ett helt samhälle bygger sin livssyn på inte har någon förankring i verkligheten.

Sekulär syn

Bland annat följande:

Med en livsåskådning följs i allmänhet en speciell livsstil, som kan påverka hur den enskilde ser på liv och död, hur man klär sig, hur man har håret, vad man äter, hur man hanterar alkohol och andra droger, hur man talar, vilka man umgås med, hur man ser på och behandlar främlingar eller dem som har en annan livsåskådning, hur man röstar, hur man ser på sexualitet, hur man förhåller sig till mainstream eller i ovan nämnda värdegrundande synsätt.

Det omvända förhållandet att en livsstil leder till en livsåskådning är mindre vanligt, men det förekommer, särskilt bland tonåringar.

Referenser

Hofman, David(år) ^ Civilisationens förnyelse. Sollentuna: Bahá'í-förlaget AB, ss 50-53. ISBN 91-7444-112-4

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
En livsåskådning eller livssyn är en människas eller en organisations övertygelse eller föreställning om hur människan eller samhället är eller bör sträva efter att vara, en etik. Övertygelsen kan vara politisk, religiös eller ideologisk och kan även vara färgad av vanföreställningar och vidskepelse.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Hellenistic philosophy is Ancient Greek philosophy corresponding to the Hellenistic period in Ancient Greece, from the death of Alexander the Great in 323 BC to the Battle of Actium in 31 BC. The dominant schools of this period were the Stoics, the Epicureans and the Skeptics.

The preceding classical period in Ancient Greek philosophy had centered around Socrates (c. 470-399 BC), whose students Antisthenes, Aristippus, and Plato went on to found Cynicism, Cyrenaicism, and Platonism, respectively. Plato taught Aristotle who created the Peripatetic school and in turn, had tutored Alexander the Great. Socrates' thought was therefore influential for many of these schools of the period, leading them to focus on ethics and how to reach eudaimonia.

Early Platonism, known as the "Old Academy" begins with Plato, followed by Speusippus (Plato's nephew), who succeeded him as the head of the school (until 339 BC), and Xenocrates (until 313 BC). Both of them sought to fuse Pythagorean speculations on number with Plato's theory of forms. The Peripatetic school was composed of philosophers who maintained and developed the philosophy of Aristotle after his death, beginning with Theophrastus (371-287 BC) and Strato of Lampsacus (335-269 BC). They advocated examination of the world to understand the ultimate foundation of things. The goal of life was the eudaimonia which originated from virtuous actions, which consisted in keeping the mean between the two extremes of the too much and the too little.

The Hellenistic world in 300 BC.

The Hellenistic period began with the death of Alexander and Diogenes in 323 BC, followed by the death of Aristotle the next year in 322 BC. While the classical thinkers were mostly based in Athens, at end of the Hellenistic period philosophers relocated at Rome or Alexandria. The shift followed Rome's military victories from the middle of the second century. Sulla's capture of Athens in 87 led to destructions and the shipping of Aristotle's manuscripts to Rome. The end of the Hellenistic period does not correspond with anything philosophical but gradually during the Roman imperial period the predominance of Ancient Roman philosophy becomes perceptible. According to A. C. Grayling, the greater insecurity and loss of autonomy of the era drove some to use philosophy as a means to seek inner security from the external world. This interest in using philosophy to improve life was captured in Epicurus' claim that "empty are the words of that philosopher who offers therapy for no human suffering".

Many of the Socratic schools founded prior to the Hellenistic period continued to exert influence well into it, including the Cynic, Cyrenaic and Megarian school.

Cynicism, as begun with Antisthenes, followed by Diogenes and Crates of Thebes, advocated purposefully living an ascetic life with only bare necessities in accordance with nature, rejecting all "unnatural pleasures" that were associated with society or its material benefits. Pleasures provided by nature (which would be immediately accessible) were acceptable, however. Crates hence claimed that "Philosophy is a quart of beans and to care for nothing". Stoicism would be based on the ethical ideas of the Cynics.

The Cyrenaics, beginning with Aristippus the Younger, the grandson of the founder, argued that the reason pleasure was good was that it was evident in human behavior from the youngest age, because this made it natural and therefore good (the so-called cradle argument). The Cyrenaics also believed that present pleasure freed one from anxiety of the future and regrets of the past, leaving one at peace of mind. These ideas were taken further by Anniceris (fl. 300 BC), who expanded pleasure to include things like friendship and honour. Theodorus (c. 340-250) disagreed with this, and instead argued that social ties should be cut and self-sufficiency be espoused instead. Hegesias of Cyrene (fl. 290) on the other hand claimed that life could ultimately not be overall pleasurable.

The dialectical school was known for their study of paradoxes, dialectic, and propositional logic. The main philosophers associated with this school were Diodorus Cronus and Philo the Logician Besides studying logical puzzles and paradoxes, the Dialecticians made two important logical innovations, by re-examining modal logic, and by starting an important debate on the nature of conditional statements. Through their development of propositional logic, the Dialectical school played an important role in the development of logic, which was an important precursor of Stoic logic.

Stoicism was founded by Zeno of Citium in the 3rd century BC, asserting that the goal of life was to live in accordance with Nature. It advocated the development of self-control and fortitude as a means of overcoming destructive emotions. The name Stoicism derives from the Stoa Poikile ( Ancient Greek: ἡ ποικίλη στοά), or "painted porch", a colonnade decorated with mythic and historical battle scenes on the north side of the Agora in Athens where Zeno of Citium and his followers gathered to discuss their ideas. Zeno's most influential follower was Chrysippus, who followed him as leader of the school after Cleanthes, and was responsible for molding what is now called Stoicism.[citation needed ] The Stoics provided a unified account of the world, constructed from ideals of logos, physics, and ethics.

Chrysippus, the third leader of the Stoic school, wrote over 300 books on logic. His works were lost, but an outline of his logical system can be reconstructed from fragments and testimony.

Chrysippus, the third head of the school, developed a system that became known as Stoic logic and included a deductive system, Stoic Syllogistic, which was considered a rival to Aristotle's Syllogistic (see: Syllogism). The Stoics held that all beings (ὄντα)-though not all things (τινά)-are material. Besides the existing beings they admitted four incorporeals (asomata): time, place, void, and sayable. They were held to be just 'subsisting' while such a status was denied to universals. Thus, they accepted Anaxagoras's idea (as did Aristotle) that if an object is hot, it is because some part of a universal heat body had entered the object. But, unlike Aristotle, they extended the idea to cover all accidents. Thus, if an object is red, it would be because some part of a universal red body had entered the object.

The Stoics propounded that knowledge can be attained through the use of reason. Truth can be distinguished from fallacy-even if, in practice, only an approximation can be made. According to the Stoics, the senses constantly receive sensations: pulsations that pass from objects through the senses to the mind, where they leave an impression in the imagination ( phantasiai) (an impression arising from the mind was called a phantasma). The mind has the ability to judge (συγκατάθεσις, synkatathesis)-approve or reject-an impression, enabling it to distinguish a true representation of reality from one that is false. Some impressions can be assented to immediately, but others can achieve only varying degrees of hesitant approval, which can be labeled belief or opinion (). It is only through reason that we gain clear comprehension and conviction (katalepsis). Certain and true knowledge (), achievable by the Stoic sage, can be attained only by verifying the conviction with the expertise of one's peers and the collective judgment of humankind.

In Stoic physics, the universe begins and ends in a divine artisan-fire.

According to the Stoics, the Universe is a material reasoning substance (), which was divided into two classes: the active and the passive. The passive substance is matter, which "lies sluggish, a substance ready for any use, but sure to remain unemployed if no one sets it in motion". The active substance is an intelligent aether or primordial fire, which acts on the passive matter. Everything is subject to the laws of Fate, for the Universe acts according to its own nature, and the nature of the passive matter it governs. The souls of humans and animals are emanations from this primordial Fire, and are, likewise, subject to Fate. Individual souls are perishable by nature, and can be "transmuted and diffused, assuming a fiery nature by being received into the seminal reason (" logos spermatikos") of the Universe". Since right Reason is the foundation of both humanity and the universe, it follows that the goal of life is to live according to Reason, that is, to live a life according to Nature. Similarly, space and the Universe have neither start nor end, rather they are cyclical. The current Universe is a phase in the present cycle, preceded by an infinite number of Universes, doomed to be destroyed (" ekpyrōsis", conflagration) and re-created again, and to be followed by another infinite number of Universes. Stoicism considers all existence as cyclical, the cosmos as eternally self-creating and self-destroying (see also Eternal return).

The foundation of Stoic ethics is that good lies in the state of the soul itself; in wisdom and self-control. One must therefore strive to be free of the passions. For the Stoics, reason meant using logic and understanding the processes of nature-the logos or universal reason, inherent in all things.

For the Stoics, passions are evaluative judgements; A person experiencing such an emotion has incorrectly valued an indifferent thing. a fault of judgement, some false notion of good or evil, lies at the root of each passion. Incorrect judgement as to a present good gives rise to delight (hēdonē), while lust (epithumia) is a wrong estimate about the future. Unreal imaginings of evil cause distress (lupē) about the present, or fear(phobos) for the future. The ideal Stoic would instead measure things at their real value, and see that the passions are not natural. To be free of the passions is to have a happiness which is self-contained. There would be nothing to fear-for unreason is the only evil; no cause for anger-for others cannot harm you.

The wise person ( sophos) is someone who is free from the passions (). Instead the sage experiences good-feelings ( eupatheia) which are clear-headed. These emotional impulses are not excessive, but nor are they diminished emotions. Instead they are the correct rational emotions. The Stoics listed the good-feelings under the headings of joy ( chara), wish ( boulesis), and caution ( eulabeia). Thus if something is present which is a genuine good, then the wise person experiences an uplift in the soul-joy ( chara).

Roman Epicurus bust

Epicureanism was founded by Epicurus in the 3rd century BC.

Epicurean physics held that the entire universe consisted of two things: matter and void. Matter is made up of atoms, which are tiny bodies that have only the unchanging qualities of shape, size, and weight. The Epicureans believed that atoms were unchanging because the world was ordered and that changes had to have specific and consistent sources, e.g. a plant species only grows from a seed of the same species, but that in order for the universe to persist, what it is ultimately made up of must not be able to be changed or else the universe would be essentially destroyed.

Epicurus holds that there must be an infinite supply of atoms, although only a finite number of types of atoms, as well as an infinite amount of void. Epicurus explains this position in his letter to Herodotus: When not prevented by other atoms, all atoms move at the same speed naturally downwards in relation to the rest of the world. This downwards motion is natural for atoms; however, as their fourth means of motion, atoms can at times randomly swerve out of their usual downwards path. This swerving motion is what allowed for the creation of the universe, since as more and more atoms swerved and collided with each other, objects were able to take shape as the atoms joined together. Without the swerve, the atoms would never have interacted with each other, and simply continued to move downwards at the same speed. Epicurus also felt that the swerve was what accounted for humanity's free will. If it were not for the swerve, humans would be subject to a never-ending chain of cause and effect. This was a point which Epicureans often used to criticize Democritus' atomic theory.

Epicureans believed that senses also relied on atoms. Every object was continually emitting particles from itself that would then interact with the observer. All sensations, such as sight, smell, or sound, relied on these particles. While the atoms that were emitted did not have the qualities that the senses were perceiving, the manner in which they were emitted caused the observer to experience those sensations, e.g. red particles were not themselves red but were emitted in a manner that caused the viewer to experience the color red. The atoms are not perceived individually, but rather as a continuous sensation because of how quickly they move.

The epistemology of the Epicureans was empiricist, with knowledge being ultimately sourced from the senses. Epicurus argued that sensory information is never false, though it may be misleading sometimes, and that "If you fight against all sensations, you will not have a standard against to which judge even those of them you say are mistaken". He responded to an objection to empiricism made by Plato in , according to which one cannot search for information without having some pre-existing idea of what to search for, hence meaning that knowledge must precede experience. The Epicurean response is that prolepsis (preconceptions) are general concepts which allow particular things to be recognised, and that these emerge from repeated experiences of similar things. When we form judgments about things ( hupolepsis), they can be verified and corrected through further sensory information. For example, if someone sees a tower from far away that appears to be round, and upon approaching the tower they see that it is actually square, they would come to realize that their original judgement was wrong and correct their wrong opinion.

Epicureanism bases its ethics on a hedonistic set of values, seeing pleasure as the chief good in life. Hence, Epicurus advocated living in such a way as to derive the greatest amount of pleasure possible during one's lifetime, yet doing so moderately in order to avoid the suffering incurred by overindulgence in such pleasure. Epicurus actively recommended against passionate love, and believed it best to avoid marriage altogether. He viewed recreational sex as a natural, but not necessary, desire that should be generally avoided. Since the political life could give rise to desires that could disturb virtue and one's peace of mind, such as a lust for power or a desire for fame, participation in politics was discouraged. Further, Epicurus sought to eliminate the fear of the gods and of death, seeing those two fears as chief causes of strife in life.

Pyrrho of Elis, marble head, Roman copy, Archeological Museum of Corfu

Greek philosophical skepticism, as a distinct philosophical movement, began with Pyrrho of Elis and Timon of Phlius in the 3rd century BC.

Following the death of Timon of Phlius, the Platonic Academy became the primary advocate of skepticism dating from around 266 BC, when Arcesilaus became its head, until the mid-first century BCE. While early Academic skepticism was influenced in part by Pyrrho, it grew more and more dogmatic until Aenesidemus, in the first century BCE, broke with the Academic skeptics and adopted Pyrrhonism, denouncing the Academy as " Stoics fighting against Stoics." The Academic skeptics maintained that knowledge of things is impossible. Ideas or notions are never true; nevertheless, there are degrees of truth-likeness, and hence degrees of belief, which allow one to act. The school was characterized by its attacks on the Stoics and on the Stoic dogma that convincing impressions led to true knowledge. The most important Academics were Arcesilaus, Carneades, and Philo of Larissa. The most extensive ancient source of information about Academic skepticism is , written by the Academic skeptic philosopher Cicero.

Greek philosophers Arcesilaus and Carneades, from the title page of Cicero's Academica, edited by Johann August Goerenz, 1810

Middle Academy

While the objective of the Pyrrhonists was the attainment of ataraxia, after Arcesilaus the Academics did not hold up ataraxia as the central objective. The Academics focused on criticizing the dogmas of other schools of philosophy, in particular of the dogmatism of the Stoics. They acknowledged some vestiges of a moral law within, at best but a plausible guide, the possession of which, however, formed the real distinction between the sage and the fool. Slight as the difference may appear between the positions of the Academics and the Pyrrhonists, a comparison of their lives leads to the conclusion that a practical philosophical moderation was the characteristic of the Academics whereas the objectives of the Pyrrhonists were more psychological.

The Academics did not doubt the existence of truth; they just doubted that humans had the capacities for obtaining it. They based this position on Plato's , in which Socrates discusses how knowledge is not accessible to mortals. Up to Arcesilaus, the Platonic Academy had accepted the principle of finding a general unity in all things, by the aid of which a principle of certainty might be found. Arcesilaus, however, broke new ground by attacking the very possibility of certainty. Socrates had said, " This alone I know: that I know nothing." But Arcesilaus went further and denied the possibility of even the Socratic minimum of certainty: "I cannot know even whether I know or not."

The doctrines of Arcesilaus, which must be gathered from the writings of others, represent an attack on the Stoic phantasia kataleptike (criterion) and are based on the skepticism which was latent in the later writings of Plato. Arcesilaus held that strength of intellectual conviction cannot be regarded as valid, inasmuch as it is characteristic equally of contradictory convictions. The uncertainty of sense data applies equally to the conclusions of reason, and therefore man must be content with probability which is sufficient as a practical guide. "We know nothing, not even our ignorance"; therefore the wise man will be content with an agnostic attitude.

Carneades of Cyrene, the most important of the Academic skeptics

New Academy

The next stage in Academic skepticism was the moderate skepticism of Carneades, which he said owed its existence to his opposition to Chrysippus. To the Stoic theory of perception, the phantasia kataleptike, by which they expressed a conviction of certainty arising from impressions so strong as to amount to science, he proposed the doctrine of acatalepsia, which denied any necessary correspondence between perceptions and the objects perceived. All our sensations are relative, and acquaint us, not with things as they are, but only with the impressions that things produce upon us. Experience, he said, clearly shows that there is no true impression. There is no notion that may not deceive us; it is impossible to distinguish between false and true impressions; therefore the Stoic phantasia kataleptike must be given up. There is no phantasia kataleptike ("criterion") of truth. Carneades also assailed Stoic theology and physics. In answer to the doctrine of final cause, of design in nature, he pointed to those things which cause destruction and danger to man, to the evil committed by men endowed with reason, to the miserable condition of humanity, and to the misfortunes that assail the good man. There is, he concluded, no evidence for the doctrine of a divine superintending providence. Even if there were orderly connexion of parts in the universe, this may have resulted quite naturally. No proof can be advanced to show that this world is anything but the product of natural forces.

