Atheistic Existentialism Review of Related Theories 1. The Existential Philosophy

Nietzsche and Heidegger are the “father” of existential philosophy. Therefore, both names are included in this thesis. The discussion of atheistic existentialism, then, leads this doctrine to the concept of alienation that is promoted by Hegel; men are abandoned in this world. The key of atheistic existentialism lies in the freedom of men and their alienation. Hegel states that: “The concrete person, who as particular is an end to himself, is a totality of wants and a mixture of necessity and caprice. As such he is one of the principles of the civic community. But the particular person is essentially connected with others.” 26 This idea shows that Hegelian philosophy believes in the singularity of men’s existence. In the sense of individual life choice, there is no other entity that controls men. Hegel believes that the concrete men are driven by their consciousness. Thus, alienation is one of the most important ideas that have been advertised by most of atheistic existentialists. Self-estrangement and self-recognition are the core of alienation. This idea is developed based on the authenticity of individual life choice. Daronkolaee and Hojjat in A Survey of Mans Alienation in Modern World state that Hegel believes the authenticity of man resides in their own life: To be authentic is to be true to one׳s own self, to be one׳s own person, to do one׳s own thing. Authenticity doesn’t need of course to imply eccentricity. Eccentricity can be inauthentic, while conformity to standard practices can be authentically chosen 27 26 G.W.F Hegel, The Philosophy of Right. Ontario: Batoche Books, 2001 154. 27 E.N Daronkolaee and M.B Hojjat, “A Survey of Man’s Alienation in Modern World: Existential Reading of Sam Shepards Buried Child and True West ”, International Journal of Humanities and Social Science 2.7 April 2012: 204. Furthermore, Taylor Carman in Authenticity stated that “’Authentic’ Eigentlich is one of Heidegger’s favorite words, and it occurs throughout ‘Being and Time’ in both technical and non-technical terms. Informally, and in ordinary speech, the word is emphatic and simply means Real ’ or ’Actual’” 28 . Based on that idea, authenticity puts men in solitude territorial where there is no external factor that will be able to affect them. In this state, men are being themselves and take no other consideration except their own consciousness. Another prominent name in atheistic existentialism is Jean Paul Sartre. Unlike other prominent names like Hegel or Nietzsche, Sartre, on the other hand, does not proclaim himself as an atheist, but the label atheist naturally emerges from his philosophy. T he foundation of Sartre’s existentialism is the idea that existence precedes essence. It means that God is not important for God is an essence. God is a concept which in the term of position is located below the existence of man, God is created by man. As Sartre stated that God only exists when men are in despair 29 , he believes that the existence of God is created by men. He says that men have no purpose. Therefore men need to find their purpose. Sartre states that “Existentialism is a doctrine that makes human life possible and also affirms that every truth and every action imply an environment and human subjectivity” 30 . He argues that base on “existence precedes essence” the existence of God is philosophically illogical because 28 E.N Daronkolaee and M.B Hojjat, “A Survey of Man’s Alienation in Modern World: Existential Reading of Sam Shepards Buried Child and True West ”, International Journal of Humanities and Social Science, 203 29 S. Prasad, “Religion and Atheistic Existentialism”, Journal of Philosophy, 622 30 J. P. Sartre, Existentialism and Humanism, 18 people believe that God is an essence that precedes existence. Men, on the other hand, are the one that can be defined by the term “existence precedes essence”. “He men materializes in the world, encounters himself, and only afterwards defines himself. If man as existentialist conceives of him cannon be defined, it is because to begin with he is nothing. He will not be anything until later, and then he will be what he makes of himself. Thus, there is no human nature since there is no God to conceive of it. Man is not only that which he conceives himself to be, but that which he wills himself to be, and since he conceives of himself only after he exist, just as he wills himself to be after being thrown into existence, man is nothing other than what he makes of himself” 31 . Sartre believes that the choice of action is a choice of oneself. It means that choice is necessary for men to determine their existence. He believes that men are nothing until they decide themselves to be something. The philosophy of men’s existence that is promoted by Sartre is also agreed by other philosophers. Kierkegaard, who is promoted theistic existentialism, also agrees with this concept 32 . Similar to Hegel, Sartre promotes the idea of alienat ion. However, Sartre’s alienation concept is