Man is condemned to be free; because once thrown into the world, he is responsible for everything he does. It is up to you to give [life] a meaning.
Jean-Paul Satre, Characterizations of Existentialism
As a short introduction to existentialism, this book is fair and comprehensive. Normally, we see ‘conventional’ philosophy as a process to discover ways to ‘think about the world’ and to pursue a good life. But existentialist thinkers such as Kierkegaard and Nietzsche have overthrown this method. Instead of starting from the root and examining the theories on human nature, they established a seminal pattern that helps us focus only on purposes. The truth, contains only in our experience with the world, and is always personal. How we live depends on how we want to live it, and it has nothing to do with the path set up by the mass and society.
There is one crucial idea: those who follow a conventional path and later have a ‘quarter-life crisis’ have believed what Satre called, ‘bad faith’. Unlike a paper-knife whose existence is preordained by its maker, humans have the responsibility to shape their own way of being. Although doubting our choice is a good thing, there is no use of having such anxiety if we make no change in the end. In this sense, existentialism offers a consolation in the age of faithlessness: we all face the challenge to justify our course of actions. Life, after all, is no longer religious – abiding by preaching, observing certain ways of eating and mating, and devoting to ‘God’.
Existentialism faces criticism also. Does existentialism means there is no absolute right or wrong? Does that mean no one would be responsible for the loss of humanity in the 1930s, and the rise of Nazi Germany? Flynn argues it is inaccurate to interpret existentialist ethic as a content for guidelines. It is not a moral content, but rather an attitude. This defence I believe can prevent existentialism from sliding into the maze of moral relativism, which is a receipt for nihilist monsters.
My main objection is that as an introductory text, it puts too many jargons in short pages. Sometimes I didn’t think I could quite follow. Flynn could have focused on the key thinkers such as Satre and Kierkegaard instead of trying to covering all the big names. But nonetheless I think it is still a useful textbook for beginners.
Siming Lan 