Knowledge being impossible, a wise man should practice (suspension of judgment). He will not even be sure that he can be sure of nothing. He saved himself, however, from absolute skepticism by the doctrine of plausibility, which may serve as a practical guide in life. Ideas or notions are never true, but only plausible; nevertheless, there are degrees of plausibility, and hence degrees of belief, leading to action. According to Carneades, an impression may be plausible in itself; plausible and uncontradicted (not distracted by synchronous sensations, but shown to be in harmony with them) when compared with others; plausible, uncontradicted, and thoroughly investigated and confirmed. In the first degree there is a strong persuasion of the propriety of the impression made; the second and third degrees are produced by comparisons of the impression with others associated with it, and an analysis of itself. Carneades left no written works; his opinions seem to have been systematized by his pupil Clitomachus, whose works, which included one " on suspension of judgment," were made use of by Cicero.

By the time of Philo of Larissa, we find a tendency not only to reconcile the internal divergences of the Academy itself, but also to connect it with parallel systems of thought. In general, his philosophy was a reaction against the skeptic or agnostic position of the middle and new Academy in favor of the dogmatism of Plato. Philo of Larissa endeavored to show that Carneades was not opposed to Plato, and further that the apparent antagonism between Platonism and Stoicism was because they were arguing from different points of view. From this syncretism emerged the eclectic middle Platonism of Antiochus of Ascalon.

Pyrrhonism was revived by Aenesidemus in the 1st century BC. Its objective is ataraxia (being mentally unperturbed), which is achieved through epoché (i.e. suspension of judgment) about non-evident matters (i.e., matters of belief). It is unclear from the surviving evidence how much of its doctrines comprise a revival of older doctrines rather than a development of new ones. Pyrrhonists dispute that the dogmatists - which includes all of Pyrrhonism's rival philosophies - have found truth regarding non-evident matters. For any non-evident matter, a Pyrrhonist makes arguments for and against such that the matter cannot be concluded, thus suspending belief and thereby inducing ataraxia.

Although Pyrrhonism's objective is ataraxia, it is best known for its epistemological arguments, particularly the problem of the criterion, and for being the first Western school of philosophy to identify the problem of induction and the Münchhausen trilemma.[citation needed ] Pyrrhonists (or Pyrrhonist practice) can be subdivided into those who are ephectic (engaged in suspension of judgment), zetetic (engaged in seeking), or aporetic (engaged in refutation). Pyrrhonist practice is for the purpose of achieving epoché, i.e., suspension of judgment. The core practice is through setting argument against argument. To aid in this, the Pyrrhonist philosophers Aenesidemus and Agrippa developed sets of stock arguments known as "modes" or " tropes."

Around 90 BC, Antiochus of Ascalon rejected skepticism, making way for the period known as Middle Platonism, in which Platonism was fused with certain Peripatetic and many Stoic dogmas. In Middle Platonism, the Platonic Forms were not transcendent but immanent to rational minds, and the physical world was a living, ensouled being, the World-Soul. The eclectic nature of Platonism during this time is shown by its incorporation into Pythagoreanism ( Numenius of Apamea) and into Jewish philosophy ( Philo of Alexandria)

Hellenistic Judaism was an attempt to establish the Jewish religious tradition within the culture and language of Hellenism. Its principal representative was Philo of Alexandria.(30 BC - 45 AD)

Pythagorean views were revived by Nigidius Figulus during the Hellenistic period, when pseudo-pythagorean writings began circulating. Eventually in the 1st and 2nd centuries AD Neopythagoreanism came to be recognized.

Adamson, Peter (2015). Philosophy in the Hellenistic and Roman Worlds. Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-872802-3.

Annas, Julia (1994), Hellenistic Philosophy of Mind, University of California Press, ISBN 978-0-520-07659-4

Capes, William Wolfe (1880), Stoicism, Pott, Young, & Co.

Graver, Margaret (2007), Stoicism and Emotion, University of Chicago Press, ISBN 978-0-226-30557-8

Grayling, A. C. (2019). The History of Philosophy. Penguin UK. ISBN 978-0-241-98086-6.

Inwood, Brad (1999), "Stoic Ethics", in Algra, Keimpe; Barnes, Johnathan; Mansfield, Jaap; Schofield, Malcolm (eds.), The Cambridge History of Hellenistic Philosophy, Cambridge University Press, ISBN 978-0-521-25028-3

O'Keefe, Tim (2010). Epicureanism. University of California Press.

Long, A. A.; Sedley, D. N., eds. (1987). The Hellenistic Philosophers. Cambridge University Press. (2 vols.)

Long, A. A. (12 September 1996). Hellenistic Philosophy: Stoics, Epicureans, Sceptics. Bloomsbury Academic. ISBN 978-0-7156-1238-5.

Sellars, John (2018). Hellenistic Philosophy. Oxford University Press. p. 36. ISBN 978-0-19-967412-1.

Sorabji, Richard (2000), Emotion and Peace of Mind: From Stoic Agitation to Christian Temptation, Oxford University Press, ISBN 978-0-198-25005-0

Thorsrud, Harald (5 December 2014). Ancient Scepticism. Routledge. ISBN 978-1-317-49283-2.

Wilson, Catherine (2015). Epicureanism: a very short introduction (First ed.). Oxford, United Kingdom. ISBN 9780199688326. OCLC 917374685.

Kelly Arenson (Ed.), The Routledge Handbook of Hellenistic Philosophy, London 2020

Keimpe Algra et al., The Cambridge History of Hellenistic Philosophy, Cambridge University Press, 1999.

Giovanni Reale, The Systems of the Hellenistic Age: History of Ancient Philosophy (Suny Series in Philosophy), edited and translated from Italian by John R. Catan, Albany, State of New York University Press, 1985, ISBN 0887060080.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Hellenistic philosophy is Ancient Greek philosophy corresponding to the Hellenistic period in Ancient Greece, from the death of Alexander the Great in 323 BC to the Battle of Actium in 31 BC. The dominant schools of this period were the Stoics, the Epicureans and the Skeptics.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Deep ecology is an environmental philosophy which promotes the inherent worth of all living beings regardless of their instrumental utility to human needs, plus the restructuring of modern human societies in accordance with such ideas.

Deep ecology argues that the natural world is a complex of relationships in which the existence of organisms is dependent on the existence of others within ecosystems. It argues that non-vital human interference with or destruction of the natural world poses a threat therefore not only to humans but to all organisms constituting the natural order.

Deep ecology's core principle is the belief that the living environment as a whole should be respected and regarded as having certain basic moral and legal rights to live and flourish, independent of its instrumental benefits for human use. Deep ecology is often framed in terms of the idea of a much broader sociality; it recognizes diverse communities of life on Earth that are composed not only through biotic factors but also, where applicable, through ethical relations, that is, the valuing of other beings as more than just resources. It is described as "deep" because it is regarded as looking more deeply into the actual reality of humanity's relationship with the natural world arriving at philosophically more profound conclusions than those of mainstream environmentalism. The movement does not subscribe to anthropocentric environmentalism (which is concerned with conservation of the environment only for exploitation by and for human purposes), since deep ecology is grounded in a different set of philosophical assumptions. Deep ecology takes a holistic view of the world human beings live in and seeks to apply to life the understanding that the separate parts of the ecosystem (including humans) function as a whole. The philosophy addresses core principles of different environmental and green movements and advocates a system of environmental ethics advocating wilderness preservation, non-coercive policies encouraging human population decline, and simple living.

In his original 1973 deep ecology paper, Arne Næss stated that he was inspired by ecologists who were studying the ecosystems throughout the world. In a 2014 essay, environmentalist George Sessions identified three people active in the 1960s whom he considered foundational to the movement: author and conservationist Rachel Carson, environmentalist David Brower, and biologist Paul R. Ehrlich. Sessions considers the publication of Carson's 1962 seminal book Silent Spring as the beginning of the contemporary deep ecology movement. Næss also considered Carson the originator of the movement, stating "Eureka, I have found it" upon encountering her writings.

Other events in the 1960s which have been proposed as foundational to the movement are the formation of Greenpeace, and the images of the Earth floating in space taken by the Apollo astronauts.

Deep ecology proposes an embracing of ecological ideas and environmental ethics (that is, proposals about how humans should relate to nature). It is also a social movement based on a holistic vision of the world. Deep ecologists hold that the survival of any part is dependent upon the well-being of the whole, and criticise the narrative of human supremacy, which they say has not been a feature of most cultures throughout human evolution. Deep ecology presents an eco-centric (earth-centred) view, rather than the anthropocentric (human centred) view, developed in its most recent form by philosophers of the Enlightenment, such as Newton, Bacon, and Descartes. Proponents of deep ecology oppose the narrative that man is separate from nature, is in charge of nature, or is the steward of nature, or that nature exists as a resource to be freely exploited. They cite the fact that indigenous peoples under-exploited their environment and retained a sustainable society for thousands of years, as evidence that human societies are not necessarily destructive by nature. They believe a different economic system must replace capitalism, as the commodification of nature by industrial civilization, based on the concept of economic growth, or 'progress', is critically endangering the biosphere. Deep ecologists believe that the damage to natural systems sustained since the industrial revolution now threatens social collapse and possible extinction of the species. They are striving to bring about ideological, economic and technological change. Deep ecology claims that ecosystems can absorb damage only within certain parameters, and contends that civilization endangers the biodiversity of the earth. Deep ecologists have suggested that the optimum human population on the earth, without fossil fuels, is 0.5 billion, but advocate a gradual decrease in population rather than any apocalyptic solution. Deep ecology eschews traditional left wing-right wing politics, but is viewed as radical ('Deep Green') in its opposition to capitalism, and its advocacy of an ecological paradigm. Unlike conservation, deep ecology does not advocate the controlled preservation of the landbase, but rather 'non-interference' with natural diversity except for vital needs. In citing 'humans' as being responsible for excessive environmental destruction, deep ecologists actually refer to 'humans within civilization, especially industrial civilization', accepting the fact that the vast majority of humans who have ever lived did not live in environmentally destructive societies - the excessive damage to the biosphere has been sustained mostly over the past hundred years.

In 1985 Bill Devall and George Sessions summed up their understanding of the concept of deep ecology with the following eight points:

The well-being of human and nonhuman life on earth is of intrinsic value irrespective of its value to humans.

The diversity of life-forms is part of this value.

Humans have no right to reduce this diversity except to satisfy vital human needs

The flourishing of human and nonhuman life is compatible with a substantial decrease in human population.

Humans have interfered with nature to a critical level already, and interference is worsening.

Policies must be changed, affecting current economic, technological and ideological structures.

This ideological change should focus on an appreciation of the quality of life rather than adhering to an increasingly high standard of living.

All those who agree with the above tenets have an obligation to implement them.

The phrase "Deep Ecology" first appeared in a 1973 article by the Norwegian philosopher Arne Næss,. Næss referred to 'biospherical egalitarianism-in principle', which he explained was 'an intuitively clear and obvious value axiom. Its restriction to humans is ... anthropocentrism with detrimental effects upon the life quality of humans themselves... The attempt to ignore our dependence and to establish a master-slave role has contributed to the alienation of man from himself.' Næss added that from a deep ecology point of view "the right of all forms [of life] to live is a universal right which cannot be quantified. No single species of living being has more of this particular right to live and unfold than any other species". As Bron Taylor and Michael Zimmerman have recounted, 'a key event in the development of deep ecology was the "Rights of Non-Human Nature" conference held at a college in Claremont, California in 1974 [which] drew many of those who would become the intellectual architects of deep ecology. These included George Sessions who, like Naess, drew on Spinoza's pantheism, later co-authoring Deep Ecology - [Living as if Nature Mattered] with Bill Devall; Gary Snyder, whose remarkable, Pulitzer prize-winning Turtle Island proclaimed the value of place-based spiritualities, indigenous cultures, and animistic perceptions, ideas that would become central within deep ecology subcultures; and Paul Shepard, who in The Tender Carnivore and the Sacred Game, and subsequent works such as Nature and Madness and Coming Home to the Pleistocene, argued that foraging societies were ecologically superior to and emotionally healthier than agricultur[al societies]. Shepard and Snyder especially provided a cosmogony that explained humanity's fall from a pristine, nature paradise. Also extremely influential was Edward Abbey's Desert Solitaire, which viewed the desert as a sacred place uniquely able to evoke in people a proper, non-anthropocentric understanding of the value of nature. By the early 1970s the above figures put in place the intellectual foundations of deep ecology.' Murray Bookchin a anarchist philosopher played a major role in devolving deep ecology through the 1980s.

Deep ecology is an eco-philosophy derived from intuitive ethical principles. It does not claim to be a science, but is based generally on the new physics, which, in the early 20th century, undermined the reductionist approach and the notion of objectivity, demonstrating that humans are an integral part of nature - a concept always held by primal peoples. Duvall and Sessions, however, note that the work of many ecologists has encouraged the adoption of an ecological consciousness, quoting environmentalist Aldo Leopold's view that such a consciousness changes the role of Homo sapiens from conqueror of the land community to plain member and citizen of it. Though some detractors assert that deep ecology is based on the discredited idea of the 'balance of nature', deep ecologists have made no such claim. They do not dispute the theory that human cultures can have a benevolent effect on the landbase, only the idea of the control of nature, or human supremacy, which is the central pillar of the industrial paradigm. The tenets of deep ecology state that humans have no right to interfere with natural diversity except for vital needs: the distinction between vital and other needs cannot be drawn precisely. Deep ecologists reject any mechanical or computer model of nature, and see the earth as a living organism, which should be treated and understood accordingly.

Arne Næss used Baruch Spinoza as a source, particularly his notion that everything that exists is part of a single reality. Others have copied Næss in this, including Eccy de Jonge and Brenden MacDonald.

In 2010 Richard Kahn promoted the movement of ecopedagogy, proposing using radical environmental activism as an educational principle to teach students to support "earth democracy" which promotes the rights of animals, plants, fungi, algae and bacteria. The biologist Dr Stephan Harding has developed the concept of 'holistic science', based on principles of ecology and deep ecology. In contrast with materialist, reductionist science, holistic science studies natural systems as a living whole. 'We encourage ... students to use [their] sense of belonging to an intelligent universe (revealed by deep experience),' Harding has written, 'for deeply questioning their fundamental beliefs, and for translating these beliefs into personal decisions, lifestyles and actions. The emphasis on action is important. This is what makes deep ecology a movement as much as a philosophy.'

Næss criticised the Judeo-Christian tradition, stating the Bible's "arrogance of stewardship consists in the idea of superiority which underlies the thought that we exist to watch over nature like a highly respected middleman between the Creator and Creation". Næss further criticizes the reformation's view of creation as property to be put into maximum productive use.

Guha and Martinez-Allier critique the four defining characteristics of deep ecology. First, because deep ecologists believe that environmental movements must shift from an anthropocentric to an ecocentric approach, they fail to recognize the two most fundamental ecological crises facing the world today, 1) overconsumption in the global north and 2) increasing militarization. Second, deep ecology's emphasis on wilderness provides impetus for the imperialist yearning of the West. Third, deep ecology appropriates Eastern traditions, characterizes Eastern spiritual beliefs as monolithic, and denies agency to Eastern peoples. And fourth, because deep ecology equates environmental protection with wilderness preservation its radical elements are confined within the American wilderness preservationist movement. Deep ecologists, however, point to the incoherence of this discourse, not as a 'Third World Critique' but as a critique by the capitalist elites of third world countries seeking to legitimise the exploitation of local ecosystems for economic gain, in concert with the global capitalist system. An example of such exploitation is the ongoing deforestation of the Amazon in Brazil under President Jair Bolsonaro.

Animal rights activists state that for an entity to require intrinsic rights, it must have interests. Deep ecologists are criticised for insisting they can somehow understand the thoughts and interests of non-humans such as plants or protists, which they claim thus proves that non-human lifeforms have intelligence. For example, a single-celled bacteria might move towards a certain chemical stimulation, although such movement might be rationally explained, a deep ecologist might say that this was all invalid because according to his better understanding of the situation that the intention formulated by this particular bacteria was informed by its deep desire to succeed in life. One criticism of this belief is that the interests that a deep ecologist attributes to non-human organisms such as survival, reproduction, growth, and prosperity are really human interests. Deep ecologists counter this criticism by the assertion that intelligence is not specific to humans, but a property of the totality of the universe of which humans are a manifestation.

When Arne Næss coined the term deep ecology, he compared it favourably with shallow ecology which he criticized for its utilitarian and anthropocentric attitude to nature and for its materialist and consumer-oriented outlook, describing its "central objective" as "the health and affluence of people in the developed countries." William D. Grey believes that developing a non-anthropocentric set of values is "a hopeless quest". He seeks an improved "shallow" view. Deep ecologists point out, however, that shallow ecology - resource management conservation - is counter-productive, since it serves mainly to support capitalism - the means through which industrial civilization destroys the biosphere. The eco-centric view thus only becomes 'hopeless' within the structures and ideology of civilization. Outside it, however, a non-anthropocentric world view has characterised most 'primal' cultures since time immemorial, and, in fact, obtained in many indigenous groups until the industrial revolution and after. Some cultures still hold this view today. As such, the eco-centric narrative is in not alien to humans, and may be seen as the normative ethos in human evolution. Grey's view represents the reformist discourse that deep ecology has rejected from the beginning.