slightly different from the one that is promoted by Hegel. Sartre explains that alienation occurs when an individual ignores the responsibility of their freedom. He states that: One aspect of alienation is ignorance. It is a mode of inter-human relations. Its type is that of refusal in the sense that to be judged ignorant by others acts as a cause does on my freedom. When I am ignorant in solitude, either Im unaware that I am ignorant or I know it, it must be mentioned that in the first case, to be unaware of my ignorance clearly is not equivalent to knowing what I am doing, but the double negative lifts from ignorance its limiting exteriority. My knowledge is limited by 31 J. P. Sartre, Existentialism and Humanism, 22 32 R. Audi, Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy; Second Edition, 468 nothing, since my unawareness of it is nothing. There is no outside to consciousness or to knowledge. There is just an impulse toward the project, toward understanding, toward truth which is positive. There are affirmations but no consciousness comes along and puts them between parentheses. There is a finite but not limited positively, my freedom is still completely there 33 . Men are “blessed” with freedom. Nonetheless, there is an ethic that men must follow. One’s freedom must not disturb other’s freedom. It is the fundamental concept of freedom. When the responsibility fails to emerge in the action of an individual to exercise freedom, the only result that will be gained by such individual is alienation. Accordance with Sartre, people look at others in the way they want to be looked. When they come across uncommon entities, men tend to assume that those entities are erroneous. When someone uses uncommon clothing, people consider them as strange depiction, but it is actually their freedom to choose what they want to wear. One’s freedom to judge other should not intersect others’ freedom. Such practice is the reason of alienation towards an individual. When an individual tries to look like other even though it does not fit them, it is possible to count such action as self-alienation. Furthermore, in Existentialism is Humanism, Sartre proposes the idea of abandonment; men are left alone in this life. Sartre proposes the case of Abraham as the example of abandonment. Abraham was commanded by an angel to sacrifice his only son. It is humane to ask if the one who gives a command is truly an angel or is he truly Abraham? If it is so, so where is the proof? For existential philosophy, 33 Sebastian Gardner, Sartre’s Being and Nothingness: A Reader’s Guide London: Continuum, 2009 294 especially the one that promoted by Sartre, men are condemned into life. As the result of the condemnation, men need to take responsibility for their own life. In the case of Abraham, even when the one who gives the command to Abraham is truly an angel and this command is really coming from God, it is Abraham who decides whether he will fulfill the command or not. The story of Abraham is an example of why men shall not falsify their action as a portrait of faithfulness since the only force that influences men’s action is their own will. Since there is no proof of the “unseen force” that called as God, every force that affects men’s decision would come from their inner self. Sartre states that “if an angel appears to me, what prove do I have if it is an angel? Or if I hear a voice, what prove is there that they come from heaven and not from hell, or from my own subconscious, or some pathological conditioning?” 34 Sartre, moreover, argues that even without God, life will be the same. Men just need to find another ethic, instead of regarding themselves to the ethic that allegedly created by God. For Sartre, men are condemned into life. Therefore men need to responsible for their own life. Sartre states that: We are left alone and without excuse. That is what I mean when I say that man is condemned to be free: Condemned because he did not create himself, yet nonetheless free, because once cast into the world, he is responsible for everything he does 35 . 34 J.P. Sartre, Existentialism and Humanism, 26 35 J.P. Sartre, Existentialism and Humanism, 29 Abraham is the one that decides to follow t he command. Abraham’s endeavor depicts the responsibility that should be taken by all men. The sense of loneliness and self-responsibility in making a decision is what existentialist called as the “abandonment”. The idea of abandonment is the idea that men have no help to take any decision, they are left alone. Even when there is an assist, they, themselves, is the one that needs to decide whether he needs that assistance or not. Sartre elaborates his idea of abandonment by the story of a man that he met when he was in jail. He met a Jesuit scholar who lived in pain his whole life. His father died and his family lives in poverty. Then, he had a scholarship from a Jesuit school. Instead of feeling happy, he feels that the school is giving him a scholarship because of pity. It makes him live as inferior to other students. In the age of twenty, after