Reflection of the Individual. Questioning the Nature of Things Pt.1
The same way Jean Paul Sartre classified existentialism as a humanism is the same way I will classify the philosophy of the Individual as a humanism.
The philosophy of the Individual appears to be negative and abrasive, but it is not. It is not pessimistic or even close to what some people would call “realism”. It is the opposite of all those things. It is incredibly positive, life affirming, chain breaking, and liberating. The reason why the nature of objectivity is brought into question in this philosophy is because as an Individual we are constantly shaping and creating the world around us. To simply accept that something is objectively good or bad without question is to deny yourself the ability and right to choose. This denial of our intrinsic ability to create our own values is voluntary and weak. Acceptance without further examination is lazy.
Humanism: a doctrine, attitude, or way of life centered on human interests or values
especially : a philosophy that usually rejects supernaturalism and stresses an individual’s dignity and worth and capacity for self-realization through reason
“The unexamined life is not worth living.”
-Socrates
The reason why the duality between consumerism and creation is brought into focus with this philosophy is because as an individual, it is your innate responsibility and function to create. In fact, whether we are aware of it or not, we are in a constant state of creation with our interpretation of the world, and how we define our values. To be in a prolonged state of consumption while disregarding the desire to create is to imply that other people’s creations are sufficient enough for you. It is to imply that you do not believe in your ability to be a creator the same way you believe in someone else, or you have not realized this ability yet. We must create something outside of ourselves, from within ourselves.
“What is meant here by saying that existence precedes essence? It means first of all, man exists, turns up, appears on the scene, and, only afterwards, defines himself. If man, as the existentialist conceives him, is indefinable, it is because at first he is nothing. Only afterward will he be something, and he himself will have made what he will be.”
-Jean Paul Sartre
The reason why the idea of unconditional love is brought into question is because of the nature of the concept. Unconditional love is unconditional action, in the simplest of descriptions it means doing something for no reason. Unconditional action cannot exist because one thing cannot exist without the other. Our existence is plural. Unconditional action could only be possible in an existence of nothing, or in an existence of one. We may love very strongly and consider it to be unconditional, but the counter argument to that would be that we love on the condition of love itself. Love is the condition being met. We would not love IF we did not feel love, it is impossible. So, in the simplest description possible, we love in order to feel love, even if the feeling is on a subconscious level. Unconditional love is a romantic idea that is pleasant to believe in. In our existential loneliness, there are some things that humans have created over time to make society feel more connected and dual. Unconditional love is one of those things. It is weak to believe this is possible, weak to hope and believe someone unconditionally loves you. It is not something that should be expected of anyone, for it is out of the realm of possibility.
Imagine the pain one would avoid if they would just love themselves.
To only need and desire your own approval and admiration.
Humble acceptance. Of that which is both negative and positive.
“My formula for greatness in a human being is Amor Fati: that one wants nothing to be different, not forward, not backward, not in all eternity. Not merely bear what is necessary, still less conceal it… but love it.”
-Friedrich Nietzsche
We don’t have to be the product of what happens around us.