Social ecologist Murray Bookchin interpreted deep ecology as being misanthropic, due in part to the characterization of humanity by David Foreman of Earth First!, as a pathological infestation on the Earth. Bookchin mentions that some, like Foreman, defend misanthropic measures such as organising the rapid genocide of most of humanity.

In response, deep ecologists have argued that Foreman's statement clashes with the core narrative of deep ecology, the first tenet of which stresses the intrinsic value of both nonhuman and human life. Arne Naess suggested a slow decrease in human population over an extended period, not genocide. Bookchin's second major criticism is that deep ecology fails to link environmental crises with authoritarianism and hierarchy. He suggests that deep ecologists fail to recognise the potential for human beings to solve environmental issues.

In response, Deep Ecologists have argued that industrial civilization, with its class hierarchy, is the sole source of the ecological crisis. The eco-centric worldview precludes any acceptance of social class or authority based on social status. Deep ecologists believe that since ecological problems are created by industrial civilization, the only solution is the deconstruction of the culture itself.

Daniel Botkin concludes that although deep ecology challenges the assumptions of western philosophy, and should be taken seriously, it derives from a misunderstanding of scientific information and conclusions based on this misunderstanding, which are in turn used as justification for its ideology. It begins with an ideology and is political and social in focus. Botkin has also criticized Næss's assertion that all species are morally equal and his disparaging description of pioneering species. Deep ecologists counter this criticism by asserting that a concern with political and social values is primary, since the destruction of natural diversity stems directly from the social structure of civilization, and cannot be halted by reforms within the system. They also cite the work of environmentalists and activists such as Rachel Carson, Aldo Leopold, John Livingston, and others as being influential, and are occasionally critical of the way the science of ecology has been misused. Naess' concept of the equality of species in principle reflects an ethical view of the disproportionate consumption of natural resources by a single species. This intuitive observation is born out by the current perilous environmental situation.[citation needed ]

Peter Singer critiques anthropocentrism and advocates for animals to be given rights. However, Singer has disagreed with deep ecology's belief in the intrinsic value of nature separate from questions of suffering. Zimmerman groups deep ecology with feminism and civil rights movements. Nelson contrasts it with "ecofeminism". The links with animal rights are perhaps the strongest, as "proponents of such ideas argue that 'all life has intrinsic value'".

David Foreman, the co-founder of the radical direct-action movement Earth First!, has said he is an advocate for deep ecology. At one point Arne Næss also engaged in direct action when he chained himself to rocks in front of Mardalsfossen, a waterfall in a Norwegian fjord, in a successful protest against the building of a dam.

Some have linked the movement to green anarchism as evidenced in a compilation of essays titled Deep Ecology & Anarchism.

1. Smith, Mick (2014). "Deep Ecology: What is Said and (to be) Done?". The Trumpeter. 30 (2): 141-156. ProQuest 1958537477.

2. ^ John Barry; E. Gene Frankland (2002). International Encyclopedia of Environmental Politics. Routledge. p. 161. ISBN 9780415202855.

3. Naess, Arne (January 1973). "The shallow and the deep, long‐range ecology movement. A summary∗". Inquiry. 16 (1-4): 95-100. doi:10.1080/00201747308601682.

4. Sessions, George (2014). "Deep Ecology, New Conservation, and the Anthropocene Worldview". The Trumpeter. 30 (2): 106-114. ProQuest 1958534297.

5. ^ Arne, Naess; Rothenberg, David (1993). Is it Painful to Think?. University of Minnesota Press. pp. 131-132.

6. Drengson, Alan; Devall, Bill; Schroll, Mark A. (2011). "The Deep Ecology Movement: Origins, Development, and Future Prospects (Toward a Transpersonal Ecosophy)". International Journal of Transpersonal Studies. 30 (1-2): 101-117. doi:10.24972/ijts.2011.30.1-2.101.

7. ^ Naess, Arne (1973). "The Shallow and the Deep, Long-Range Ecology Movement. A Summary". Inquiry: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy. 16 (1-4): 95-96.

8. Næss, Arne (1989). Ecology, community and lifestyle: outline of an ecosophy Translated by D. Rothenberg. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp. 166, 187. ISBN 0521344069. LCCN 88005068.

9. ^ https://www.pdcnet.org/enviroethics/content/enviroethics_1989_0011_0001_0005_0025z

10. ^ https://www.pdcnet.org/enviroethics/content/enviroethics_1989_0011_0002_0099_0116

11. ^ Best, Steven (September 1998). "Murray Bookchin's Theory of Social Ecology: An Appraisal of the Ecology of Freedom". Organization & Environment. 11 (3): 334-353. doi:10.1177/0921810698113004. S2CID 145369736. ProQuest 219901508.

12. ^ There are no shortcuts to direct organic experiencing Morris Berman, quoted in Deep Ecology by Bill Devall and George Sessions 1985 p.89

13. ^ de Jonge, Eccy (April 28, 2004). Spinoza and Deep Ecology: Challenging Traditional Approaches to Environmentalism (Ashgate New Critical Thinking in Philosophy). Routledge. ISBN 978-0754633273.

14. ^ MacDonald, Brenden James (14 May 2012). "Spinoza, Deep Ecology, and Human Diversity -- Schizophrenics and Others Who Could Heal the Earth If Society Realized Eco-Literacy". The Trumpeter. 28 (1): 89-101. ProQuest 1959176673.

15. The Guardian, ^ http://www.digitaljournal.com/news/environment/deforestation-of-amazon-rainforest-soars-under-bolsonaro/article/553369#ixzz6RR8tTsOZ

16. ^ Devall, Bill; Sessions, George. Deep Ecology: Environmentalism as if all beings mattered.

17. ^ Naess, Arne (January 1973). "The shallow and the deep, long‐range ecology movement. A summary". Inquiry. 16 (1-4): 95-100. doi:10.1080/00201747308601682.

18. ^ Bookchin, Murray (1987). "Social Ecology versus Deep Ecology: A Challenge for the Ecology Movement". Green Perspectives/Anarchy Archives.

19. ^ Botkin, Daniel B. (2000). No Man's Garden: Thoreau and a New Vision for Civilization and Nature. Shearwater Books. pp. 42 42, 39]. ISBN 978-1-55963-465-6.

20. Kendall, Gillian (May 2011). ^ The Greater Good: Peter Singer On How To Live An Ethical Life. Sun Magazine, The Sun Interview, Issue 425. Retrieved on: 2011-12-02

21. ^ Alan AtKisson. "Introduction To Deep Ecology, an interview with Michael E. Zimmerman". In Context (22).

22. ^ David Levine, ed. (1991). Defending the Earth: a dialogue between Murray Bookchin and Dave Foreman.

23. ^ Bookchin, Murray; Graham Purchase; Brian Morris; Rodney Aitchtey; Robert Hart; Chris Wilbert (1993). Deep Ecology and Anarchism. Freedom Press. ISBN 978-0-900384-67-7.

24. J. Seed, J. Macy, P. Flemming, A. Næss, ^ Thinking like a mountain: towards a council of all beings, Heretic Books (1988), ISBN 0-946097-26-7, ISBN 0-86571-133-X.

Bender, F. L. 2003. The Culture of Extinction: Toward a Philosophy of Deep Ecology Amherst, New York: Humanity Books.

Katz, E., A. Light, et al. 2000. Beneath the Surface: Critical Essays in the Philosophy of Deep Ecology Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.

LaChapelle, D. 1992. Sacred Land, Sacred Sex: Rapture of the Deep Durango: Kivakí Press.

Passmore, J. 1974. Man's Responsibility for Nature London: Duckworth.

Taylor, B. and M. Zimmerman. 2005. Deep Ecology" in B. Taylor, ed., Encyclopedia of Religion and Nature, v 1, pp. 456-60, London: Continuum International.

Clark, John P (2014). "What Is Living In Deep Ecology?". Trumpeter: Journal of Ecosophy. 30 (2): 157-183.

Hawkins, Ronnie (2014). "Why Deep Ecology Had To Die". Trumpeter: Journal of Ecosophy. 30 (2): 206-273.

Sessions, G. (ed) 1995. Deep Ecology for the Twenty-first Century Boston: Shambhala.

Gecevska, Valentina; Donev, Vancho; Polenakovik, Radmil (2016). "A Review Of Environmental Tools Towards Sustainable Development". Annals of the Faculty of Engineering Hunedoara - International Journal of Engineering. 14 (1): 147-152.

Glasser, Harold (ed.) 2005. The Selected Works of Arne Næss, Volumes 1-10. Springer, ISBN 1-4020-3727-9. (review)

Holy-Luczaj, Magdalena (2015). "Heidegger's Support For Deep Ecology Reexamined Once Again". Ethics & the Environment. 20 (1): 45-66. doi:10.2979/ethicsenviro.20.1.45. S2CID 141921083.

Keulartz, Jozef 1998. Struggle for nature : a critique of radical ecology, London [etc.] : Routledge.

Linkola, Pentti 2011. Can Life Prevail? UK: Arktos Media, 2nd Revised ed. ISBN 1907166637

Marc R., Fellenz. "9. Ecophilosophy: Deep Ecology And Ecofeminism." The Moral Menagerie : Philosophy and Animal Rights. 158. Champaign: University of Illinois Press, 2007.

Sylvan, Richard (1985a). "A Critique of Deep Ecology, Part I.". Radical Philosophy. 40: 2-12.

Sylvan, Richard (1985b). "A Critique of Deep Ecology, Part II". Radical Philosophy. 41: 1-22.

Tobias, Michael (ed.) 1988 (1984). Deep Ecology. Avant Books. ISBN 0-932238-13-0.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Deep ecology is an environmental philosophy which promotes the inherent worth of all living beings regardless of their instrumental utility to human needs, plus the restructuring of modern human societies in accordance with such ideas.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Ecosophy or ecophilosophy (a portmanteau of ecological philosophy) is a philosophy of ecological harmony or equilibrium. The term was coined by the French post-structuralist philosopher and psychoanalyst Félix Guattari and the Norwegian father of deep ecology, Arne Næss.

Félix Guattari

Ecosophy also refers to a field of practice introduced by psychoanalyst, poststructuralist philosopher, and political activist Félix Guattari. In part Guattari's use of the term demarcates a necessity for the proponents of social liberation, whose struggles in the 20th century were dominated by the paradigm of social revolution, to embed their arguments within an ecological framework which understands the interconnections of social and environmental spheres.

Guattari holds that traditional environmentalist perspectives obscure the complexity of the relationship between humans and their natural environment through their maintenance of the dualistic separation of human (cultural) and nonhuman (natural) systems; he envisions ecosophy as a new field with a monistic and pluralistic approach to such study. Ecology in the Guattarian sense, then, is a study of complex phenomena, including human subjectivity, the environment, and social relations, all of which are intimately interconnected. Despite this emphasis on interconnection, throughout his individual writings and more famous collaborations with Gilles Deleuze, Guattari has resisted calls for holism, preferring to emphasize heterogeneity and difference, synthesizing assemblages and multiplicities in order to trace rhizomatic structures rather than creating unified and holistic structures.

Without modifications to the social and material environment, there can be no change in mentalities. Here, we are in the presence of a circle that leads me to postulate the necessity of founding an "ecosophy" that would link environmental ecology to social ecology and to mental ecology.

Guattari's concept of the three interacting and interdependent ecologies of mind, society, and environment stems from the outline of the three ecologies presented in Steps to an Ecology of Mind, a collection of writings by cyberneticist Gregory Bateson.

Næss's definition

Næss defined ecosophy in the following way:

By an ecosophy I mean a philosophy of ecological harmony or equilibrium. A philosophy as a kind of sofia (or) wisdom, is openly normative, it contains both norms, rules, postulates, value priority announcements and hypotheses concerning the state of affairs in our universe. Wisdom is policy wisdom, prescription, not only scientific description and prediction. The details of an ecosophy will show many variations due to significant differences concerning not only the 'facts' of pollution, resources, population, etc. but also value priorities.

-  A. Drengson and Y. Inoue, 1995, page 8

While a professor at University of Oslo in 1972, Arne Næss, introduced the terms " deep ecology movement" and "ecosophy" into environmental literature. Næss based his article on a talk he gave in Bucharest in 1972 at the Third World Future Research Conference. As Drengson notes in Ecophilosophy, Ecosophy and the Deep Ecology Movement: An Overview, "In his talk Næss discussed the longer-range background of the ecology movement and its connection with respect for Nature and the inherent worth of other beings." Næss's view of humans as an integral part of a "total-field image" of Nature contrasts with the alternative construction of ecosophy outlined by Guattari.

The term ecological wisdom, synonymous with ecosophy, was introduced by Næss in 1973. The concept has become one of the foundations of the deep ecology movement. All expressions of values by Green Parties list ecological wisdom as a key value-it was one of the original Four Pillars of the Green Party and is often considered the most basic value of these parties. It is also often associated with indigenous religion and cultural practices. In its political context, it is necessarily not as easily defined as ecological health or scientific ecology concepts.

Drengson, A. and Y. Inoue, eds. (1995) The Deep Ecology Movement: An Introductory Anthology. Berkeley: North Atlantic Publishers.

Guattari, Félix: "Pour une refondation des pratiques sociales". In: Le Monde Diplomatique (Oct. 1992): 26-7.

Guattari, Félix: "Remaking Social Practices". In: Genosko, Gary (Hg.) (1996): The Guattari Reader. Oxford, Blackwell, S. 262-273.

Maybury-Lewis, David. (1992) "On the Importance of Being Tribal: Tribal Wisdom." Millennium: Tribal Wisdom and the Modern World. Binimun Productions Ltd.

Næss, Arne. (1973) The Shallow and the Deep Long-Range Ecology Movement: A Summary". Inquiry, 16:95-100

Drengson A. & B. Devall (2008) (Eds) The Ecology of Wisdom. Writings by Arne Naess. Berkeley: Counterpoint

Levesque, Simon (2016) Two versions of ecosophy: Arne Næss, Félix Guattari, and their connection with semiotics. Sign Systems Studies 44(4): 511-541. http://dx.doi.org/10.12697/SSS.2016.44.4.03

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Ecosophy or ecophilosophy (a portmanteau of ecological philosophy) is a philosophy of ecological harmony or equilibrium. The term was coined by the French post-structuralist philosopher and psychoanalyst Félix Guattari and the Norwegian father of deep ecology, Arne Næss. Ecosophy also refers to a field of practice introduced by psychoanalyst, poststructuralist philosopher, and political activist Félix Guattari.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
For the political ideology commonly associated with states governed by communist parties, see Marxism–Leninism.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Humanism is a philosophical stance that emphasizes the individual and social potential, and agency of human beings, whom it considers the starting point for serious moral and philosophical inquiry.

The meaning of the term "humanism" has changed according to successive intellectual movements that have identified with it. During the Italian Renaissance, ancient works inspired Italian scholars, giving rise to the Renaissance humanism movement. During the Age of Enlightenment, humanistic values were re-enforced by advances in science and technology, giving confidence to humans in their exploration of the world. By the early 20th century, organizations dedicated to humanism flourished in Europe and the United States, and have since expanded worldwide. In the early 21st century, the term generally denotes a focus on human well-being and advocates for human freedom, autonomy, and progress. It views humanity as responsible for the promotion and development of individuals, espouses the equal and inherent dignity of all human beings, and emphasizes a concern for humans in relation to the world.

Starting in the 20th century, humanist movements are typically non-religious and aligned with secularism. Most frequently, humanism refers to a non-theistic view centered on human agency, and a reliance on science and reason rather than revelation from a supernatural source to understand the world. Humanists tend to advocate for human rights, free speech, progressive policies, and democracy. People with a humanist worldview maintain religion is not a precondition of morality, and object to excessive religious entanglement with education and the state.

Contemporary humanist organizations work under the umbrella of Humanists International. Well-known humanist associations are Humanists UK and the American Humanist Association.

Etymology and definition

The word "humanism" derives from the Latin word , which was first used in ancient Rome by Cicero and other thinkers to describe values related to liberal education. This etymology survives in the modern university concept of the humanities-the arts, philosophy, history, literature, and related disciplines. The word reappeared during the Italian Renaissance as umanista and entered the English language in the 16th century. The word "humanist" was used to describe a group of students of classical literature and those advocating for a classical education. In the early 19th century, the term humanismus was used in Germany with several meanings and from there, it re-entered the English language with two distinct denotations; an academic term linked to the study of classic literature and a more-common use that signified a non-religious approach to life contrary to theism. It is probable Bavarian theologian Friedrich Immanuel Niethammer coined the term humanismus to describe the new classical curriculum he planned to offer in German secondary schools. Soon, other scholars such as Georg Voigt and Jacob Burckhardt adopted the term. In the 20th century, the word was further refined, acquiring its contemporary meaning of a naturalistic approach to life, and a focus on the well-being and freedom of humans.

