Sartre, existentialism, and science

[Kendel]

@Jay313

Essence is an ancient concept worthy of being jettisoned.

I think so. I’ve heard so many esoteric uses of “essence” as if there’s some special (exotic), hard-to-pin-down something that only the most refined of us can identify clearly.

Or it is so easily abused for the sake of power moves.

@Markd has talked about how we don’t actually interact with the world as it is, but through our concepts of it. I think there’s a good deal of sense in that. He has used the term “the thing as it is” rather than “essence.” “The thing as it is” has all the charm and mystery of a yellow #2 wooden pencil or my office chair. I like that. It just says it plain.

@paleomalacologist

St. Exupery has been labeled a “Christian existentialist”, to toss in yet another viewpoint to discuss.

Now that IS interesting. And surprising. I had no idea.

@adamjedgar in regard to good works, or helping people, I’ll repost from Pithy Quotes one of my favorite quotes so far from Kierkegaard, criticizing the nice, comfortable church:

@Kendel

In relation to his focus on vocation, I will add this quote from Kierkegaard regarding Luther, James and secular distortions of grace and works:

At that time there appeared a man from God and with faith, Martin Luther; with faith (for truly this required faith) or by faith he established faith in its rights. His life expressed works–let us never forget that–but he said: A person is saved by faith alone. The danger was great. I know of no stronger expression of how great it was in Luther’s eyes than that he decided that in order to get things straight: the Apostle James must be shoved aside. Imagine Luther’s respect for an apostle–and then to have to dare to do this in order to get faith restored to its rights!

But what happened? There is always a secular mentality that no doubt wants to have the name of being Christian but wants to become Christian as cheaply as possible. This secular mentality became aware of Luther. It listened; for safety’s sake it listened once again lest it should have heard wrongly; thereupon it said, “Excellent! This is something for us. Luther says: It depends on faith alone. He himself does not say that his life expresses works, and since he is now dead it is no longer an actuality. So we take his words, his doctrine–and we are free from all works–long live Luther! Wer nicht liebt Weiber, Wein, Gesang / Er wird ein Narr sein Leben lang [Who loves not women, wine, and song / He is a fool his whole life long]. This is the meaning of Luther’s life, this man of God who, in keeping with the times, reformed Christianity.” Even though not everyone took Luther in vain in such a downright secular way–in every human being there is an inclination either to want to be meritorious when it comes to works or, when faith and grace are to be emphasized, also to want to be free from works as far as possible. Indeed, “man,” this rational creation of God, certainly does not let himself be fooled; he is not a peasant coming to market, he has his eyes open. “No, it’s one or the other,” says the man. “If it is to be works–fine, but then I must also ask for the legitimate yield I have coming from my works, so that they are meritorious. If it is to be grace–fine, but then I must also ask to be free from works–otherwise it surely is not grace. If it is to be works and nevertheless grace, that is indeed foolishness.” Yes, that is indeed foolishness; that would also be true Lutheranism; that would indeed be Christianity. Christianity’s requirement is this: your life should express works as strenuously as possible; then one thing more is required–that you humble yourself and confess: But my being saved is nevertheless grace. The error of the Middle Ages, meritoriousness, was abhorred. But when one scrutinizes the matter more deeply, it is easy to see that people had perhaps an even greater notion that works are meritorious than did the Middle Ages, but they applied grace in such a way that they freed themselves from works. Having abolished works, they could not very well be tempted to regard as something meritorious the works they did not do. Luther wished to take “meritoriousness” away from works and apply them somewhat differently–namely, in the direction of witnessing for the truth; the secular mentality, which understood Luther perfectly, took meritoriousness away altogether–including the works.
Kierkegaard, S. “For Self Examination [First Series].” The Essential Kierkegaard. Princeton, 2000. 76% in Calibre.