this Jesuit man fails his military exam, he decides that there is no secular destiny for him and the only destiny left is the destiny of religious man. He decides to join the Jesuit Ordo. This man deciphers the sign of life and not the destiny. He is a model of “abandonment”. The man from the jail is free to become anything else, but he decides to become a religious man. People might think that is a destiny, but for existentialist like Sartre, the decision that taken by that man is pure from his own thinking. In addition, Sartre also promotes the idea of despair. Sartre claims that “despair” is simpler than “abandonment”. However, this idea consists of a complicated philosophical understanding of men’s life. It is an idea in which men need to do anything without hope. Sartre explains that in every action that is taken by PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI men, there is more than one possible result that men will get. Therefore, men need to expel good hope . Despair exposes the unfruitful truth of men’s life. It denies any ideal condition that is assumed by men. Therefore, people accuse existentialism as a pessimistic philosophy. Sartre declines that acquisition. He explains that the construction of existentialism is based on the realistic condition of life. The key of “despair” is to expel any dream and hope. Sartre clarifies that nothing exists in men besides their action. He states that: Reality alone counts, and that dream, expectations, and hopes only serve to define a man a broken dream, aborted hope and futile expectation; in other word, they define him negatively, not positively. Nonetheless, saying “you are nothing but your life” does not imply that the artist will be judged solely by his work of art, for a thousand other things also help to define him. What we mean to say is that a man is nothing but a series of enterprises and that he is the sum, organization, and aggregate of the relation that constitute such enterprises 36 . According to the statement above, existentialism is an optimistic philosophy. It counts men as the main actor of their own life. Hence, “despair” denotes that men should abandon all their hope and do whatever they need to do since hope, dream, and expectation does not determine their life, their action does. The idea of despair shows the difference between existentialism and other philosophies that are based on an idealistic life form. Existentialism acknowledges the possibility of loss and failure in any decision that is made by men. 36 J.P. Sartre, Existentialism and Humanism, 38 Another existential idea that is majorly used in this thesis is the one that promoted by Albert Camus. Resembling Sartre, Camus does not involve God’s concept in his philosophy. He is a literary figure that focuses his work on existentialism. Comparable to Samuel Becket and Harold Pinter with their Theater of the Absurd, Camus ’ literary work contains existential elements and absurd stories. He becomes one of the most prominent existentialists after The Myth of Sisyphus is published. He depicts the absurdity of men’s life through the story of Sisyphus’ useless labor. Sisyphus is condemned by gods to roll a rock up to the top of a mountain, only to have it roll back down again. It displays an absurd labor. It makes Sisyphus envisioned as an absurd individual. He has meaningless existence and monotonous everyday’s life without any purpose. Camus believes that men are in the same condition with Sisyphus, men are dissatisfied with the world, but they feel isolated and helpless to change it. Absurdity is one of the most discussed ideas in the history of men’s existence. Ancient people who strive for immortality have experienced such absurd condition. Their faith in gods and goddess was challenged by misery and pain, which they believe caused by their gods and goddess. The absurd conflict is resulting in invincible heroes like Achilles and Siegfried. They become the representation of men who believe that they have been trapped by the absurdity of their own existence. Men have been tried to escape from their absurd existence through courage, heroic actions, and through the power that was gained either through knowledge like Odysseus or by unlimited physical strength like Achilles. However, differences are established between ancient and modern views of absurdity. Ancient men try to escape from the absurdity through courage and power, but modern men are completely understood that they have no way to escape from absurdity. As portrayed in The Myth of Sisyphus, Camus perceives that modern men are like Sisyphus. He is an individual who trapped by his own absurdity since he has no power to change it. Unlike ancient hero, Sisyphus does not have any knowledge or strength to fight the absurd. In addition, Camus also formulates a philosophical approach to suicide. He states that “suicide has never been dealt with except as a social phenomenon. On the contrary, we are concerned here, at the outset, with the relationship between individual thought and suicide” 37 . He believes