There is no single, widely accepted definition of humanism, and scholars have given different meanings to the term. For philosopher Sidney Hook, writing in 1974, humanists are opposed to the imposition of one culture in some civilizations, do not belong to a church or established religion, do not support dictatorships, and do not justify the use of violence for social reforms. Hook also said humanists support the elimination of hunger and improvements to health, housing, and education. In the same edited collection, Humanist philosopher H. J. Blackham argued humanism is a concept focusing on improving humanity's social conditions by increasing the autonomy and dignity of all humans. In 1999, Jeaneane D. Fowler said the definition of humanism should include a rejection of divinity, and an emphasis on human well-being and freedom. She also noted there is a lack of shared belief system or doctrine but, in general, humanists aim for happiness and self-fulfillment.

In 2015, prominent humanist Andrew Copson attempted to define humanism as follows:

Humanism is naturalistic in its understanding of the universe; science and free inquiry will help us comprehend more about the universe.

This scientific approach does not reduce humans to anything less than human beings.

Humanists place importance of the pursuit of a self-defined, meaningful, and happy life.

Humanism is moral; morality is a way for humans to improve their lives.

Humanists engage in practical action to improve personal and social conditions.

According to the International Humanist and Ethical Union:

Humanism is a democratic and ethical life stance, which affirms that human beings have the right and responsibility to give meaning and shape to their own lives. It stands for the building of a more humane society through an ethic based on human and other natural values in the spirit of reason and free inquiry through human capabilities. It is not theistic, and it does not accept supernatural views of reality.

Dictionaries define humanism as a worldview or philosophical stance. According to Merriam Webster Dictionary, humanism is " ... a doctrine, attitude, or way of life centered on human interests or values; especially: a philosophy that usually rejects supernaturalism and stresses an individual's dignity and worth and capacity for self-realization through reason".

Predecessors

Traces of humanism can be found in ancient Greek philosophy. Pre-Socratic philosophers were the first Western philosophers to attempt to explain the world in terms of human reason and natural law without relying on myth, tradition, or religion. Protagoras, who lived in Athens c. 440 BCE, put forward some fundamental humanist ideas, although only fragments of his work survive. He made one of the first agnostic statements; according to one fragment: "About the gods I am able to know neither that they exist nor that they do not exist nor of what kind they are in form: for many things prevent me for knowing this, its obscurity and the brevity of man's life". (80B4 DK) Socrates spoke of the need to "know thyself"; his thought changed the focus of then-contemporary philosophy from nature to humans and their well-being. Socrates, a theist who was executed for atheism, investigated the nature of morality by reasoning. Aristotle (384-322 BCE) taught rationalism and a system of ethics based on human nature that also parallels humanist thought. In the third century BCE, Epicurus developed an influential, human-centered philosophy that focused on achieving eudaimonia. Epicureans continued Democritus' atomist theory-a materialistic theory that suggests the fundamental unit of the universe is an indivisible atom. Human happiness, living well, friendship, and the avoidance of excesses were the key ingredients of Epicurean philosophy that flourished in and beyond the post-Hellenic world. It is a repeated view among scholars that the humanistic features of ancient Greek thought are the roots of humanism 2,000 years later.

Arabic translations of Ancient Greek literature during the Abbasid Caliphate in the eighth and ninth centuries influenced Islamic philosophers. Many medieval Muslim thinkers pursued humanistic, rational, and scientific discourse in their search for knowledge, meaning, and values. A wide range of Islamic writings on love, poetry, history, and philosophical theology show medieval Islamic thought was open to humanistic ideas of individualism, occasional secularism, skepticism, liberalism, and free speech; schools were established at Baghdad, Basra and Isfahan.

Renaissance

The intellectual movement later known as Renaissance humanism first appeared in Italy and has greatly influenced both contemporaneous and modern Western culture. The Renaissance is regarded as a rebirth of the classical Greco-Roman humanism, especially in its artistic, literary and architerctural aspects, that reflected on the ideal of man as the measure of all things. Renaissance humanism emerged in Italy alongside a renewed interest in literature and the arts in 13th-century Italy. Italian scholars discovered Ancient Greek thought, particularly that of Aristotle, through Arabic translations from Africa and Spain. Other centers were Verona, Naples, and Avignon. Petrarch, who is often referred to as the father of humanism, is a significant figure. Petrarch was raised in Avignon; he was inclined toward education at a very early age and studied alongside his well-educated father. Petrarch's enthusiasm for ancient texts led him to discover manuscripts such as Cicero's and Pomponius Mela's De Chorographia that were influential in the development of the Renaissance. Petrarch wrote Latin poems such as Canzoniere and De viris illustribus, in which he described humanist ideas. His most-significant contribution was a list of books outlining the four major disciplines-rhetoric, moral philosophy, poetry, and grammar-that became the basis of humanistic studies ( studia humanitatis). Petrarch's list relied heavily on ancient writers, especially Cicero.

The revival of classicist authors continued after Petrarch's death. Florence chancellor and humanist Coluccio Salutati made his city a prominent center of Renaissance humanism; his circle included other notable humanists-including Leonardo Bruni, who rediscovered, translated, and popularized ancient texts. Humanists heavily influenced education. Vittorino da Feltre and Guarino Veronese created schools based on humanistic principles; their curriculum was widely adopted and by the 16th century, humanistic was the dominant outlook of pre-university education. Parallel with advances in education, Renaissance humanists made progress in fields such as philosophy, mathematics, and religion. In philosophy, Angelo Poliziano, Nicholas of Cusa, and Marsilio Ficino further contributed to the understanding of ancient classical philosophers and Giovanni Pico della Mirandola undermined the dominance of Aristotelian philosophy by revitalizing Sextus Empiricus' skepticism. Religious studies were affected by the growth of Renaissance humanism when Pope Nicholas V initiated the translation of Hebrew and Greek biblical texts, and other texts in those languages, to contemporaneous Latin.

Humanist values spread from Italy in the 15th century. Students and scholars went to Italy to study before returning to their homelands carrying humanistic messages. Printing houses dedicated to ancient texts were established in Venice, Basel, and Paris. By the end of 15th century, the center of humanism had shifted from Italy to northern Europe, with Erasmus of Rotterdam being the leading humanist scholar. The longest-lasting effect of Renaissance humanism was its education curriculum and methods. Humanists insisted on the importance of classical literature in providing intellectual discipline, moral standards, and a civilized taste for the elite-an educational approach that reached the contemporary era.

Enlightenment

During the Age of Enlightenment, humanistic ideas resurfaced, this time further from religion and classical literature. Science, reason, and intellectualism advanced, and the mind replaced God as the means with which to understand the world. Divinity was no longer dictating human morals, and humanistic values such as tolerance and opposition to slavery started to take shape. Life-changing technological discoveries allowed ordinary people to face religion with a new morality, and greater confidence about humanity and its abilities. New philosophical, social, and political ideas appeared. Some thinkers rejected theism outright; and atheism, deism, and hostility to organized religion were formed. During the Enlightenment, Baruch Spinoza redefined God as signifying the totality of nature; Spinoza was accused of atheism but remained silent on the matter. Naturalism was also advanced by prominent Encyclopédistes. Baron d'Holbach wrote the polemic System of Nature, claiming religion is built on fear and helped tyrants throughout history. Diderot and Helvetius combined their materialism with sharp, political critique.

Also during the Enlightenment, the abstract conception of humanity started forming-a critical juncture for the construction of humanist philosophy. Previous appeals to "men" now shifted toward "man"; this is evident in political documents like The Social Contract (1762) of Rousseau, in which he says "Man is born free, but is everywhere in chains". Likewise, Thomas Paine's Rights of Man uses the singular form of the word, revealing a universal conception of "man". In parallel, Baconian empiricism-though not humanism per se-led to Thomas Hobbes's materialism.

According to scholar J. Brent Crosson, while the belief the birth of humanism was solely a European affair is widely held, intellectual thought from other continents such as Africa and Asia significantly contributed as well. He also notes during enlightenment, the universal man did not encompass all humans but was shaped by gender and race. According to Crosson, the shift from man to human started during enlightenment and is still ongoing. Also, Crosson noted that enlightenment, especially in Britain during scientific revolution, produce not only the notion of universal man and an optimism that reason will prevail over religious superstitions, but also gave birth to pseudoscientific ideas such as race that shaped European history. He gives the paradigm of Africa, which was a contribution to knowledge until the Renaissance but was disregarded afterwards.

From Darwin to current era

French philosopher Auguste Comte (1798-1857) introduced the idea-which is sometimes attributed to Thomas Paine-of a " religion of humanity". This was intended to be an atheist cult based on some humanistic tenets, and had some prominent members but soon declined. It was nonetheless influential during the 19th century, and its humanism and rejection of supernaturalism are echoed in the works of later authors such as Oscar Wilde, George Holyoake-who coined the word secularism- George Eliot, Émile Zola, and E. S. Beesly. Paine's The Age of Reason, along with the 19th-century Biblical criticism of the German Hegelians David Strauss and Ludwig Feuerbach, also contributed to new forms of humanism.

Advances in science and philosophy provided scholars with further alternatives to religious belief. Charles Darwin's theory of natural selection offered naturalists an explanation for the plurality of species. Darwin's theory also suggested humans are simply a natural species, contradicting the traditional theological view of humans as more than animals. Philosophers Ludwig Feuerbach, Friedrich Nietzsche, and Karl Marx attacked religion on several grounds, and theologians David Strauss and Julius Wellhausen questioned the Bible. In parallel, utilitarianism was developed in Britain through the works of Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill. Utilitarianism, a moral philosophy, centers its attention on human happiness, aiming to eliminate human and animal pain via natural means. In Europe and the US, as philosophical critiques of theistic beliefs grew, large parts of society distanced themselves from religion. Ethical societies were formed, leading to the contemporary humanist movement.

The rise of rationalism and the scientific method was followed in the late 19th century in Britain by the start of many rationalist and ethical associations, such as the National Secular Society, the Ethical Union, and the Rationalist Press Association. In the 20th century, humanism was further promoted by the work of philosophers such as A. J. Ayer, Antony Flew, and Bertrand Russell, whose advocacy of atheism in Why I Am Not a Christian further popularized humanist ideas. In 1963, the British Humanist Association evolved out of the Ethical Union, and merged with many smaller ethical and rationalist groups. Elsewhere in Europe, humanist organizations also flourished. In the Netherlands, the Dutch Humanist Alliance gained a wide base of support after World War II and in Norway, the Norwegian Humanist Association gained popular support.

In the US, humanism evolved with the aid of significant figures of the Unitarian Church. Humanist magazines began to appear, including The New Humanist, which published the Humanist Manifesto I in 1933. The American Ethical Union emerged from newly founded, small, ethicist societies. The American Humanist Association (AHA) was established in 1941 and became as popular as some of its European counterparts. The AHA spread to all states, and some prominent public figures such as Isaac Asimov, John Dewey, Erich Fromm, Paul Kurtz, Carl Sagan, and Gene Roddenberry became members. Humanist organizations from all continents formed the International Humanist and Ethical Union (IHEU), which is now known as Humanists International, and promotes the humanist agenda via the United Nations organizations UNESCO and UNICEF.

Varieties of humanism

Early 20th century naturalists, who viewed their humanism as a religion and participated in church-like congregations, used the term "religious humanism". Religious humanism appeared mostly in the US and is now rarely practiced. The American Humanist Association arose from religious humanism. The same term has been used by religious groups such as the Quakers to describe their humanistic theology.

The term "Renaissance humanism" was given to a tradition of cultural and educational reform engaged in by civic and ecclesiastical chancellors, book collectors, educators, and writers that developed during the 14th and early 15th centuries. By the late 15th century, these academics began to be referred to as umanisti (humanists). While modern humanism's roots can be traced to the Renaissance, Renaissance humanism vastly differs from it.

Other terms using "humanism" in their name include:

Christian humanism; a historical current in the late Middle Ages in which Christian scholars combined Christian faith with interest in classical antiquity and a focus on human well-being.

Ethical humanism"; a synonym of Ethical culture, was prominent in the US in the early 20th century and focused on relations between humans.

Scientific humanism emphasizes belief in the scientific method as a component of humanism as described in the works of John Dewey and Julian Huxley. Scientific humanism is largely synonymous with secular humanism.

Secular humanism was coined in the mid-20th century. It was initially an attempt to denigrate humanism but some humanist associations embraced the term. Secular humanism is synonymous with the contemporary humanist movement.

Marxist humanism; one of several rival schools of Marxist thought, which accepts basic humanistic tenets such as secularism and naturalism but differs from other strands of humanism because of its vague stance on democracy and rejection of free will.

Philosophy

Immanuel Kant provided the basis of the humanist narrative. His theory of critical philosophy formed the basis of the world of knowledge, defending rationalism and grounding it in the empirical world. He also supported the idea of the moral autonomy of the individual, which is fundamental to his philosophy. According to Kant, morality is the product of the way humans live and not a set of fixed values. Instead of a universal ethic code, Kant suggested a universal procedure that shapes the ethics that differ among groups of people.

Humanism is strongly linked to rationality. For humanists, humans are reasonable beings, and reasoning and the scientific method are means of finding truth. Humanists argue science and rationality have driven successful developments in various fields while the invocation of supernatural phenomena fails to coherently explain the world. One form of irrational thinking is adducing. Humanists are skeptical of explanations of natural phenomena or diseases that rely on hidden agencies.

Human autonomy is another hallmark of humanist philosophy. For people to be autonomous, their beliefs and actions must be the result of their own reasoning. For humanists, autonomy dignifies each individual; without autonomy, people's humanity is lessened. Humanists also consider human essence to be universal, irrespective of race and social status, diminishing the importance of collective identities and signifying the importance of individuals.

Philosopher and humanist advocate Corliss Lamont, in his book The Philosophy of Humanism (1997), states:

In the Humanist ethics the chief end of thought and action is to further this-earthly human interests on behalf of the greater glory of people. The watchword of Humanism is happiness for all humanity in this existence as contrasted with salvation for the individual soul in a future existence and the glorification of a supernatural Supreme Being ... It heartily welcomes all life-enhancing and healthy pleasures, from the vigorous enjoyments of youth to the contemplative delights of mellowed age, from the simple gratifications of food and drink, sunshine and sports, to the more complex appreciation of art and literature, friendship and social communion...

The humanist attitude toward morality has changed since its beginning. Starting in the 18th century, humanists were oriented toward an objective and universalist stance on ethics. Both Utilitarian philosophy-which aims to increase human happiness and decrease suffering-and Kantian ethics, which states one should act in accordance with maxims one could will to become a universal law, shaped the humanist moral narrative until the early 20th century. Because the concepts of free will and reason are not based on scientific naturalism, their influence on humanists remained in the early 20th century but was reduced by social progressiveness and egalitarianism. As part of social changes in the late 20th century, humanist ethics evolved to support secularism, civil rights, personal autonomy, religious toleration, multiculturalism, and cosmopolitanism.

A naturalistic criticism of humanistic morality is the denial of the existence of morality. For naturalistic skeptics, morality was not hardwired within humans during their evolution; humans are primarily selfish and self-centered. Defending humanist morality, humanist philosopher John R. Shook makes three observations that lead him to the acceptance of morality. According to Shook, homo sapiens has a concept of morality that must have been with the species since the beginning of human history, developing by recognizing and thinking upon behaviors. He adds morality is universal among human cultures and all cultures strive to improve their moral level. Spook concludes while morality was initially generated by our genes, culture shaped human morals and continues to do so. He calls "moral naturalism" the view morality is a natural phenomenon, can be scientifically studied, and is a tool rather than a set of doctrines that was used to develop human culture.

Humanist philosopher Brian Ellis advocates a social humanist theory of morality called "social contractual utilitarianism", which is based on Hume's naturalism and empathy, Aristotelian virtue theory, and Kant's idealism. According to Ellis, morality should aim for eudaimonia, an Aristotelian concept that combines a satisfying life with virtue and happiness by improving societies worldwide. Humanist Andrew Copson takes a consequentialist and utilitarian approach to morality; according to Copson, all humanist ethical traits aim at human welfare. Philosopher Stephen Law emphasizes some principles of humanist ethics; respect for personal moral autonomy, rejection of god-given moral commands, an aim for human well-being, and "emphasiz[ing] the role of reason in making moral judgements".

Humanism's godless approach to morality has driven criticism from religious commentators. The necessity for a divine being delivering sets of doctrines for morals to exist is a common argument; according to Dostoevsky in The Brothers Karamazov; "if God does not exist, then everything is permitted". This argument suggests chaos will ensue if religious belief disappears. For humanists, theism is an obstacle to morality rather than a prerequisite for it. According to humanists, acting only out of fear, adherence to dogma, and expectation of a reward is a selfish motivation rather than morality. Humanists point to the subjectivity of the supposedly objective divine commands by referring to the Euthyphro dilemma; "does God command something because it is good or is something good because God commands it?" If goodness is independent from God, humans can reach goodness without religion but relativism is invited if God creates goodness. Another argument against this religious criticism is the human-made nature of morality, even through religious means. The interpretation of holy scriptures almost always includes human reasoning; different interpreters reach contradictory theories.

