About the Kant thing, my first draft was getting too long when I started talking about it. I knew I had to mention it, but my first draft got a little out of hand. However, I wasn't sure how much of Kant's moral philosophy I should mention with this draft. I suspected that I didn't treat it as I should have, but length compelled me to quickly touch on it. Nevertheless, I agree that a further study of Kant would indeed help understand what Sartre's getting at.
And yes, I really have to read Heidegger's response Sartre. I don't think I can avoid it, for that matter. I want to acquaint myself with this 'doctrine of thinking', and see how it fits (or not?) with Sartre's doctrine in this lecture.
I think you'll be interested in Sartre's analysis of The Stranger. It really game me some ideas of how to approach something that I want to understand. It doesn't mean that I have to copy his exact method(s), but it did make me realize that one type of thinking isn't enough for almost any given subject. Lateral thinking is never a bad thing, I'd say.
Also, the price is reasonable, so I suggest you buy this one as well. I picked mine up for roughly $12 or so.
The thing about Sartre is that he's a jambalaya of sorts. What you get from him is a spicy mix-up of about a dozen different philosophers: some Hegel here, some Husserl there, some half-baked Heidegger, Bergson to taste, a pinch of Marx, and a whole lot of Kant. Especially with the Existentialism lecture, I tend to think Kant (the moral philosophy, at least) is the core of the whole thing. You mention this a little, but I think it should be further emphasized: you really can't understand Sartre's philosophy without some familiarity with Kant's Grundlegung.
In the end, I'm inclined to think that one learns more by reading the books that Sartre read (the guys listed above) than reading Sartre himself. That's not to say he's not quite a smart guy and a very good writer, though.
Final note: if you read this thing for a class on "Existentialism" (or something like that), it probably means you're all set to hit Heidegger's response to Sartre in the Letter On Humanism. Heck, you might read it even if the Sartre wasn't for a class. But if I'm going to encourage you on that, I should add with a warning: the Letter is a very, very different beast. Sartre's lecture presents a "doctrine of action," something which is not especially difficult for anyone nowadays to understand. Heidegger's "doctrine of thinking," if you like, is something completely foreign.
Ah Existentialism. The Philosophy that changed my life, and my viewpoint on life (seriously, it did).
I have not read this one by Sartre, but I'm thinking of picking it up now. I've read his Nausea and The Transcendence of the Ego.
I'm most interested in this analysis of The Stranger. It was my first Existentialist book, and I now consider my reading of it a major turning point in my thought processes of the world. I would really like to read Sartre's view on it.
We see Sartre basically thinking out loud, as it were.
Ugh, that is totally awesome. I love books that do this. They can be son interesting.
Thanks for the review man! I really think I may need to pick this one up.
Pleiades Rising
Otaku Idol (Otaku Eternal) | Posted 04/11/09 | Reply
@Fasteriskhead:
About the Kant thing, my first draft was getting too long when I started talking about it. I knew I had to mention it, but my first draft got a little out of hand. However, I wasn't sure how much of Kant's moral philosophy I should mention with this draft. I suspected that I didn't treat it as I should have, but length compelled me to quickly touch on it. Nevertheless, I agree that a further study of Kant would indeed help understand what Sartre's getting at.
And yes, I really have to read Heidegger's response Sartre. I don't think I can avoid it, for that matter. I want to acquaint myself with this 'doctrine of thinking', and see how it fits (or not?) with Sartre's doctrine in this lecture.
Pleiades Rising
Otaku Idol (Otaku Eternal) | Posted 04/11/09 | Reply
@Kastom:
I think you'll be interested in Sartre's analysis of The Stranger. It really game me some ideas of how to approach something that I want to understand. It doesn't mean that I have to copy his exact method(s), but it did make me realize that one type of thinking isn't enough for almost any given subject. Lateral thinking is never a bad thing, I'd say.
Also, the price is reasonable, so I suggest you buy this one as well. I picked mine up for roughly $12 or so.
Fasteriskhead
Otakuite++ | Posted 04/11/09 | Reply
The thing about Sartre is that he's a jambalaya of sorts. What you get from him is a spicy mix-up of about a dozen different philosophers: some Hegel here, some Husserl there, some half-baked Heidegger, Bergson to taste, a pinch of Marx, and a whole lot of Kant. Especially with the Existentialism lecture, I tend to think Kant (the moral philosophy, at least) is the core of the whole thing. You mention this a little, but I think it should be further emphasized: you really can't understand Sartre's philosophy without some familiarity with Kant's Grundlegung.
In the end, I'm inclined to think that one learns more by reading the books that Sartre read (the guys listed above) than reading Sartre himself. That's not to say he's not quite a smart guy and a very good writer, though.
Final note: if you read this thing for a class on "Existentialism" (or something like that), it probably means you're all set to hit Heidegger's response to Sartre in the Letter On Humanism. Heck, you might read it even if the Sartre wasn't for a class. But if I'm going to encourage you on that, I should add with a warning: the Letter is a very, very different beast. Sartre's lecture presents a "doctrine of action," something which is not especially difficult for anyone nowadays to understand. Heidegger's "doctrine of thinking," if you like, is something completely foreign.
Kastom
Otaku Princess | Posted 04/11/09 | Reply
Ah Existentialism. The Philosophy that changed my life, and my viewpoint on life (seriously, it did).
I have not read this one by Sartre, but I'm thinking of picking it up now. I've read his Nausea and The Transcendence of the Ego.
I'm most interested in this analysis of The Stranger. It was my first Existentialist book, and I now consider my reading of it a major turning point in my thought processes of the world. I would really like to read Sartre's view on it.
We see Sartre basically thinking out loud, as it were.
Ugh, that is totally awesome. I love books that do this. They can be son interesting.
Thanks for the review man! I really think I may need to pick this one up.
I'd rather see in shades of gray.