that there is a philosophical explanation for suicide, which he describes in one of his essays, “The Absurd Reasoning”. He describes suicide as the connection between the absurd reasoning of life and man’s longing for death. A world that can be explained even with bad reasons is a familiar world. But, on the other hand, in a universe suddenly divested of illusions and lights, man feels an alien, a stranger. His exile is without remedy since he is deprived of the memory of a lost home or the hope of a promised land. This divorce between man and this life, the actor and his setting, is properly the feeling of absurdity. All healthy men having thought of their own suicide, it can be seen, without further explanation, that there is a direct connection between this feeling and the longing for death 38 . 37 A. Camus, “The absurd Reasoning”, The Myth of Sisyphus and other Essays, 2 38 A. Camus, “The absurd Reasoning”, The Myth of Sisyphus and other Essays, 3 Camus puts suicide as philosophical problem, but as absurd as the reason for suicide, he also believes that not every problem has its answer. He states that “it is wrongly assumed that simple questions involve answers that are no less simple and that evidence implies evidence” 39 . Camus, then, puts hope as one of the reason of suicide. He states that “hope of another life one must “deserve” or trickery of those who live not for life itself but for some great idea that will transcend it, refine it, give it a meaning, and betray it” 40 . Camus uses the absurd story in The Myth of Sisyphus to describe men’s situation in finding a meaning in the universe which does not provide it. Camus introduces us to the philosophy of the absurd. The word “absurd” itself is a familiar word, but yet people do not really understand the meaning of it. Camus states that Absurd is, in simple word, something contradictory. He says that: If I accuse an innocent man of a monstrous crime, if I tell a virtuous man that he has coveted his own sister, he will reply that this is absurd. His indignation has its comical aspect. But it also has its fundamental reason. The virtuous man illustrates by that reply the definitive antinomy existing between the deed I am attribut ing to him and his lifelong principles. “It’s absurd” means “It’s impossible” but also “It’s contradictory.” If I see a man armed only with a sword attack a group of machine guns, I shall consider his act to be absurd. But it is so solely by virtue of the disproportion between his intention and the reality he will encounter, of the contradiction I notice between his true strength and the aim he has in view 41 . 39 A. Camus, “The absurd Reasoning”, The Myth of Sisyphus and other Essays, 3 40 A. Camus, “The absurd Reasoning”, The Myth of Sisyphus and other Essays, 4 41 A. Camus, “The absurd Reasoning”, The Myth of Sisyphus and other Essays, 13 Based on the passage, absurd is a contradiction between the reality and the goal. Derived from that idea, most men are absurd for men’s mind and body is always in divorce. Absurd is when people’s hope contradict the fact that they have. Every suicide cases enclose absurdity. Therefore it can be seen as an absurd occurrence. One of the greatest strength of mankind is to survive. It means an individual who desires death and upholds self demise is an absurd individual. Men have survived from many devastating events. They survive from Black Plague that kills millions of people and WW II, which more than 60 million people are died. It is an evidence of men’s surviving aptitude, it is their instinct. Instinctively, when someone tries to throw something to you, you will duck or protect the target that they aim. That is the example of men’s survival instinct. Based on that idea, suicide is an absurd case because it is an indicator that the individual who commit it denies their own nature. Another type of absurdity that exposed by Camus is the absurdity of life. In the story of The Myth of Sisyphus, Camus sees that men are trapped in their own freedom. If Sisyphus was condemned to do what he does, he is an example of men who trapped in their own idea for a man always has his own idea and decision. God condemned him to the underworld, but he still needs to choose whether he is going to accept his fate or not. By doing so, it is and indicator of acceptation. Sisyphus accepts his condemnation. What he is doing is, undeniably, absurd. However, for he is accepting his fate, Sisyphus shall be seen as a happy individual. This doctrine contemplates a very deep philosophical idea of man and his existence. The story of Sisyphus exposes men’s anxiety on whether life has meaning or not. This question is the question that, in some points, leads men to suicide. Camus stresses the importance of understanding the value of life. He believes that this is the key to decipher the philosophical problem of suicide. Based on the story of Sisyphus, even without meaning, without solution, without faith, life is worth to live. When man can truly accept his fate without hope and expectation, he can truly be happy.