Humanism has widely been seen as antithetical to religion. Philosopher of religion David Kline, traces the roots of this animosity since the Renaissance, when humanistic views deconstructed the previous religiously defined order. Kline describes several ways this antithesis has evolved. Kline notes the emergence of a confident human-made knowledge, which was a new way of epistemology, repelled the church from its authoritative position. Kline uses the paradigm of non-humanists Copernicus, Kepler, and Galileo to illustrate how scientific discoveries added to the deconstruction of the religious narrative in favor of human-generated knowledge. This ultimately uncoupled the fate of humans from the divine will, prompting social and political shifts. The relation of state and citizens changed as civic humanistic principles emerged; people were no longer to be servile to religiously grounded monarchies but could pursue their own destinies. Kline also points at the aspect of personal beliefs that added to the hostility between humanism and religion. Humanism was associated with prominent thinkers who rationally advocated against the existence of God. Critique of theism continued through the humanistic revolutions in Europe, challenging religious worldviews, attitudes and superstitions on a rational basis-a tendency that continued to the 20th century.

According to Stephen Law, humanist adherence to secularism placed humans at odds with religion, especially nationally dominant religions striving to retain privileges gained in the last centuries. Worth notes religious persons can be secularists. Law notes secularism is criticized for suppressing freedom of expression of religious persons but firmly denies such accusation; instead, he says, secularism protects this kind of freedom but opposes the privileged status of religious views.

According to Andrew Copson, humanism is not incompatible with some aspects of religion. Copson sees elements of religion, such as belief, practice, identity and culture, in which a person adhering to few religious doctrines could also be humanist. Copson adds that religious critics usually frame humanism as an enemy of religion but most humanists are proponents of religious tolerance or exhibit a curiosity about religion's effects in society and politics, commenting: "Only a few are regularly outraged by other people's false beliefs per se".

The meaning of life

In the 19th century, the problem of the meaning of life arose, along with the decline of religion and its accompanied teleology, puzzling both society and philosophers. Unlike religions, humanism does not have a definite view on the meaning of life. Humanists commonly say people create rather than discover meaning. While many philosophers such as Kierkegaard, Schopenhauer, and Nietzsche wrote on the meaning of life in a godless world, the work of Albert Camus has echoed and shaped humanism. In Camus' The Myth of Sisyphus, he quotes a Greek myth in which the absurd hero Sisyphus is destined to push a heavy rock up a hill; the rock slips back and he must repeat the task.

Personal humanist interpretations of the meaning of life vary from the pursuit of happiness without recklessness and excesses to participation in human history, and connection with loved ones, living animals, and plants. Some answers are close to those of religious discourse if the appeal to divinity is overlooked. According to humanist professor Peter Derks, elements that contribute to the meaning of life are a morally worthy purpose in life, positive self-evaluation, an understanding of one's environment, being seen and understood by others, the ability to emotionally connect with others, and a desire to have a meaning in life. Humanist professor Anthony B. Pinn places the meaning of life in the quest of what he calls "complex subjectivity". Pinn, who is advocating for a non-theistic, humanistic religion inspired by African cultures, says seeking the never-reaching meaning of life contributes to well-being, and that rituals and ceremonies, which are occasions for reflection, provide an opportunity to assess the meaning of life, improving well-being.

Well-being and the living of a good life are at the center of humanist reflection. For humanists, well-being is linked with values that arise from the meaning of life that each human sets for him or herself. Humanist philosopher Bertrand Russell described the good life as one "inspired by love, guided by knowledge". A.C. Grayling noted a good life "is the life that feels meaningful and fulfilling to the one living it". Despite the platitudes, humanism does not have a doctrine of good life nor offers any certainties; each person should decide for themself what constitutes a good life. For humanists, it is vital the option for a meaningful and fulfilling life is available to all members of society.

In public life

In politics

Humanism had a considerable impact in the framing of the United States Declaration of Independence (1776) and the French Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen (1789). According to Domenic Marbaniang, during the French Revolution, "humanism coalesced with a new spirit of patriotism (a devotion to the fatherland)", emphasizing liberty, equality, and fraternity of all humans-ideals that played an important role in the development of modern democracy and political secularism. The hallmark of contemporary humanism in politics is the demand for secularism. Philosopher Alan Haworth said secularism delivers fair treatment to all citizens of a nation-state since all are treated without discrimination; religion is a private issue and the state should have no power over it. He also adds secularism helps plurality and diversity, which are fundamental aspects of our modern world. Haworth, also examines political objections to humanist calsl for secularism. He examines the conservative argument of Edmund Burke that calls for common sense rather than abstract reasoning, and preserving traditional and Christian values and puts importance on national continuity. Haworth said Christian values have not stopped Europeans committing atrocities. While this kind of barbarism can be found in most civilizations, Haworth notes religion usually fuels rhetoric and enables these actions. He also said the values of hard work, honesty, and charity are found in other civilizations. According to Haworth, humanism opposes the irrationality of nationalism and totalitarianism, whether these are part of fascism or Marxist-Leninist communism.

According to professor Joseph O. Baker, in political theory, contemporary humanism is sculptured by two main axons; the first is individualistic and the second inclines to collectivism. The trajectory of these two axons led to libertarianism and socialism respectively, but a range of combinations exists. Individualistic humanists often have a philosophical perspective of humanism; in the politics, these are inclined to libertarianism and in ethics tend to follow a scientistic approach. Collectivists have a more-applied view of humanism, lean toward socialism, and have a humanitarian approach to ethics. The second group has connections with the thought of young Marx, especially his anthropological views rejecting his political practices. A factor that repels many humanists from the libertarian view is the consequences they feel it bears. Libertarianism is tied to neoliberalism and capitalistic society that is conceived to be inhumane.

Humanism has been a part of both major 20th-century ideological currents-liberalism and Marxism. Early 19th-century socialism was connected to humanism. In the 20th century, a humanistic interpretation of Marxism focused on Marx's early writings, viewing Marxism not as " scientific socialism" but as a philosophical critique aimed at the overcoming of " alienation". In the US, liberalism is associated mostly with humanistic principles, which is distinct from the European use of the same word, which has economical connotations. In the post-1945 era, Jean-Paul Sartre and other French existentialists advocated for humanism, linking it to socialism while trying to stay neutral during the Cold War.

In psychology and counseling

Humanist counseling is humanism-inspired applied psychology, which is a major current of counseling. There are various approaches such as discussion and critical thinking, replying to existential anxiety, and focusing on social and political dimensions of problems. Humanist counseling focuses on respecting the client's worldview and placing it in the correct cultural context. The approach emphasizes an individual's inherent drive towards self-actualization and creativity. It also recognizes the importance of moral questions about one's interactions with people according to one's worldview. This is examined using a process of dialogue. Generally, humanist counseling aspires to help people to live a good, fulfilling, and meaningful life by continual interpretation and reflection. Humanist counseling originated in the post-World War II Netherlands.

Humanistic counseling, a different term from humanist counseling, is based on the works of psychologists Carl Rogers and Abraham Maslow. It introduced a positive, humanistic psychology in response to what Rogers and Maslow viewed as the over-pessimistic view of psychoanalysis in the early 1960s. Other sources include the philosophies of existentialism and phenomenology.

Some modern counseling organizations have humanist origins, like the British Association for Counselling and Psychotherapy, which was founded by Harold Blackham, which he developed alongside the British Humanist Association's Humanist Counselling Service. Modern-day humanist pastoral care in the UK and the Netherlands draws on elements of humanistic psychology.

Geographies of humanism

In Africa, contemporary humanism has been shaped by the continent's colonial history, and the introduction of Christianity and Islam. African philosophers focused on inter-dependency among humans, and between humans and nature. Pre-colonial oral traditions reflecting African views on humanity and human good were eliminated by the entrance of European powers. Christianity and Islam advanced, and many intra-African atrocities took place. Africans never abandoned the ideas of human value and the mutual interdependence of humans, which are core features of African humanism. This idea was advanced by philosophers such as Kwasi Wiredu and Jean-Godefroy Bidima. Wiredu emphasized the need of human interaction for humans to become what they are, and projected his thought to the need for democracy. According to Bidima, the interaction should be enduringly since history and humans are constantly evolving. According to socialist philosopher Léopold Sédar Senghor, Africans were naturally leaning towards humanism and socialism, not because of its scientific or epistemological basis, but because of their intuition.

Middle East

It is a widely held view among scholars that due to the dominance of Islam, humanistic values found a hostile environment in the Middle East and were unable to flourish there. According to scholar Khurram Hussain, however, some traits of the early Islamic world resemble humanism. He notes Islam unified a diverse population and provided political, epistemological, and social solutions to the then-fragmented Arab world. Also according to Hussain, there is a form of humanism within the Islamic anthropology. To support his argument, he notes examples such as the lack of "original sin", indicating in Islamic theology the human is a free, moral agent. He also said Islamic scholars such as Ibn al-‛Arabī and al-Jīlī placed humans at the center of the universe, a place occupied by God in Christian traditions. Khurram Hussain also notes the Arab Spring of 2011 revived certain humanistic values-including democracy, freedom, and fairness-in the Middle East, and argues they are not incompatible with Islam.

In East Asia, Confucianism's core ideas are humanistic. The philosophy of Confucius (551-479 BCE), which became the basis of the state ideology of successive Chinese dynasties and nearby polities in East Asia, has several humanistic traits, placing a high value on human life, and discounting mysticism and superstition-including speculations on ghosts and an afterlife. Confucianism is considered a religious form of humanism because supernatural phenomena such as Heaven (tian)-which supposedly guides the world-have a place in it. According to sinologist Theodore de Bary, In the Analects of Confucius, humanist ideals include respectfulness, reasonableness, kindness, and enthusiasm for learning. A fundamental teaching of Confucius is a person can become a (someone who is noble, just, or kind) through education. Without religious appeals, Confucius advised people to act according to an axiom that is the negative mirror of the Western golden rule: "Is there one word that one can act upon throughout the course of one's life?" According to Confucius; "Reciprocity [shu]-what you would not want for yourself, do not do to others". (Analects 15:23) After Confucius' death, his disciple Mencius (371-289 BCE) centered his philosophies on secular, humanistic concerns like the nature of good governance and the role of education rather than on ideas founded on the state or folk religions. Societies in China, Japan, and Korea were shaped by the prevalence of humanistic Confucianism.

Early Taoism also had some humanistic tenets. Taoism initially developed as a naturalistic philosophy, aiming for the harmony of self, society, and the universe. Naturalness is achieved by (non‐action); philosopher Michael LaFargue said the philosophy's fundamental book, the Tao Te Ching, is based on humanistic thought. Buddhism has also been noted to include elements of humanistic thought because Buddhism aims to the salvage humans from the sorrows of life, after abandoning egoistic tendencies, and coming in peace with society and universe.

North America

The United States Constitution was shaped by humanistic ideas originating from the Enlightenment but did not go far enough to tackle gender-and-race-inequality issues. According to Carol Wayne White, Black communities experiencing injustice moved toward atheism in the 20th century. Later, many Black organizations loosely connected within the Black Lives Matter movement rejected theism or embraced a humanistic agenda. Black literature reveals the quest for freedom and justice in a community often subordinated to white dominance.

Latin America

Humanism in Latin America is hard to detect, mainly because of the dominance of Catholicism and Protestantism. European positivism had influenced the thought of scholars and political leaders in Latin America during the 19th century but its influences wavered in the next century. In recent years, the number of humanist organizations in Latin America has increased.

In Europe, various currents of 19th century though as freethinkers, ethicists, atheists and rationalists have merged to form the contemporary humanist movement. Various national organizations founded the European Humanist Federation (EHF) in 1991, affirming their support for secularism. All humanistic organizations promote a naturalistic worldview, scientific approach, individualism, and solidarity but they vary in terms of their practice. One view is that they should focus on meeting the needs of non-religious peoples and their members; the other is pursuing activism to bring about social change. These two main patterns in European humanism that coexist within humanist organizations often collude with each other.

Demographics

Humanists demographic data are sparse. Scholar Yasmin Trejo examined the results of Pew Research Center's 2014 Religious Landscape Study. Trejo did not use self-identification to measure humanists but combined the answers of two questions: "Do you believe in God or a universal spirit?" (she chose those answered 'no') and "when it comes to questions of right or wrong, which of the following do you look to most for guidance?" (picking answers 'scientific information' and 'philosophy and reason'). According to Trejo, most humanists identify as atheist or agnostic (37% and 18%), 29% as "nothing in particular", while 16% of humanists identify as religious. She also found most humanists (80%) were raised in a religious background. Sixty percent of humanists are married to non-religious spouses, while one quarter are married to a Christian. There is a gender divide among humanists; 67 percent are male. Trejo says this can be explained by the fact more males self-identify as atheist, while women have stronger connections to religion because of socialization, community influence, and stereotypes. Other findings note the high level of education of most humanists, indicating a higher socioeconomic status. The population of humanists is overwhelming non-Hispanic white; according to Trejo, this is because minority groups are usually very religious.

Criticisms

Criticism of humanism focus on its adherence to human rights, which some critics have called "Western". Critics say humanist values have become a tool of Western moral dominance, which is a form of neo-colonialism that leads to oppression and a lack of ethical diversity. Other critics say humanism is an oppressive philosophy because it is not free from the biases of the white, heterosexual males who shaped it. History professor Samuel Moyn attacks humanism for its advocacy of human rights; according to Moyn, in the 1960s, human rights were a declaration of anti-colonial struggle but during the 1970s, they were transformed into a utopian vision, replacing the failing utopias of the 20th century. The humanist underpinning of human rights turns them into a moral tool that is impractical and ultimately non-political. He also notes a commonality between humanism and the Catholic discourse on human dignity.

Anthropology professor Talal Asad said humanism is a project of modernity and a secularized continuation of Western Christian theology. According to Asad, just as the Catholic Church passed the Christian doctrine of love to Africa and Asia while assisting in the enslavement of large parts of their population, humanist values have at times been a pretext for Western countries to expand their influence to other parts of the world to humanize "barbarians". Asad has also said humanism is not a purely secular phenomenon but takes the idea of the essence of humanity from Christianity. According to Asad, Western humanism cannot incorporate other humanistic traditions, such as those from India and China, without subsuming and ultimately eliminating them.

Sociology professor Didier Fassin said humanism's focus on empathy and compassion, rather than goodness and justice, is a problem. According to Fassin, humanism originated in the Christian tradition, particularly the Parable of the Good Samaritan, in which empathy is universalized. Fassin also said humanism's central essence, the sanctity of human life, is a religious victory hidden in a secular wrapper.

Another argument states humanism is opposed to traditional values, and destroys family and family values. A similar argument says, with a more religious tone, the materialism of humanism diminishes humanity because humans no longer have a soul or a higher nature, nor are they a reflection of God.

Antihumanism

Antihumanism is a philosophical theory that rejects humanism as a pre-scientific ideology. This argument developed during the 19th and 20th centuries in parallel with the advancement of humanism. Prominent thinkers questioned the metaphysics of humanism and the human nature of its concept of freedom. Nietzsche, while departing from a humanistic, pro-Enlightenment viewpoint, criticized humanism for illusions on a number of topics, especially the nature of truth. According to Nietzsche, objective truth is an anthropomorphic illusion and humanism is meaningless, and replacing theism with reason and science simply replaces one religion with another.

According to Karl Marx, humanism is a bourgeois project that attempts to present itself as radical but is not. After the atrocities of World War II, questions about human nature and the concept of humanity were renewed. During the Cold War, influential Marxist philosopher Louis Althusser introduced the term "theoretical antihumanism" to attack both humanism and humanist-like socialist currents, eschewing more structural and formal interpretations of Marx. According to Althusser, Marx's early writings resonate with the humanistic idealism of Hegel, Kant, and Feuerbach but Marx radically moved toward scientific socialism in 1845, rejecting concepts such as the essence of man. Other antihumanist writers such as Martin Heidegger and Michel Foucault attacked the notion of humanity using psychoanalysis, Marxism, and linguistic theory.

Humanist organizations

Humanist organizations exist in several countries. Humanists International is a global organization. Humanists UK-formerly the British Humanist Association-and the American Humanist Association are two of the oldest humanist organizations.

In 2015, London-based Humanists UK had around 28,000 members and a budget of over £1 million to cover operational costs. Its membership includes some high-profile people such as Richard Dawkins, Brian Cox, Salman Rushdie, Polly Toynbee, and Stephen Fry, who are mostly known for their participation in public debate; promoting reason, science and secularism; and objecting to state funding for faith-based events and institutions. Humanists UK organizes and conducts non-religious ceremonies for weddings, namings, comings of age, and funerals. According to Stephen Law, ceremonies and rituals exist in our culture because they help humans express emotions rather than having a magical effect on the participants.

The American Humanist Association (AHA) was formed in 1941 from previous humanist associations. Its journal The Humanist is the continuation of a previous publication The Humanist Bulletin. In 1953, the AHA established the " Humanist of the Year" award to honor individuals who promote science. A few decades later, it became a well-recognized organization, initiating campaigns for abortion rights and opposing discriminatory policies, resulted in it becoming a target of the religious right by the 1980s. High-profile members of academia and public figureshave published work in The Humanist, and joined and lead the AHA.

