I would like to lay some groundwork to build off of for several posts. So consider this the part where I bring in the big yellow earth movers and the hard-hatted men with that little telescope thing looking at the guy across the field holding the stick. On a colorful billboard posted above the orange construction fence is “Coming soon! Existentialism Proper!”
Existentialism is the philosophical inquiry that explores the problem of human existence. Sounds very ostentatious, but few philosophical ideas are as widespread and as misunderstood as this. We hear the phrases like “existential crisis” and “existential threats”, but these have little to do with true existentialism, which makes up the broth of cultural soup in which we simmer. To get an idea of what it is and how it shapes our thinking, a groundwork needs to be laid to understand it’s boundaries, origins, and direction. In future posts I will dive into the history and trace the trickles and rivulets through the time and space as it gathered into the raging torrent it now is. But first a little terraforming.
Let’s start the diesels rumbling to life with a question: Why is man? Without any further qualifiers, how would you answer that question? It sounds unfinished. More familiar is the question What is man? What is a question of function and composition; it is definitional, but definitional in terms of ability and ingredients. Ask a hundred people this question and the answers will range over known function, chemical composition, taxonomic categorization and accomplishments. “Man is a bipedal, hairless ape; inventor of fire, the wheel and the Shake Weight.” Some accomplishments are more definitional than others.
Why begs for a qualifier: “Why is man…what? Intelligent? Gregarious? Political? Comical?” The unqualified question is open, too open, like the skin of a wound. It is uncomfortable. When an adjective qualifier is added to the question it is a relief, falling within the realm of our ability to answer. “Why is man intelligent?” “Man is intelligent because…” These are questions we can handle because we assemble the answer from centuries of observations of the species. Anthropologists tell us why man is coalesced into groups, why they compete for resources, and other such questions based on a track record of observations. But without the qualifier, we are left to give a reason, not just for man, but for ourselves as individual persons. Why is man? And for that matter, why am I? It is the first most reasonable question a human can ask.
In our uniform and repeated experience, essence determines existence. This means before anything physically exists, it first begins as an idea of what kind of thing it is to be. Take a screwdriver, for example. Before the first Phillips head screwdriver was created, the kind with the X shape at the tip, it existed as an idea in the mind of a man, in this case, Henry Thompson. Thompson was frustrated with his flat head screwdriver slipping out the sides of the screw while turning, and developed the self-centering “crosshead” design we now know as Philips. (Thompson sold the design to a business owner named Henry Phillips, hence the name. I found it a little disappointing the screwdriver wasn’t named after its inventor, but then, who would buy a Thomspon head screwdriver? Not me.) The idea, the essence, came first. He didn’t stumble upon a straight metal rod with a ‘x’ at the tip and wonder what he could turn clockwise with it. The design and purpose was born in his mind before it existed, then manufactured in the shape of its purpose. Essence precedes existence.
Now it goes without saying that an object’s use is not bound by its essence. You could stab a guy with a screwdriver. You could aerate your lawn. Pop a balloon. For some reason all I can think of are stabby things at this moment, but there are a litany of uses that have nothing to do with the intended purpose of the Phillips screwdriver. This does not mean the Phillips screwdriver is then retroactively defined by its misuse. The essence is unbothered and unalterable despite how it is used.
So what about us? Is there an essence of mankind that preceded our existence? If so, in whom did the essence originate? If I were to live in such a way that were in line with my purpose, would I live differently than I do? These are all very reasonable questions and they follow as night the day and are validated by the fact that we ask these questions about everything else in our experience.
Even though this questions is most natural, when we wander into the realm of Existentialism the question becomes illegitimate, it makes no sense. Or to put it another way, existentialism exists because there is no answer, and there is no answer because the underlying suppositions of existentialism is atheistic. There exists no Being from whom essence could have come, therefore the question why is not a thing. This is the bedrock of Existentialism Proper. That above us only sky, is the preamble to the Existentialist doctrine. The rest is figuring out how to live in a world diseased with death, destruction and absurdity in light of this fact.
It is true that Soren Kierkegaard is known as the Father of Existentialism and he was a Christian. However, his brand is off the market. Kierkegaard’s existentialism was more akin to a 19th century emo phase. It was a quick stop on the train to Existentialism Proper, and most of the respectable types got off.
There are two potential counterpoints to my assertion that essence precedes existence, if you squint your eyes and screw up your face: props and 2x4s. A common game played by improv groups is called Props. That’s when a box of oddly shaped, brightly colored foam and fabric items are pulled at random and the actors improvise a purpose: a water noodle becomes a nose ring, a hula hoop is halo, or whatever, I don’t feel funny right now. An arbitrary essence is pasted onto a pre-existing object with no defined purpose, and that essence is mutable depending on how the actor sees it.
The 2×4 is a length of dimensional lumber that, it could be argued, has no purpose in itself, but becomes meaningful as it is built into a structure that has a larger purpose. It gets together with a bunch of its buddies and frames a wall which is part of a house, its individual purpose taking shape along with the larger structure. In this case the essence is one of becoming. It has no reason for being in itself, only in conjunction with others of its kind sharing a common goal. I realize I am ascribing a lot of high minded ideals to a length of lumber, but one can find the same ideals amongst our politicians.
Of course, the essence of the prop is for the purpose of getting a laugh, and the 2×4 is meant as a structural support for a building. This is clear enough to any thinking person, which is why you need to squint your eyes. I bring it up because this kind of reasoning is swimming about us like carp at feeding time. With the paucity of purpose which comes when we cannot ask the question why, what we are left with is figuring it out on our own.
In conclusion, humans ask why about everything in our experience, but when we turn the question on ourselves it feels awkward, uncomfortable and unanswerable. Whatever smoldering hope we might have had about finding our purpose as a species or an individual is snuffed out in this atheistic vacuum which is Existentialism Proper. When we scrape the earth flat to build the structure of Existentialism, we must start with the understanding that there is no god and therefore we cannot consult anyone but ourselves about what mankind is. Why is not a question that applies because there is no essence from which mankind derives his existence, no purpose to fulfill. We start with a what and manufacture a why on the go.
In my next post I will head back to the 17th century and consider at what existing structures were crumbling and condemned, and how Existentialism bought the land underneath them to lay its foundation stones.
Thought Butter 