3. Theistic Existentialism

Based on the recognition of higher power, existentialists divide themselves into two different streams, atheistic and theistic existentialist. Soren Kierkegaard is an existentialist who vocally represents theistic existentialist. He was a Freudian before Freud, and his writings are full of what we know as depth-psychology 42 . Kierkegaard always believes that there is an absolute paradox in m an’s life, God. Soren Kierkergaard persists to see existentialism as the part of his faith. Kierkegaard defends his faith in an ethical self. Kierkegaard introduces the concept of “absolute paradox” 43 to the world of existential philosophy. He believes that unquestioning philosophical reason alone, without believing the “absolute paradox”, will prevent people from understanding God and His power, prevent them from faith. Philosophically, Kierkegaard explains that faith appears alongside risk. He says that: 42 John Killinger, “Existentialism and Human Freedom”, The English Journal 50.5 May, 1961: 305 43 P. Roubiczek, Existentialism For and Against, 9 “Without risk there is no faith, and the greater the risk the greater the faith; the more objective security the less inwardness for inwardness is precisely subjectivity, and the less objective security the more profound the possible inwardness” 44 . He, furthermore, promotes three level of men’s faith, total faith commitment where a person progresses from a life of mere pleasure aesthetic, to a life of rules and obedience ethical, and finally to a life of total faith that one seeks passionately after God religious 45 . For Kierkegaard, every thinker needs to connect to the paradox. Socrates is an example of a thinker who connects himself to the notion of paradox. He spends most of his life to understand human being, describes his curiosity towards himself whether he is as monstrous as Typhoon or just a normal human being with numerous limitation. Every thinker needs to acknowledge the paradox of his own thinking. Kierkegaard states that “a thinker without a paradox is like a lover without passion: a poor model” 46 . Kierkegaard’s philosophy is an apparatus to explore men’s faith towards God. It makes him become one of the most important names in the domain of existentialism. The time Kierkegaard promotes his philosophy; atheistic teaching is striving through Europe. Therefore there are so many philosophers that question Kierkegaard elaboration on God’s concept. He answers that doubt in his book, Repetition and Philosophic Crumbs. He says that: 44 Walter Kaufmann, Existentialism from Dostoevsky to Sartre New York: Meridian, 1956 117 45 Malachi. Existential Wars: Kierkegaard versus Nietzsche. Web. November 2010. http:www.christiancadre.orgmember_contribmal_existential.html 46 Soren Kierkegaard, Repetition and Philosophic Crumbs New York: Oxford University Press, 2009 111 But what is this unknown thing against which the understanding, in its paradoxical passion, collides, and which, in addition, disturbs even a person’s self-knowledge? It is the unknown. But this cannot be another person, to the extent that he knows what a person is, nor can it be any other thing he knows. So let us call this unknown God. This is just a name we give it. It can hardly occur to the understanding to want to prove that this unknown thing God exists. For if God does not exist, then it would be impossible to prove he did. But if he does exist, then it is foolish to try to prove it, in that I have assumed this existence is not doubtful the instant the proof begins, since an assumption, to the extent that it is an assumption, cannot be doubtful, otherwise I could not get started, understanding, as I would, that the whole thing would be impossible if there were no God. If, on the other hand what I intend by the expression ‘prove God’s existence’ is to prove that the unknown, which exists, is God, then my expression is unfortunate, because then I would be proving nothing, least of all that something existed. I would merely be developing the content of a concept 47 . The key point of his explanation is that men will not be able to explain whether God really exist or not. However, men who understand life will indeed understand God’s