References

1. ^ Law 2011, chapter History of Humanism, #Ancient Greece; Freeman 2015See also Foreword of the book, p xi; Lamont 1997, p. 68; Davies 1996, p. 9.

2. ^ Law 2011, chapter History of Humanism, #Ancient Greece:According to Law "Three early Greek philosophers - Thales, Anaximander, and Anaximenes - are of particular interest. The manner in which these Milesian philosophers thought critically and independently, largely putting aside mythological and religious explanations and instead attempting to develop their own ideas and theories grounded in observation and reason, obviously makes them particularly important from a humanist point of view. They collectively exhibit several of the key ideas and values of humanism." In the next paragraph, he also mentions presocratic philosopher, Protagoras.; Lamont 1997, p. 41-42:Lamont cites Thales, Anaximander and Heraclitus for leaning towards materialism and naturalism but, for Lamont, the first solid materialist philosopher was Democritus with his atomic theory; Barnes 1987, pp. 17-18; Curd 2020:Scholar Jonothan Banres writes: First, and most simply, the Presocratics invented the very idea of science and philosophy. They hit upon that special way of looking at the world which is the scientific or rational way. They saw the world as something ordered and intelligible, its history following an explicable course and its different parts arranged in some comprehensible system. The world was not a random collection of bits, its history was not an arbitrary series of events. Still less was it a series of events determined by the will- or the caprice - of the gods." See whole subchapter "First philosophy" pp 17-25

3. ^ Law 2011, chapter History of Humanism, #Ancient Greece.

Copson, Andrew (2015). "What is Humanism?". In A. C. Grayling (ed.). The Wiley Blackwell Handbook of Humanism. Andrew Copson. John Wiley & Sons. pp. 1-72. ISBN 978-1-119-97717-9.

Curd, Patricia (2020). "Presocratic Philosophy". In Edward N. Zalta (ed.). Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University.

Ellis, Brian (30 March 2010). "Humanism and Morality". Sophia. Springer Science and Business Media LLC. 50 (1): 135-139. doi:10.1007/s11841-010-0164-x. ISSN 0038-1527. S2CID 145380913.

Grayling, A.C. (2015). "The Good and Worthwhile Life". In A. C. Grayling (ed.). The Wiley Blackwell Handbook of Humanism. Andrew Copson. John Wiley & Sons. pp. 87-84. ISBN 978-1-119-97717-9.

Harper, Douglas. "Humanism". Online Etymological Dictionary.

Hardie, Glenn M (2000). "Humanist history: a selective review". Humanist in Canada. Gale Academic OneFile (132): 24-29, 38.

Heavens, Timothy (2013). "Confucianism as humanism" (PDF). CLA Journal (1): 33-41.

Kristeller, Paul Oskar (1978). "HUMANISM". Minerva. Springer. 16 (4): 586-595. ISSN 15731871 00264695, 15731871. JSTOR 41820353.

Monfasani, John (2020). "Humanism and the Renaissance". In Anthony B. Pinn (ed.). The Oxford Handbook of Humanism. Oxford University Press. pp. 150-175. doi:10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190921538.013.30. ISBN 978-0-19-092153-8.

Law, Stephen (2015). "Science, Reason, and Scepticism". In A. C. Grayling (ed.). The Wiley Blackwell Handbook of Humanism. Andrew Copson. John Wiley & Sons. pp. 55-71. ISBN 978-1-119-97717-9.

Nederman, Cary (8 September 2020). Edward N. Zalta (ed.). "Civic Humanism". Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2020 ed.). Archived from the original on 12 September 2021.

Rohlf, Michael (2020). Edward N. Zalta (ed.). "Immanuel Kant". Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.

Savage, David (2021). "The Development of Non-Religious Pastoral Support in the UK". Religions. 12 (10): 812. doi:10.3390/rel12100812.

Further reading

Cummings, Dolan (2018). Debating Humanism. Andrews UK Limited. ISBN 978-1-84540-690-5.

Dacey, Austin (2003). The Case for Humanism An Introduction. Rowman & Littlefield. ISBN 978-0-7425-1393-8.

Gay, Peter (1964). The Party of Humanity: Essays in the French Enlightenment. Borzoi book. Knopf. ISBN 978-90-10-04434-1.

Levi, Albert William (1969). Humanism & Politics: Studies in the Relationship of Power and Value in the Western Tradition. Indiana University Press. ISBN 978-0-253-13900-9.

Proctor, Robert E. (1998). Defining the Humanities: How Rediscovering a Tradition Can Improve Our Schools : with a Curriculum for Today's Students. Indiana University Press. ISBN 978-0-253-33421-3.

Ranisch, Robert (2014). Post- and transhumanism: an introduction. Frankfurt am Main. ISBN 9783631606629.

Rockmore, Tom (1995). Heidegger and French Philosophy: Humanism, Antihumanism, and Being. Routledge. ISBN 978-0-415-11181-2.

Wernick, A. (2001). Auguste Comte and the Religion of Humanity: The Post-theistic Program of French Social Theory. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0-521-66272-7.

External links

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Humanism is a philosophical stance that emphasizes the individual and social potential, and agency of human beings, whom it considers the starting point for serious moral and philosophical inquiry. The meaning of the term "humanism" has changed according to successive intellectual movements that have identified with it.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Existentialism is a form of philosophical inquiry that explores the issue of human existence. Existentialist philosophers explore questions related to the meaning, purpose, and value of human existence. Common concepts in existentialist thought include existential crisis, dread, and anxiety in the face of an absurd world (see: human free will), as well as authenticity, courage, and virtue.

Existentialism is associated with several 19th- and 20th-century European philosophers who shared an emphasis on the human subject, despite often profound differences in thought. Among the earliest figures associated with existentialism are philosophers Søren Kierkegaard, Friedrich Nietzsche and novelist Fyodor Dostoevsky, all of whom critiqued rationalism and concerned themselves with the problem of meaning. In the 20th century, prominent existentialist thinkers included Jean-Paul Sartre, Albert Camus, Martin Heidegger, Simone de Beauvoir, Karl Jaspers, Gabriel Marcel, and Paul Tillich.

Many existentialists considered traditional systematic or academic philosophies, in style and content, to be too abstract and removed from concrete human experience. A primary virtue in existentialist thought is authenticity. Existentialism would influence many disciplines outside of philosophy, including theology, drama, art, literature, and psychology.

Existentialist philosophy encompasses a range of perspectives, but it shares certain underlying concepts. Among these, a central tenet of existentialism is that personal freedom, individual responsibility, and deliberate choice are essential to the pursuit of self-discovery and the determination of life's meaning.

The term existentialism ( French: L'existentialisme) was coined by the French Catholic philosopher Gabriel Marcel in the mid-1940s. When Marcel first applied the term to Jean-Paul Sartre, at a colloquium in 1945, Sartre rejected it. Sartre subsequently changed his mind and, on October 29, 1945, publicly adopted the existentialist label in a lecture to the Club Maintenant in Paris, published as L'existentialisme est un humanisme ( Existentialism Is a Humanism), a short book that helped popularize existentialist thought. Marcel later came to reject the label himself in favour of Neo-Socratic, in honor of Kierkegaard's essay " On the Concept of Irony".

Some scholars argue that the term should be used to refer only to the cultural movement in Europe in the 1940s and 1950s associated with the works of the philosophers Sartre, Simone de Beauvoir, Maurice Merleau-Ponty, and Albert Camus. Others extend the term to Kierkegaard, and yet others extend it as far back as Socrates. However, it is often identified with the philosophical views of Sartre.

The labels existentialism and existentialist are often seen as historical conveniences in as much as they were first applied to many philosophers long after they had died. While existentialism is generally considered to have originated with Kierkegaard, the first prominent existentialist philosopher to adopt the term as a self-description was Sartre. Sartre posits the idea that "what all existentialists have in common is the fundamental doctrine that existence precedes essence", as the philosopher Frederick Copleston explains. According to philosopher Steven Crowell, defining existentialism has been relatively difficult, and he argues that it is better understood as a general approach used to reject certain systematic philosophies rather than as a systematic philosophy itself. In a lecture delivered in 1945, Sartre described existentialism as "the attempt to draw all the consequences from a position of consistent atheism". For others, existentialism need not involve the rejection of God, but rather "examines mortal man's search for meaning in a meaningless universe", considering less "What is the good life?" (to feel, be, or do, good), instead asking "What is life good for?".

Although many outside Scandinavia consider the term existentialism to have originated from Kierkegaard, it is more likely that Kierkegaard adopted this term (or at least the term "existential" as a description of his philosophy) from the Norwegian poet and literary critic Johan Sebastian Cammermeyer Welhaven. This assertion comes from two sources:

The Norwegian philosopher Erik Lundestad refers to the Danish philosopher Fredrik Christian Sibbern. Sibbern is supposed to have had two conversations in 1841, the first with Welhaven and the second with Kierkegaard. It is in the first conversation that it is believed that Welhaven came up with "a word that he said covered a certain thinking, which had a close and positive attitude to life, a relationship he described as existential". This was then brought to Kierkegaard by Sibbern.

The second claim comes from the Norwegian historian Rune Slagstad, who claimed to prove that Kierkegaard himself said the term existential was borrowed from the poet. He strongly believes that it was Kierkegaard himself who said that "Hegelians do not study philosophy 'existentially;' to use a phrase by Welhaven from one time when I spoke with him about philosophy."

Sartre argued that a central proposition of existentialism is that existence precedes essence, which is to say that individuals shape themselves by existing and cannot be perceived through preconceived and a priori categories, an "essence". The actual life of the individual is what constitutes what could be called their "true essence" instead of an arbitrarily attributed essence others use to define them. Human beings, through their own consciousness, create their own values and determine a meaning to their life. This view is in contradiction to Aristotle and Aquinas, who taught that essence precedes individual existence. Although it was Sartre who explicitly coined the phrase, similar notions can be found in the thought of existentialist philosophers such as Heidegger, and Kierkegaard:

The subjective thinker's form, the form of his communication, is his style. His form must be just as manifold as are the opposites that he holds together. The systematic eins, zwei, drei is an abstract form that also must inevitably run into trouble whenever it is to be applied to the concrete. To the same degree as the subjective thinker is concrete, to that same degree his form must also be concretely dialectical. But just as he himself is not a poet, not an ethicist, not a dialectician, so also his form is none of these directly. His form must first and last be related to existence, and in this regard he must have at his disposal the poetic, the ethical, the dialectical, the religious. Subordinate character, setting, etc., which belong to the well-balanced character of the esthetic production, are in themselves breadth; the subjective thinker has only one setting-existence-and has nothing to do with localities and such things. The setting is not the fairyland of the imagination, where poetry produces consummation, nor is the setting laid in England, and historical accuracy is not a concern. The setting is inwardness in existing as a human being; the concretion is the relation of the existence-categories to one another. Historical accuracy and historical actuality are breadth.

-  Søren Kierkegaard (Concluding Postscript, Hong pp. 357-358.)

Some interpret the imperative to define oneself as meaning that anyone can wish to be anything. However, an existentialist philosopher would say such a wish constitutes an inauthentic existence - what Sartre would call " bad faith". Instead, the phrase should be taken to say that people are defined only insofar as they act and that they are responsible for their actions. Someone who acts cruelly towards other people is, by that act, defined as a cruel person. Such persons are themselves responsible for their new identity (cruel persons). This is opposed to their genes, or human nature, bearing the blame.

As Sartre said in his lecture Existentialism is a Humanism: "Man first of all exists, encounters himself, surges up in the world-and defines himself afterwards." The more positive, therapeutic aspect of this is also implied: a person can choose to act in a different way, and to be a good person instead of a cruel person.

Jonathan Webber interprets Sartre's usage of the term essence not in a modal fashion, i.e. as necessary features, but in a teleological fashion: "an essence is the relational property of having a set of parts ordered in such a way as to collectively perform some activity". For example, it belongs to the essence of a house to keep the bad weather out, which is why it has walls and a roof. Humans are different from houses because-unlike houses-they do not have an inbuilt purpose: they are free to choose their own purpose and thereby shape their essence; thus, their existence precedes their essence.

Sartre is committed to a radical conception of freedom: nothing fixes our purpose but we ourselves, our projects have no weight or inertia except for our endorsement of them. Simone de Beauvoir, on the other hand, holds that there are various factors, grouped together under the term sedimentation, that offer resistance to attempts to change our direction in life. Sedimentations are themselves products of past choices and can be changed by choosing differently in the present, but such changes happen slowly. They are a force of inertia that shapes the agent's evaluative outlook on the world until the transition is complete.

Sartre's definition of existentialism was based on Heidegger's magnum opus Being and Time (1927). In the correspondence with Jean Beaufret later published as the Letter on Humanism, Heidegger implied that Sartre misunderstood him for his own purposes of subjectivism, and that he did not mean that actions take precedence over being so long as those actions were not reflected upon. Heidegger commented that "the reversal of a metaphysical statement remains a metaphysical statement", meaning that he thought Sartre had simply switched the roles traditionally attributed to essence and existence without interrogating these concepts and their history.

Sisyphus, the symbol of the absurdity of existence, painting by Franz Stuck (1920)

The notion of the absurd contains the idea that there is no meaning in the world beyond what meaning we give it. This meaninglessness also encompasses the amorality or "unfairness" of the world. This can be highlighted in the way it opposes the traditional Abrahamic religious perspective, which establishes that life's purpose is the fulfillment of God's commandments. This is what gives meaning to people's lives. To live the life of the absurd means rejecting a life that finds or pursues specific meaning for man's existence since there is nothing to be discovered. According to Albert Camus, the world or the human being is not in itself absurd. The concept only emerges through the juxtaposition of the two; life becomes absurd due to the incompatibility between human beings and the world they inhabit. This view constitutes one of the two interpretations of the absurd in existentialist literature. The second view, first elaborated by Søren Kierkegaard, holds that absurdity is limited to actions and choices of human beings. These are considered absurd since they issue from human freedom, undermining their foundation outside of themselves.

The absurd contrasts with the claim that "bad things don't happen to good people"; to the world, metaphorically speaking, there is no such thing as a good person or a bad person; what happens happens, and it may just as well happen to a "good" person as to a "bad" person. Because of the world's absurdity, anything can happen to anyone at any time and a tragic event could plummet someone into direct confrontation with the absurd. Many of the literary works of Kierkegaard, Beckett, Kafka, Dostoevsky, Ionesco, Miguel de Unamuno, Luigi Pirandello, Sartre, Joseph Heller, and Camus contain descriptions of people who encounter the absurdity of the world.

It is because of the devastating awareness of meaninglessness that Camus claimed in The Myth of Sisyphus that "There is only one truly serious philosophical problem, and that is suicide." Although "prescriptions" against the possible deleterious consequences of these kinds of encounters vary, from Kierkegaard's religious "stage" to Camus' insistence on persevering in spite of absurdity, the concern with helping people avoid living their lives in ways that put them in the perpetual danger of having everything meaningful break down is common to most existentialist philosophers. The possibility of having everything meaningful break down poses a threat of quietism, which is inherently against the existentialist philosophy. It has been said that the possibility of suicide makes all humans existentialists. The ultimate hero of absurdism lives without meaning and faces suicide without succumbing to it.

Facticity is defined by Sartre in Being and Nothingness (1943) as the , which for humans takes the form of being and not being. It is the facts of one's personal life and as per Heidegger, it is " the way in which we are thrown into the world." This can be more easily understood when considering facticity in relation to the temporal dimension of our past: one's past is what one is, meaning that it is what has formed the person who exists in the present. However, to say that one is only one's past would ignore the change a person undergoes in the present and future, while saying that one's past is only what one was, would entirely detach it from the present self. A denial of one's concrete past constitutes an inauthentic lifestyle, and also applies to other kinds of facticity (having a human body-e.g., one that does not allow a person to run faster than the speed of sound-identity, values, etc.).

Facticity is a limitation and a condition of freedom. It is a limitation in that a large part of one's facticity consists of things one did not choose (birthplace, etc.), but a condition of freedom in the sense that one's values most likely depend on it. However, even though one's facticity is "set in stone" (as being past, for instance), it cannot determine a person: the value ascribed to one's facticity is still ascribed to it freely by that person. As an example, consider two men, one of whom has no memory of his past and the other who remembers everything. Both have committed many crimes, but the first man, remembering nothing, leads a rather normal life while the second man, feeling trapped by his own past, continues a life of crime, blaming his own past for "trapping" him in this life. There is nothing essential about his committing crimes, but he ascribes this meaning to his past.

However, to disregard one's facticity during the continual process of self-making, projecting oneself into the future, would be to put oneself in denial of the conditions shaping the present self and would be inauthentic. The origin of one's projection must still be one's facticity, though in the mode of not being it (essentially). An example of one focusing solely on possible projects without reflecting on one's current facticity: would be someone who continually thinks about future possibilities related to being rich (e.g. a better car, bigger house, better quality of life, etc.) without acknowledging the facticity of not currently having the financial means to do so. In this example, considering both facticity and transcendence, an authentic mode of being would be considering future projects that might improve one's current finances (e.g. putting in extra hours, or investing savings) in order to arrive at a future-facticity of a modest pay rise, further leading to purchase of an affordable car.

