Musings:
I was in an exchange a few days ago about whether existentialism could include dogma. So this subject has been on my mind. I maintain it cannot, as existentialism is the antithesis of dogma. No rules, or structure per se.
E.g. the 1960,s', in my opinion, was the first major existential movement in the history of mankind. Up until the 1960's, every person on earth, for all time, had lived their lives according to whatever script their parents and culture had presented to them at birth.
The thesis of the 60's, was that no one had to live their lives by another's rules. Every person had the right to manifest their own destiny as they saw fit, and seek self actualization, as long as they did not hurt anyone.
Existentialism to me, is sort of like Zen. They are states of mind and understanding. So it is sort of difficult to explain them to anyone. A person has to study those philosophies until they see and understand them in their minds eye. The reason the Zen masters use the approach they do.
Existentialism is very difficult for young people to understand I believe. It takes a world view of life, as it is a philosophy of individual experience and counter to most prevailing mores, norms and ideas of static laws. To many, existentialism is an elusive concept, but well worth trying to learn.
Existence precedes essence. We are, what we become-lol. |
