Anarchopedia - User contributions [en]

Talk:Anarchopedia:Community Portal

2012-03-15T07:03:02Z

Weiyi:

<center>Welcome to '''Anarchopedias Community Portal!'''</center>
[http://www.jewelrypandorasale.net/ pandora jewelry] brand is inspired by Greek mythology. [http://www.jewelrypandorasale.net/ pandora bracelets] in a beautiful way to capture life's memorable moments, [http://www.jewelrypandorasale.net/ pandora bracelet] to create a beautiful, exquisite jewelry, [http://www.jewelrypandorasale.net/ pandora jewelry sale] also represents luck and hope.
==Disambiguation pages==
Ive noticed a lot of disambiguation pages, epsecially ones about abbreviations, that dont actually have any articles to direct to. What is the point of this?--[[User:151.199.25.180|151.199.25.180]] 21:49, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
Ive noticed that too, and ive sterted deleting them [[User:Carlostmpl|Carlostmpl]]

GFDL is not appropriate to a wiki. Should be replaced by GNU GPL or a Creative Common Licence
(discussion on meta community portal)

:I think we should make this a lot more organised. Wikipedia's articles are duplicatable; I believe we should copy those articles first, then modify them to our own standards. As of now, this looks like a sub-standard wiki; just a mess. We can add the anarchist perspective and rearrange the (already well-organised) articles as we wish. [[User:lockeownzj00|lockeownzj00]] 20:46, 12 May 2005 (UTC)

You are right. Anarchopedia in English doesn't have a lot of contributors and my English is not so well. Some time ago, I started to copy Wikipedia's articles about anarchism, and I'll join you :) next week. --[[User:millosh|millosh]] 21:13, 12 May 2005 (UTC)

What's the point of this? If you do a search on Google of a passage from a Wikipedia article for Louis XIV - [http://www.google.com/search?q=%22bankruptcy+when+Louis+XIV+assumed%22 &amp;quot;bankruptcy when Louis XIV assumed&amp;quot;], you get 109 hits, with Wikipedia being #1. Why be hit #110? What's the point of just cloning Wikipedia?

I have copied articles from Wikipedia, usually original articles by a good author. I think copying wholesale Wikipedia articles is pointless. If you want to copy and modify articles from Wikipedia, then copy them to your hard drive, modify it and then upload it. What's the point of being just another Wikipedia clone? [[User:Lance Murdoch|Lance Murdoch]] 01:32, 13 May 2005 (UTC)

:I'm going to add articles from Wikipedia I created or contributed toward, largely articles on U.S. leftist groups. [[User:DJ Silverfish|DJ Silverfish]] 18:56, 20 May 2005 (UTC)

:Why is copying all of Wikipedia pointless? No, that's a bad question... let me try again:

:What is the purpose of this site other than to be "not [[Wikipedia]]"? If the purpose is to be an encyclopedia, doesn't it make sense to start with an encyclopedia that you think needs work and then ''do that work''? Any other position would seem to be based merely on territorialism. -[[User:Harmil|Harmil]] 21:26, 30 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Sorry to sound negative, but was this site started by non-anarchists to make anarchists look hopelessly disorganised? I thought that Wikipedia was a mess, but this... [[User:81.202.195.21|81.202.195.21]] 14:40, 8 Jul 2005 (UTC)

:Hehehe... I started it and I ''am'' an anarchist. People from [[:deu:|German]] and [[:fra:|French]] Anarchopedia are better organized because they were working on site organization. So, if you want to make some better organization here, you are welcome. The point is ''self-organization'', not leadership. And we have a lot of time to try to do that. To say again here (and this is the answer to Harmil's question, too): Anarchopedia should be "an anarchist encyclopedia" and "an encyclopedia for anarchists", but also the virtual place where we can try to build anarchy. May we organize us without leaders and power; at least in the virtual world? ... as well as with people who are not explicit anarchists? Even [http://www.infoshop.org/wiki/ Infoshop OpenWiki] doesn't intend to be "an encyclopedia for anarchists" (just "an anarchist encyclopedia") Anarchopedia would not have a lot of sense without the goal to build a virtual anarchy. --[[User:millosh|millosh]] 00:09, 11 Jul 2005 (UTC)

:So, this is the main reason why I am writing here only at the talk pages. People who want to write here should write here without the idea that Anarchopedia is "project which belongs to someone" and without the idea that one person can make decisions about relations between contributors or about the site content. --[[User:millosh|millosh]] 00:09, 11 Jul 2005 (UTC)

:It is not easy to make even virtual society without hierarchy and we want to do that in reality. The good thing is that we have a lot of time to try to do that here (or anywhere else). --[[User:millosh|millosh]] 00:09, 11 Jul 2005 (UTC)

::Consider the [[open politics in force]] [[ruleset]]: [http://openpolitics.ca/open+politics+in+force it seems to set very ambitious goals for having mutually self-reinforcing rules that people enforce on each other with minimal input from advisors].