Another aspect of facticity is that it entails angst. Freedom "produces" angst when limited by facticity and the lack of the possibility of having facticity to "step in" and take responsibility for something one has done also produces angst.

Another aspect of existential freedom is that one can change one's values. One is responsible for one's values, regardless of society's values. The focus on freedom in existentialism is related to the limits of responsibility one bears, as a result of one's freedom. The relationship between freedom and responsibility is one of interdependency and a clarification of freedom also clarifies that for which one is responsible.

Many noted existentialists consider the theme of authentic existence important. Authenticity involves the idea that one has to "create oneself" and live in accordance with this self. For an authentic existence, one should act as oneself, not as "one's acts" or as "one's genes" or as any other essence requires. The authentic act is one in accordance with one's freedom. A component of freedom is facticity, but not to the degree that this facticity determines one's transcendent choices (one could then blame one's background for making the choice one made [chosen project, from one's transcendence]). Facticity, in relation to authenticity, involves acting on one's actual values when making a choice (instead of, like Kierkegaard's Aesthete, "choosing" randomly), so that one takes responsibility for the act instead of choosing either-or without allowing the options to have different values.

In contrast, the inauthentic is the denial to live in accordance with one's freedom. This can take many forms, from pretending choices are meaningless or random, convincing oneself that some form of determinism is true, or "mimicry" where one acts as "one should".

How one "should" act is often determined by an image one has, of how one in such a role (bank manager, lion tamer, sex worker, etc.) acts. In Being and Nothingness, Sartre uses the example of a waiter in "bad faith". He merely takes part in the "act" of being a typical waiter, albeit very convincingly. This image usually corresponds to a social norm, but this does not mean that all acting in accordance with social norms is inauthentic. The main point is the attitude one takes to one's own freedom and responsibility and the extent to which one acts in accordance with this freedom.

The Other (written with a capital "O") is a concept more properly belonging to phenomenology and its account of intersubjectivity. However, it has seen widespread use in existentialist writings, and the conclusions drawn differ slightly from the phenomenological accounts. The Other is the experience of another free subject who inhabits the same world as a person does. In its most basic form, it is this experience of the Other that constitutes intersubjectivity and objectivity. To clarify, when one experiences someone else, and this Other person experiences the world (the same world that a person experiences)-only from "over there"-the world is constituted as objective in that it is something that is "there" as identical for both of the subjects; a person experiences the other person as experiencing the same things. This experience of the Other's look is what is termed the Look (sometimes the Gaze).

While this experience, in its basic phenomenological sense, constitutes the world as objective and oneself as objectively existing subjectivity (one experiences oneself as seen in the Other's Look in precisely the same way that one experiences the Other as seen by him, as subjectivity), in existentialism, it also acts as a kind of limitation of freedom. This is because the Look tends to objectify what it sees. When one experiences oneself in the Look, one does not experience oneself as nothing (no thing), but as something (some thing). In Sartre's example of a man peeping at someone through a keyhole, the man is entirely caught up in the situation he is in. He is in a pre-reflexive state where his entire consciousness is directed at what goes on in the room. Suddenly, he hears a creaking floorboard behind him and he becomes aware of himself as seen by the Other. He is then filled with shame for he perceives himself as he would perceive someone else doing what he was doing-as a Peeping Tom. For Sartre, this phenomenological experience of shame establishes proof for the existence of other minds and defeats the problem of solipsism. For the conscious state of shame to be experienced, one has to become aware of oneself as an object of another look, proving a priori, that other minds exist. The Look is then co-constitutive of one's facticity.

Another characteristic feature of the Look is that no Other really needs to have been there: It is possible that the creaking floorboard was simply the movement of an old house; the Look is not some kind of mystical telepathic experience of the actual way the Other sees one (there may have been someone there, but he could have not noticed that person). It is only one's perception of the way another might perceive him.

"Existential angst", sometimes called existential dread, anxiety, or anguish, is a term common to many existentialist thinkers. It is generally held to be a negative feeling arising from the experience of human freedom and responsibility. The archetypal example is the experience one has when standing on a cliff where one not only fears falling off it, but also dreads the possibility of throwing oneself off. In this experience that "nothing is holding me back", one senses the lack of anything that predetermines one to either throw oneself off or to stand still, and one experiences one's own freedom.

It can also be seen in relation to the previous point how angst is before nothing, and this is what sets it apart from fear that has an object. While one can take measures to remove an object of fear, for angst no such "constructive" measures are possible. The use of the word "nothing" in this context relates to the inherent insecurity about the consequences of one's actions and to the fact that, in experiencing freedom as angst, one also realizes that one is fully responsible for these consequences. There is nothing in people (genetically, for instance) that acts in their stead-that they can blame if something goes wrong. Therefore, not every choice is perceived as having dreadful possible consequences (and, it can be claimed, human lives would be unbearable if every choice facilitated dread). However, this does not change the fact that freedom remains a condition of every action.

Despair is generally defined as a loss of hope. In existentialism, it is more specifically a loss of hope in reaction to a breakdown in one or more of the defining qualities of one's self or identity. If a person is invested in being a particular thing, such as a bus driver or an upstanding citizen, and then finds their being-thing compromised, they would normally be found in a state of despair-a hopeless state. For example, a singer who loses the ability to sing may despair if they have nothing else to fall back on-nothing to rely on for their identity. They find themselves unable to be what defined their being.

What sets the existentialist notion of despair apart from the conventional definition is that existentialist despair is a state one is in even when they are not overtly in despair. So long as a person's identity depends on qualities that can crumble, they are in perpetual despair-and as there is, in Sartrean terms, no human essence found in conventional reality on which to constitute the individual's sense of identity, despair is a universal human condition. As Kierkegaard defines it in : "Let each one learn what he can; both of us can learn that a person's unhappiness never lies in his lack of control over external conditions, since this would only make him completely unhappy." In Works of Love, he says:

When the God-forsaken worldliness of earthly life shuts itself in complacency, the confined air develops poison, the moment gets stuck and stands still, the prospect is lost, a need is felt for a refreshing, enlivening breeze to cleanse the air and dispel the poisonous vapors lest we suffocate in worldliness. ... Lovingly to hope all things is the opposite of despairingly to hope nothing at all. Love hopes all things-yet is never put to shame. To relate oneself expectantly to the possibility of the good is to hope. To relate oneself expectantly to the possibility of evil is to fear. By the decision to choose hope one decides infinitely more than it seems, because it is an eternal decision.

-  Søren Kierkegaard, Works of Love

Existentialists oppose defining human beings as primarily rational, and, therefore, oppose both positivism and rationalism. Existentialism asserts that people make decisions based on subjective meaning rather than pure rationality. The rejection of reason as the source of meaning is a common theme of existentialist thought, as is the focus on the anxiety and dread that we feel in the face of our own radical free will and our awareness of death. Kierkegaard advocated rationality as a means to interact with the objective world (e.g., in the natural sciences), but when it comes to existential problems, reason is insufficient: "Human reason has boundaries".

Like Kierkegaard, Sartre saw problems with rationality, calling it a form of "bad faith", an attempt by the self to impose structure on a world of phenomena-"the Other"-that is fundamentally irrational and random. According to Sartre, rationality and other forms of bad faith hinder people from finding meaning in freedom. To try to suppress feelings of anxiety and dread, people confine themselves within everyday experience, Sartre asserted, thereby relinquishing their freedom and acquiescing to being possessed in one form or another by "the Look" of "the Other" (i.e., possessed by another person-or at least one's idea of that other person).

An existentialist reading of the Bible would demand that the reader recognize that they are an existing subject studying the words more as a recollection of events. This is in contrast to looking at a collection of "truths" that are outside and unrelated to the reader, but may develop a sense of reality/God. Such a reader is not obligated to follow the commandments as if an external agent is forcing these commandments upon them, but as though they are inside them and guiding them from inside. This is the task Kierkegaard takes up when he asks: "Who has the more difficult task: the teacher who lectures on earnest things a meteor's distance from everyday life-or the learner who should put it to use?" Philosophers such as Similarly, Hans Jonas and Rudolph Bultmann introduced the concept of existentialist demythologization into the field of Early Christianity and Christian Theology, respectively.

Although nihilism and existentialism are distinct philosophies, they are often confused with one another since both are rooted in the human experience of anguish and confusion that stems from the apparent meaninglessness of a world in which humans are compelled to find or create meaning. A primary cause of confusion is that Friedrich Nietzsche was an important philosopher in both fields.

Existentialist philosophers often stress the importance of angst as signifying the absolute lack of any objective ground for action, a move that is often reduced to moral or existential nihilism. A pervasive theme in existentialist philosophy, however, is to persist through encounters with the absurd, as seen in Camus's The Myth of Sisyphus ("One must imagine Sisyphus happy.") and it is only very rarely that existentialist philosophers dismiss morality or one's self-created meaning: Kierkegaard regained a sort of morality in the religious (although he would not agree that it was ethical; the religious suspends the ethical), and Sartre's final words in Being and Nothingness are: "All these questions, which refer us to a pure and not an accessory (or impure) reflection, can find their reply only on the ethical plane. We shall devote to them a future work."

Some have argued that existentialism has long been an element of European religious thought, even before the term came into use. William Barrett identified Blaise Pascal and Søren Kierkegaard as two specific examples. Jean Wahl also identified William Shakespeare's Prince Hamlet (" To be, or not to be"), Jules Lequier, Thomas Carlyle and William James as existentialists. According to Wahl, "the origins of most great philosophies, like those of Plato, Descartes, and Kant, are to be found in existential reflections." Precursors to Existentialism can also be identified in the works of Iranian Islamic philosopher Mulla Sadra (c. 1571 - 1635) who would posit that " existence precedes essence" becoming the principle expositor of the School of Isfahan which is described as 'alive and active'.

Kierkegaard is generally considered to have been the first existentialist philosopher. He proposed that each individual-not reason, society, or religious orthodoxy-is solely tasked with giving meaning to life and living it sincerely, or "authentically".

Kierkegaard and Nietzsche were two of the first philosophers considered fundamental to the existentialist movement, though neither used the term "existentialism" and it is unclear whether they would have supported the existentialism of the 20th century. They focused on subjective human experience rather than the objective truths of mathematics and science, which they believed were too detached or observational to truly get at the human experience. Like Pascal, they were interested in people's quiet struggle with the apparent meaninglessness of life and the use of diversion to escape from boredom. Unlike Pascal, Kierkegaard and Nietzsche also considered the role of making free choices, particularly regarding fundamental values and beliefs, and how such choices change the nature and identity of the chooser. Kierkegaard's knight of faith and Nietzsche's Übermensch are representative of people who exhibit freedom, in that they define the nature of their own existence. Nietzsche's idealized individual invents his own values and creates the very terms they excel under. By contrast, Kierkegaard, opposed to the level of abstraction in Hegel, and not nearly as hostile (actually welcoming) to Christianity as Nietzsche, argues through a pseudonym that the objective certainty of religious truths (specifically Christian) is not only impossible, but even founded on logical paradoxes. Yet he continues to imply that a leap of faith is a possible means for an individual to reach a higher stage of existence that transcends and contains both an aesthetic and ethical value of life. Kierkegaard and Nietzsche were also precursors to other intellectual movements, including postmodernism, and various strands of psychotherapy. However, Kierkegaard believed that individuals should live in accordance with their thinking.

The first important literary author also important to existentialism was the Russian, Dostoyevsky. Dostoyevsky's Notes from Underground portrays a man unable to fit into society and unhappy with the identities he creates for himself. Sartre, in his book on existentialism Existentialism is a Humanism, quoted Dostoyevsky's The Brothers Karamazov as an example of existential crisis. Other Dostoyevsky novels covered issues raised in existentialist philosophy while presenting story lines divergent from secular existentialism: for example, in Crime and Punishment, the protagonist Raskolnikov experiences an existential crisis and then moves toward a Christian Orthodox worldview similar to that advocated by Dostoyevsky himself.

In the first decades of the 20th century, a number of philosophers and writers explored existentialist ideas. The Spanish philosopher Miguel de Unamuno y Jugo, in his 1913 book The Tragic Sense of Life in Men and Nations, emphasized the life of "flesh and bone" as opposed to that of abstract rationalism. Unamuno rejected systematic philosophy in favor of the individual's quest for faith. He retained a sense of the tragic, even absurd nature of the quest, symbolized by his enduring interest in the eponymous character from the Miguel de Cervantes novel Don Quixote. A novelist, poet and dramatist as well as philosophy professor at the University of Salamanca, Unamuno wrote a short story about a priest's crisis of faith, Saint Manuel the Good, Martyr, which has been collected in anthologies of existentialist fiction. Another Spanish thinker, José Ortega y Gasset, writing in 1914, held that human existence must always be defined as the individual person combined with the concrete circumstances of his life: " Yo soy yo y mi circunstancia" ("I am myself and my circumstances"). Sartre likewise believed that human existence is not an abstract matter, but is always situated (" en situation").

Although Martin Buber wrote his major philosophical works in German, and studied and taught at the Universities of Berlin and Frankfurt, he stands apart from the mainstream of German philosophy. Born into a Jewish family in Vienna in 1878, he was also a scholar of Jewish culture and involved at various times in Zionism and Hasidism. In 1938, he moved permanently to Jerusalem. His best-known philosophical work was the short book , published in 1922. For Buber, the fundamental fact of human existence, too readily overlooked by scientific rationalism and abstract philosophical thought, is "man with man", a dialogue that takes place in the so-called "sphere of between" ("das Zwischenmenschliche").

Two Russian philosophers, Lev Shestov and Nikolai Berdyaev, became well known as existentialist thinkers during their post-Revolutionary exiles in Paris. Shestov had launched an attack on rationalism and systematization in philosophy as early as 1905 in his book of aphorisms All Things Are Possible. Berdyaev drew a radical distinction between the world of spirit and the everyday world of objects. Human freedom, for Berdyaev, is rooted in the realm of spirit, a realm independent of scientific notions of causation. To the extent the individual human being lives in the objective world, he is estranged from authentic spiritual freedom. "Man" is not to be interpreted naturalistically, but as a being created in God's image, an originator of free, creative acts. He published a major work on these themes, The Destiny of Man, in 1931.

Gabriel Marcel, long before coining the term "existentialism", introduced important existentialist themes to a French audience in his early essay "Existence and Objectivity" (1925) and in his Metaphysical Journal (1927). A dramatist as well as a philosopher, Marcel found his philosophical starting point in a condition of metaphysical alienation: the human individual searching for harmony in a transient life. Harmony, for Marcel, was to be sought through "secondary reflection", a "dialogical" rather than "dialectical" approach to the world, characterized by "wonder and astonishment" and open to the "presence" of other people and of God rather than merely to "information" about them. For Marcel, such presence implied more than simply being there (as one thing might be in the presence of another thing); it connoted "extravagant" availability, and the willingness to put oneself at the disposal of the other.

Marcel contrasted secondary reflection with abstract, scientific-technical primary reflection, which he associated with the activity of the abstract Cartesian ego. For Marcel, philosophy was a concrete activity undertaken by a sensing, feeling human being incarnate-embodied-in a concrete world. Although Sartre adopted the term "existentialism" for his own philosophy in the 1940s, Marcel's thought has been described as "almost diametrically opposed" to that of Sartre. Unlike Sartre, Marcel was a Christian, and became a Catholic convert in 1929.

In Germany, the psychologist and philosopher Karl Jaspers-who later described existentialism as a "phantom" created by the public-called his own thought, heavily influenced by Kierkegaard and Nietzsche, Existenzphilosophie. For Jaspers, " Existenz-philosophy is the way of thought by means of which man seeks to become himself...This way of thought does not cognize objects, but elucidates and makes actual the being of the thinker".

Jaspers, a professor at the university of Heidelberg, was acquainted with Heidegger, who held a professorship at Marburg before acceding to Husserl's chair at Freiburg in 1928. They held many philosophical discussions, but later became estranged over Heidegger's support of National Socialism. They shared an admiration for Kierkegaard, and in the 1930s, Heidegger lectured extensively on Nietzsche. Nevertheless, the extent to which Heidegger should be considered an existentialist is debatable. In Being and Time he presented a method of rooting philosophical explanations in human existence ( Dasein) to be analysed in terms of existential categories ( existentiale); and this has led many commentators to treat him as an important figure in the existentialist movement.

Following the Second World War, existentialism became a well-known and significant philosophical and cultural movement, mainly through the public prominence of two French writers, Jean-Paul Sartre and Albert Camus, who wrote best-selling novels, plays and widely read journalism as well as theoretical texts. These years also saw the growing reputation of Being and Time outside Germany.

