Hacker News Reader

Comment by nickysielicki | Hacker News Reader

Existentialism and dread and absurdity have very little to do with practical problems like pandemics and more to do with the human condition. I feel like the author does a poor job of establishing the premise introduced in the title and first paragraph, and the rest of the article is just a summary of existentialist thought.

Existentialism is something that's about you as an individual, it's all very inward facing. The idea that society at-large is facing a problem, and therefore we're all having an existentialist moment together is a weird claim to me.

View on HN

Existentialism is about going back to reality as you perceive it. It's not about being self-centered. You should read or re-read The Stranger, and you'll see that it has much to do with the current pandemic.

If you were going to name one Camus novel to illustrate your point, why didn't you choose La Peste (The Plague)? The subject matter is even timely!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Plague

I've thought a lot about this book this year, though I haven't read it since I was a teen.

The Plague is Camus' most novel-ish book and least philosophical. There is philosophy there (should a doctor resist an inevitable plague?) but there is also a lot of metaphor (many read it as an allegory for nazi-sympathizing france) and even just classic character development. This is very different from The Stranger, which spends like 1/3 of its words on a philosophical conversation, or something like Myth of Sisyphus, which doesn't even attempt to be a story.

I don't know. Cutting everyone off from human contact so that they face life alone feels fairly existential to me - not in theory, but in practice.

It's about the "dizziness of freedom", it's about wanting your cake and to eat it, too. When you have no choice in the matter, where's the internal conflict?

You are completely alone in the universe. Nobody is going to make any choices for you or help define your life. You have to decide who you are and how you live.

That's how it came down, practically and especially emotionally, to a lot of people who were quarantined. Seems pretty existential to me.

>Nobody is going to make any choices for you or help define your life. You have to decide who you are and how you live.

Except of course the culture and language you’re born into, the public education and legal systems that curb and define your behavior, popular gender and sexual mores...

Modern humanity is a massively socially-constructed and mediated entity, defined by these interactions in their present and historic forms. Existentialism is largely a retreat from this reality into the fictive notion of an individuality because it shields one from engaging with the larger terrain, within and without oneself.

My point is that, during quarantine and isolation, a bunch of that external stuff disappeared.

My point is that it didn’t because it’s not really “external” to us, but always a part of us and we a part of it.

Humans’ evolutionary advantage over other species is our capacity for imitation, which allows for us to transfer skills and abilities outside of and beyond what is inherited through biological descent. But what this also means is that we’re constantly running these imitative, collective structures within ourselves at all times, seeking more and to share our own permutations of them. The reason people go insane in isolation is not because they’re confronted with they’re “freedom,” but because they’re more disconnected from this networked collectivity from which our notion of “self” is constituted.

There is an element of truth in what you say, but it's not wholly true. We aren't as much a slave to conditioning as you say - especially when the stimulus disappears for an extended period.

> You are completely alone in the universe. Nobody is going to make any choices for you or help define your life. You have to decide who you are and how you live.

That depends a lot on what you think you are. As far as hyper-individualistic egocentrism is internalized, indeed you are an insular, isolated entity hopelessly alone in your existence. If you throw a dash of blank-slatist postmodernism on it, indeed you are whatever you define to be and gosh it is so hard to choose what to be and you might as well be nothing.

If you see yourself as the continuation of past generations with a purpose to leave something for future generations, while doing your share for your current fellow humans, in short, if you matter to other people, then your life has meaning and you are as connected as one can ever be. If you see the struggle of your ancestors on these same problems, and the gifts they have left for you including the genes, epigenetic methilations and memes (i.e. everything from science to culture to music), if you see yourself as the fallible human being with the curse of having infinite potential (because we are the best generalist species but can only be so many things and achieve so much in our lives) therefore making sure to raise and leave something valuable for your following generations (doesn’t even have to be own kids), suddenly your choices are not as high stakes and you just have to do your best with what you got.

Both definitiions straddle the same existential problems, isolation, meaning, choice/responsibility and death. One gets crushed under them, the other thrives with the challenge they provide.

You changed my outlook on life. And I am grateful that you did.

Two years ago randomly I gave about 100 bucks to an old guy runnig a restraunt towards fixing the blown off roof of his log cabbin next door. I visited again recently and that act had inspired the community to start a crowdfunding project, they had fixed up the cabin, started building a campground and a dog run. I went on a river climbing excursion with some people from my region. One of them after made a comic book with a character heavily inspired by my image. Just going about our lives even pursuing individualistic goals, we never know how we are influencing the people around us.

I think Sartre said when you look over the edge of a high building you feel fear, but when you realize nothing is stopping you from throwing yourself off, you feel anxiety. A real life of the party, he was. If you want to read a slightly less-depressing existentialist, try Kierkegaard.