existence. He also states that if he insists to proof the existence of God, he will ends up proving nothing since God’s existence is different with the existence of men for men’s existence can easily be proven. Based on Kierkegaard elaboration; there is an unstoppable force that affects human life. His existence depends on how men understand their relationship towards themselves and life. Men are able to call that force anything. However, people commonly call that force as God. The philosophy of God is not the only doctrine Kierkegaard promotes. He also promotes the originality of man’s thinking. Kierkegaard says that “to give up all the results of rational thinking, of scientific reasoning, and to surrender to the inner voice which tells us that there is a different reality, a sphere of a different kind, 47 S.Kierkegaard, Repetition and Philosophic Crumbs, 113 transcending reason” 48 . There are always two forces that affect men’s life, the rational thinking and the inner voice. The contestation between those forces is the process every man needs to endure. It is an important process for confusion is the beginning of understanding. Kierkergaard believes that men who undergo such process will be able to understand God ’s existence and experience the truth of faith. Furthermore, Kierkegaard explains the originality of men’s idea as the core of existentialism. Kierkegaard is a devoted Christian, but when it comes to faith, he explains that the originality of men’s faith is significantly important. For Kierkegaard “it does not matter what I believe to be true: what matters is only how I believe it. A false idol sincerely, fervently worshiped is worth more than the true creed taken over second- hand” 49 . For the relationship between man and his God is the ultimate relationship, he particularly opposes men who duplicate God’s concept from others, but declares himself as a faithful worshiper. Men’s relationship with their parents, or their children, is a describable connection. Hence, men’s connection with God is indescribable. Therefore, men’s connection with God has to be original for no individual is able to explain such indescribable connection. Men’s connection with God involves the ultimate paradox and subjectivity. It will only depend on men’s personal und erstanding. Kierkegaard’s idea of men’s original feelings toward God is, perhaps, unacceptable to certain theological system. Kierkegaard’s elaboration is an 48 P. Roubiczek, Existentialism For and Against, 10 49 Henry W Nordmeyer, “An Existentialist Approach to Literature”. The Modern Language Journal 33.8 Dec. 1949: 586 ethic that exposes a unique relationship between men and their God. Therefore, such notion is, in some points, poles apart from theological credo. Kierkegaard states that the truth is “subjectivity”. Within subjectivity, the connection between men to themselves and their society will lead them to ultimate relationship between them and God 50 . Although Kierkegaard is a devoted Christian, his work is mostly criticizing the church. He believes that being Christian does not always mean that a person need to blindly follow what the church says because the relation between men and their God is the ultimate relationship and it can only be determined by men and God Himself. The debate between atheistic and theistic existentialism shows that both ideas hold their ground for God’s existence and religion. Sanjiwan Prasad in his study on atheistic existentialism and religion provides illuminating understanding on the debate between both sides. Prasad shows that based on Heidegger and Sartre, atheistic existentialism provides men with logical study of religion and God. He states that atheistic existentialism declares an idea that can be an important foundation for religion and God. He states that: At the very outside it may be said that Atheistic Existentialism, by rejecting religion in on sweep, has admitted religion in the mood of religion in the mood of indifference. Even though religion is only religion at adversity – only in being rejected, the fact remains that the grounds of rejection are more or less not so much convincing as they appear to be so. 50 J.P. Sartre, Existentialism and Humanism, 4