French philosophers Jean-Paul Sartre and Simone de Beauvoir

Sartre dealt with existentialist themes in his 1938 novel and the short stories in his 1939 collection , and had published his treatise on existentialism, Being and Nothingness, in 1943, but it was in the two years following the liberation of Paris from the German occupying forces that he and his close associates-Camus, Simone de Beauvoir, Maurice Merleau-Ponty, and others-became internationally famous as the leading figures of a movement known as existentialism. In a very short period of time, Camus and Sartre in particular became the leading public intellectuals of post-war France, achieving by the end of 1945 "a fame that reached across all audiences." Camus was an editor of the most popular leftist (former French Resistance) newspaper ; Sartre launched his journal of leftist thought, Les Temps Modernes, and two weeks later gave the widely reported lecture on existentialism and secular humanism to a packed meeting of the Club Maintenant. Beauvoir wrote that "not a week passed without the newspapers discussing us"; existentialism became "the first media craze of the postwar era."

By the end of 1947, Camus' earlier fiction and plays had been reprinted, his new play had been performed and his novel published; the first two novels of Sartre's The Roads to Freedom trilogy had appeared, as had Beauvoir's novel The Blood of Others. Works by Camus and Sartre were already appearing in foreign editions. The Paris-based existentialists had become famous.

Sartre had traveled to Germany in 1930 to study the phenomenology of Edmund Husserl and Martin Heidegger, and he included critical comments on their work in his major treatise Being and Nothingness. Heidegger's thought had also become known in French philosophical circles through its use by Alexandre Kojève in explicating Hegel in a series of lectures given in Paris in the 1930s. The lectures were highly influential; members of the audience included not only Sartre and Merleau-Ponty, but Raymond Queneau, Georges Bataille, Louis Althusser, André Breton, and Jacques Lacan. A selection from Being and Time was published in French in 1938, and his essays began to appear in French philosophy journals.

French philosopher, novelist, and playwright Albert Camus

Heidegger read Sartre's work and was initially impressed, commenting: "Here for the first time I encountered an independent thinker who, from the foundations up, has experienced the area out of which I think. Your work shows such an immediate comprehension of my philosophy as I have never before encountered." Later, however, in response to a question posed by his French follower Jean Beaufret, Heidegger distanced himself from Sartre's position and existentialism in general in his Letter on Humanism. Heidegger's reputation continued to grow in France during the 1950s and 1960s. In the 1960s, Sartre attempted to reconcile existentialism and Marxism in his work Critique of Dialectical Reason. A major theme throughout his writings was freedom and responsibility.

Camus was a friend of Sartre, until their falling-out, and wrote several works with existential themes including , Summer in Algiers, The Myth of Sisyphus, and The Stranger, the latter being "considered-to what would have been Camus's irritation-the exemplary existentialist novel." Camus, like many others, rejected the existentialist label, and considered his works concerned with facing the absurd. In the titular book, Camus uses the analogy of the Greek myth of Sisyphus to demonstrate the futility of existence. In the myth, Sisyphus is condemned for eternity to roll a rock up a hill, but when he reaches the summit, the rock will roll to the bottom again. Camus believes that this existence is pointless but that Sisyphus ultimately finds meaning and purpose in his task, simply by continually applying himself to it. The first half of the book contains an extended rebuttal of what Camus took to be existentialist philosophy in the works of Kierkegaard, Shestov, Heidegger, and Jaspers.

Simone de Beauvoir, an important existentialist who spent much of her life as Sartre's partner, wrote about feminist and existentialist ethics in her works, including The Second Sex and The Ethics of Ambiguity. Although often overlooked due to her relationship with Sartre, de Beauvoir integrated existentialism with other forms of thinking such as feminism, unheard of at the time, resulting in alienation from fellow writers such as Camus.

Paul Tillich, an important existentialist theologian following Kierkegaard and Karl Barth, applied existentialist concepts to Christian theology, and helped introduce existential theology to the general public. His seminal work The Courage to Be follows Kierkegaard's analysis of anxiety and life's absurdity, but puts forward the thesis that modern humans must, via God, achieve selfhood in spite of life's absurdity. Rudolf Bultmann used Kierkegaard's and Heidegger's philosophy of existence to demythologize Christianity by interpreting Christian mythical concepts into existentialist concepts.

Maurice Merleau-Ponty, an existential phenomenologist, was for a time a companion of Sartre. Merleau-Ponty's Phenomenology of Perception (1945) was recognized as a major statement of French existentialism. It has been said that Merleau-Ponty's work Humanism and Terror greatly influenced Sartre. However, in later years they were to disagree irreparably, dividing many existentialists such as de Beauvoir, who sided with Sartre.

Colin Wilson, an English writer, published his study The Outsider in 1956, initially to critical acclaim. In this book and others (e.g. Introduction to the New Existentialism), he attempted to reinvigorate what he perceived as a pessimistic philosophy and bring it to a wider audience. He was not, however, academically trained, and his work was attacked by professional philosophers for lack of rigor and critical standards.

Adolphe Menjou (left) and Kirk Douglas (right) in Paths of Glory (1957)

Stanley Kubrick's 1957 anti-war film Paths of Glory "illustrates, and even illuminates...existentialism" by examining the "necessary absurdity of the human condition" and the "horror of war". The film tells the story of a fictional World War I French army regiment ordered to attack an impregnable German stronghold; when the attack fails, three soldiers are chosen at random, court-martialed by a " kangaroo court", and executed by firing squad. The film examines existentialist ethics, such as the issue of whether objectivity is possible and the "problem of authenticity". Orson Welles's 1962 film , based upon Franz Kafka's book of the same name ( Der Prozeß), is characteristic of both existentialist and absurdist themes in its depiction of a man (Joseph K.) arrested for a crime for which the charges are neither revealed to him nor to the reader.

Neon Genesis Evangelion is a Japanese science fiction animation series created by the anime studio Gainax and was both directed and written by Hideaki Anno. Existential themes of individuality, consciousness, freedom, choice, and responsibility are heavily relied upon throughout the entire series, particularly through the philosophies of Jean-Paul Sartre and Søren Kierkegaard. Episode 16's title, "The Sickness Unto Death, And..." is a reference to Kierkegaard's book, The Sickness Unto Death.

Notable directors known for their existentialist films include Ingmar Bergman, Bela Tarr, Robert Bresson, Jean-Pierre Melville, François Truffaut, Jean-Luc Godard, Michelangelo Antonioni, Akira Kurosawa, Terrence Malick, Stanley Kubrick, Andrei Tarkovsky, Hideaki Anno, Wes Anderson, Gaspar Noé, Woody Allen, and Christopher Nolan. Charlie Kaufman's Synecdoche, New York focuses on the protagonist's desire to find existential meaning. Similarly, in Kurosawa's , the protagonist's experiences as an intern in a rural health clinic in Japan lead him to an existential crisis whereby he questions his reason for being. This, in turn, leads him to a better understanding of humanity. The French film, Mood Indigo (directed by Michel Gondry) embraced various elements of existentialism. The film The Shawshank Redemption, released in 1994, depicts life in a prison in Maine, United States to explore several existentialist concepts.

First edition of The Trial by Franz Kafka (1925)

Existential perspectives are also found in modern literature to varying degrees, especially since the 1920s. Louis-Ferdinand Céline's Journey to the End of the Night ( Voyage au bout de la nuit, 1932) celebrated by both Sartre and Beauvoir, contained many of the themes that would be found in later existential literature, and is in some ways, the proto-existential novel. Jean-Paul Sartre's 1938 novel was "steeped in Existential ideas", and is considered an accessible way of grasping his philosophical stance. Between 1900 and 1960, other authors such as Albert Camus, Franz Kafka, Rainer Maria Rilke, T. S. Eliot, Hermann Hesse, Luigi Pirandello, Ralph Ellison, and Jack Kerouac composed literature or poetry that contained, to varying degrees, elements of existential or proto-existential thought. The philosophy's influence even reached pulp literature shortly after the turn of the 20th century, as seen in the existential disparity witnessed in Man's lack of control of his fate in the works of H. P. Lovecraft.

Sartre wrote in 1944, an existentialist play originally published in French as Huis Clos (meaning or "behind closed doors"), which is the source of the popular quote, "Hell is other people." (In French, "L'enfer, c'est les autres"). The play begins with a Valet leading a man into a room that the audience soon realizes is in hell. Eventually he is joined by two women. After their entry, the Valet leaves and the door is shut and locked. All three expect to be tortured, but no torturer arrives. Instead, they realize they are there to torture each other, which they do effectively by probing each other's sins, desires, and unpleasant memories.

Existentialist themes are displayed in the Theatre of the Absurd, notably in Samuel Beckett's Waiting for Godot, in which two men divert themselves while they wait expectantly for someone (or something) named Godot who never arrives. They claim Godot is an acquaintance, but in fact, hardly know him, admitting they would not recognize him if they saw him. Samuel Beckett, once asked who or what Godot is, replied, "If I knew, I would have said so in the play." To occupy themselves, the men eat, sleep, talk, argue, sing, play games, exercise, swap hats, and contemplate suicide-anything "to hold the terrible silence at bay". The play "exploits several archetypal forms and situations, all of which lend themselves to both comedy and pathos." The play also illustrates an attitude toward human experience on earth: the poignancy, oppression, camaraderie, hope, corruption, and bewilderment of human experience that can be reconciled only in the mind and art of the absurdist. The play examines questions such as death, the meaning of human existence and the place of God in human existence.

Tom Stoppard's Rosencrantz & Guildenstern Are Dead is an absurdist tragicomedy first staged at the Edinburgh Festival Fringe in 1966. The play expands upon the exploits of two minor characters from Shakespeare's . Comparisons have also been drawn to Samuel Beckett's Waiting for Godot, for the presence of two central characters who appear almost as two halves of a single character. Many plot features are similar as well: the characters pass time by playing Questions, impersonating other characters, and interrupting each other or remaining silent for long periods of time. The two characters are portrayed as two clowns or fools in a world beyond their understanding. They stumble through philosophical arguments while not realizing the implications, and muse on the irrationality and randomness of the world.

Jean Anouilh's also presents arguments founded on existentialist ideas. It is a tragedy inspired by Greek mythology and the play of the same name ( Antigone, by Sophocles) from the fifth century BC. In English, it is often distinguished from its antecedent by being pronounced in its original French form, approximately "Ante-GŌN." The play was first performed in Paris on 6 February 1944, during the Nazi occupation of France. Produced under Nazi censorship, the play is purposefully ambiguous with regards to the rejection of authority (represented by Antigone) and the acceptance of it (represented by Creon). The parallels to the French Resistance and the Nazi occupation have been drawn. Antigone rejects life as desperately meaningless but without affirmatively choosing a noble death. The crux of the play is the lengthy dialogue concerning the nature of power, fate, and choice, during which Antigone says that she is, "... disgusted with [the]...promise of a humdrum happiness." She states that she would rather die than live a mediocre existence.

Critic Martin Esslin in his book Theatre of the Absurd pointed out how many contemporary playwrights such as Samuel Beckett, Eugène Ionesco, Jean Genet, and Arthur Adamov wove into their plays the existentialist belief that we are absurd beings loose in a universe empty of real meaning. Esslin noted that many of these playwrights demonstrated the philosophy better than did the plays by Sartre and Camus. Though most of such playwrights, subsequently labeled "Absurdist" (based on Esslin's book), denied affiliations with existentialism and were often staunchly anti-philosophical (for example Ionesco often claimed he identified more with 'Pataphysics or with Surrealism than with existentialism), the playwrights are often linked to existentialism based on Esslin's observation.

Black existentialism explores the existence and experiences of Black people in the world. Classical and contemporary thinkers include C.L.R James, Frederick Douglass, W.E.B DuBois, Frantz Fanon, Angela Davis, Cornell West, Naomi Zack, bell hooks, Stuart Hall, Lewis Gordon, and Audre Lorde.

A major offshoot of existentialism as a philosophy is existentialist psychology and psychoanalysis, which first crystallized in the work of Otto Rank, Freud's closest associate for 20 years. Without awareness of the writings of Rank, Ludwig Binswanger was influenced by Freud, Edmund Husserl, Heidegger, and Sartre. A later figure was Viktor Frankl, who briefly met Freud as a young man. His logotherapy can be regarded as a form of existentialist therapy. The existentialists would also influence social psychology, antipositivist micro- sociology, symbolic interactionism, and post-structuralism, with the work of thinkers such as Georg Simmel and Michel Foucault. Foucault was a great reader of Kierkegaard even though he almost never refers to this author, who nonetheless had for him an importance as secret as it was decisive.

An early contributor to existentialist psychology in the United States was Rollo May, who was strongly influenced by Kierkegaard and Otto Rank. One of the most prolific writers on techniques and theory of existentialist psychology in the US is Irvin D. Yalom. Yalom states that

Aside from their reaction against Freud's mechanistic, deterministic model of the mind and their assumption of a phenomenological approach in therapy, the existentialist analysts have little in common and have never been regarded as a cohesive ideological school. These thinkers-who include Ludwig Binswanger, Medard Boss, Eugène Minkowski, V. E. Gebsattel, Roland Kuhn, G. Caruso, F. T. Buytendijk, G. Bally, and Victor Frankl-were almost entirely unknown to the American psychotherapeutic community until Rollo May's highly influential 1958 book Existence -and especially his introductory essay-introduced their work into this country.

A more recent contributor to the development of a European version of existentialist psychotherapy is the British-based Emmy van Deurzen.

Anxiety's importance in existentialism makes it a popular topic in psychotherapy. Therapists often offer existentialist philosophy as an explanation for anxiety. The assertion is that anxiety is manifested of an individual's complete freedom to decide, and complete responsibility for the outcome of such decisions. Psychotherapists using an existentialist approach believe that a patient can harness his anxiety and use it constructively. Instead of suppressing anxiety, patients are advised to use it as grounds for change. By embracing anxiety as inevitable, a person can use it to achieve his full potential in life. Humanistic psychology also had major impetus from existentialist psychology and shares many of the fundamental tenets. Terror management theory, based on the writings of Ernest Becker and Otto Rank, is a developing area of study within the academic study of psychology. It looks at what researchers claim are implicit emotional reactions of people confronted with the knowledge that they will eventually die.

Also, Gerd B. Achenbach has refreshed the Socratic tradition with his own blend of philosophical counseling; as did Michel Weber with his Chromatiques Center in Belgium.

Walter Kaufmann criticized "the profoundly unsound methods and the dangerous contempt for reason that have been so prominent in existentialism." Logical positivist philosophers, such as Rudolf Carnap and A. J. Ayer, assert that existentialists are often confused about the verb "to be" in their analyses of "being". Specifically, they argue that the verb "is" is transitive and pre-fixed to a predicate (e.g., an apple is red) (without a predicate, the word "is" is meaningless), and that existentialists frequently misuse the term in this manner. Wilson has stated in his book The Angry Years that existentialism has created many of its own difficulties: "We can see how this question of freedom of the will has been vitiated by post-romantic philosophy, with its inbuilt tendency to laziness and boredom, we can also see how it came about that existentialism found itself in a hole of its own digging, and how the philosophical developments since then have amounted to walking in circles round that hole."

Sartre's philosophy

Many critics argue Sartre's philosophy is contradictory. Specifically, they argue that Sartre makes metaphysical arguments despite his claiming that his philosophical views ignore metaphysics. Herbert Marcuse criticized Being and Nothingness for projecting anxiety and meaninglessness onto the nature of existence itself: "Insofar as Existentialism is a philosophical doctrine, it remains an idealistic doctrine: it hypostatizes specific historical conditions of human existence into ontological and metaphysical characteristics. Existentialism thus becomes part of the very ideology which it attacks, and its radicalism is illusory."

In Letter on Humanism, Heidegger criticized Sartre's existentialism:

Existentialism says existence precedes essence. In this statement he is taking existentia and essentia according to their metaphysical meaning, which, from Plato's time on, has said that essentia precedes existentia. Sartre reverses this statement. But the reversal of a metaphysical statement remains a metaphysical statement. With it, he stays with metaphysics, in oblivion of the truth of Being.

Appignanesi, Richard; Zarate, Oscar (2001). Introducing Existentialism. Cambridge, UK: Icon. ISBN 1-84046-266-3.

Barrett, William (1958). Irrational Man: A Study in Existential Philosophy (1st ed.). Doubleday.

Deurzen, Emmy van (2010). Everyday Mysteries: a Handbook of Existential Psychotherapy (2nd ed.). London: Routledge. ISBN 978-0-415-37643-3.

Fallico, Arthuro B. (1962). Art & Existentialism. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall.

Marino, Gordon, ed. (2004). Basic Writings of Existentialism. New York: Modern Library. ISBN 0-375-75989-1.

Merleau-Ponty, M. (1962). Phenomenology of Perception [Colin Smith]. New York: Routledge and Kegan Paul. ISBN 9780710036131.

Rose, Eugene (Fr. Seraphim) (1994). Nihilism: The Root of the Revolution of the Modern Age. Saint Herman Press (1 September 1994). ISBN 0-938635-15-8. Archived from the original on 2 March 2013.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Existentialism is a form of philosophical inquiry that explores the issue of human existence. Existentialist philosophers explore questions related to the meaning, purpose, and value of human existence. Common concepts in existentialist thought include existential crisis, dread, and anxiety in the face of an absurd world (see: human free will), as well as authenticity, courage, and virtue.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
"What makes something right or wrong?" Narrated by Stephen Fry - That's Humanism!

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Why We Experience An Existential Crisis - The Philosophy of Jean-Paul Sartre