Sartre can speak for himself. Those aren't the emotions I feel.

> When you have no choice in the matter, where's the internal conflict?

Uh.... this completely misunderstands like literally everything Sartre wrote, the point of which was that you ALWAYS have a choice.

How is the current pandemic now causing dread in people? Sure, most people experience existential crises individually, but now we have an event that is causing a lot of people to experience it at once.

In fact, the first time existentialism became mainstream was in the aftermath of World War II, a large scale global disaster that shook people's faith in God and Government (capital G). Is the coronavirus pandemic not the most global disaster since WWII?

The feeling i get from reading existentialist works compared to the popular usage of the word existential are quite far separated, the same goes for any school of thought with a name entering the popular vocabulary (i.e. cynic, stoic, hedonist, ...)

In scope, even more global than WWII, in intensity though, nowhere remotely close... very different kinds of situation that don’t easily draw comparison.

I mean existentialism literally gained popularity post WWII. See how much more popular Neitszche and Kierkegaard became many years after they had died. Camus, on the other hand, was celebrated during his lifetime.

Is it so absurd to think that the pandemic is probably one of the worst events many people today have ever experienced? One of the reoccurring themes of existentialism is that individuals form their own meaning, a meaning that may be radically altered if they've lost their job due to the pandemic, have been hospitalized due to the pandemic, or have lost someone to the pandemic.

1 in 1800 people has died in the US, and about 1 in 50 has tested positive. The rest of us have to stay home from work and can't go out to restaurants?

There's unemployment spikes, but that has happened before too... say, 2009? Several other previous recessions?

For some people it's the worst, certainly many have died... but the average person? the median person? Yes there's the inconvenience and stress of social isolation, yes there's unemployment... but still let's keep things in perspective, comparing it to a world war is a bit extravagant. Whole cities were bombed out of existence, the infrastructure of Europe was completely destroyed, the deaths around the world were enormous in places and primarily young people in the prime of their lives...

It just doesn't compare. Not that it isn't a very difficult situation all around, but don't overrate people's suffering.

I agree that anyone who has lived or learned through great conflicts (world wars, bloody civil wars, great leap forward, etc) will have a hard time to compare this pandemic to any of that and yet, the reaction I see in many (too many) acquaintances is that of trauma. It's very odd because none of them have be directly impacted by covid yet but they are pretty sure it will happen and when it happen it will be nasty. So yes... In a very (millennial?) way, many people may imagine they are living through very traumatic times.

Watching Netflix at home, WFH, etc... While awaiting "certain covid" of course, its only for the privileged.

For the not so privileged the trauma can be easily compared to violent times: it's all about unemployment, domestic violence, hunger, collateral death, etc

It's not just about the direct impact of Covid, though. In my millennial-and-younger circles there are plenty who have been directly affected, but also many who still have work, but are deeply worried about their future prospects, not just when it comes to work, but also in regards to political turmoil and climate change.

They get a cat instead of a kid, they expect to never be able to buy a home, they expect not to have a pension and to enter the later stages of their life in a climate of turmoil and an ever-decreasing safety net.

Whether that's true, of course, is debatable. But it's been somewhat surprising and very painful to see how many of the 30-and-below people around me are utterly pessimistic about their future prospects on various axes. The pandemic mostly registered to them as a punch to the gut, and as something that probably accelerates a number of their other concerns. If anything, it /hasn't/ been too traumatic because they were already pessimistic.

This is certainly factually correct.

It’s interesting that our current ‘modern’ culture focuses on feelings much more, such that someone may feel they are going through something worse than WW2 and we to affirm their feelings or we are ‘hating’ them.

The original poster said since ww2, not same as ( > not >= ).

I imagine the spectre of nuclear armegedon during the height of the cold war was pretty scary, so maybe its still a false claim, but its hard for me to say as i wasn't alive then. I will say that i think this year has been one of the most anxious of my life, only partially due to covid.

The 80s had a very menacing undertone you quickly caught if you went to the library and read about the nuclear arsenal. If not, it was pretty peachy, you might have missed the nuclear holocaust threat almost entirely.

The pandemic isn't just bad, like getting hurt or losing money. It turned our lives upside down, calling into question the meaning and value of institutions we previous largely took for granted -- from school to office to commute to social relationships and how we interact.

"First, it has been reproached as an invitation to people to dwell in quietism of despair. For if every way to a solution is barred, one would have to regard any action in this world as entirely inefective, and one would arrive finally at a contemplative philosophy. Moreover, since contemplation is a luxury, this would be only another bourgeois philosophy. This is, especially, the reproach made by the Communists"

-- Sartre, second paragraph of Existentialism is a Humanism, https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/sartre/works/exis...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com