==Restored data==
I restored eng: from database dump from September 8th. Between 5 ti 10 changes (from 8, 9, and 10 September) are lost. --[[User:millosh|millosh]] 17:49, 11 Sep 2005 (UTC)

:No big deal, it should take just a few minutes to resubmit the changes (and apparently i was the only person active during the period :). [[User:eâ˜…f|eâ˜…f]] 20:26, 11 Sep 2005 (UTC)

==Eng is on new server==
[[User:millosh|millosh]] 14:50, 13 Sep 2005 (UTC)

==User unfriendly==

Want to grow the articles here? Improve the ease of submitting a new article. First, what the hell is this about having to log in to create an article? How anarchic is that? Second, typing an entry in to the search box should bring up a "create new article" dialog if the database query finds nothing, not the apocryphal MySQL space language it does now. [[User:Denni|Denni]] 01:38, 14 Dec 2005 (UTC)

: We have a very small community here so far, and i think this ([[Special:Userlogin|logging]] in first) was done to prevent bots from editing and creating crap articles... personally seeing how there was an influx of regestering bots around, i say this rule has to be deprecated, since it doesn't help anyhow. {{User:beta_m/sig}}

:: First of all, YOU DONT HAVE TO BE LOGGED IN TO CREATE AN ARTICLE! Second, making a new article is not terribly complicated. All you have to do is search for it, and if it doesnt come up a link will show up in red at the top of the page. Anyone that cant figure out how to do that probably shouldn't be contributing to Anarchopedia anyway. Im sick of people complaining about how you have to be logged in and how it is un-anarchistic. I have a user name, but I dont always log in with it (usually due to laziness) and it never hinders my ability to edit articles. Furthermore, if you look at the records, only one user was ever banned from this website, and that was because he added "an eggcup" onto the end of every article he could find.

:::Right on.

== can't write on eng: ? ==

i tryied to [[User talk:Libre/dads|make a translation]] for "diego abad de santillan" from the [[:fr:Diego Abad de SantillÃ¡n|french article]], and put it on eng:, but it [[Special:Recentchanges|seems created]], but it show nothing : see [[Diego Abad de Santillan]].
What happen ?
[[User:Libre|Libre]] 08:51, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

: something strange !? it passed now ???!! finally good :) [[User:Libre|Libre]] 08:52, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

: It happens sometimes that you have to submit the same thing twice before it actually works. I suspect it has something to do with the timeout threshhold being too low.  ~ [[User:Beta_M|Beta_M]] (VolodyA! V Anarhist) [{{SERVER}}{{localurl:User_talk:Beta_M|action=edit&section=new}} Talk] {{{1|09:37}}}

== licensing ==

I also have thought a bit about licenses. I think the bad thing about licenses like GFDL and CC are that they gibe somebody the right to go to the courts in order to enforce the rights. I think for anarchists that should be a no-go. So I suggest to develop an anarchistic anti-licenses. This should be very short, maybe one paragraph - and could also be used on other projects. The idea is to give the people the "rights" they need but make clear that these "rights" can not be enforced by any jurisdiction. I would call such a license AAL [[Anarchist Anti License]]. The "Anti" should make clear that this is not a real license. Please take a look at http://www.cypherspace.org/CPL/ for an idea - but I think this could be made much shorter. --[[User:Vinci|Vinci]] 08:50, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

: I do like the idea, but think it's more silly then anything. {{ll|Public domain}} is the way to go if we want to be anarchic. And i don't see what is wrong with GNU GPL anyhow. Taking away somebody's right to restict freedoms of others isn't a bad thing, nor is it anti-anarchist.  ~ [[User:Beta_M|Beta_M]] (VolodyA! V Anarhist) [{{SERVER}}{{localurl:User_talk:Beta_M|action=edit&section=new}} Talk] [[2006]] [[July 02]] 16:47 ([[Coordinated Universal Time|UTC]])

::The problem with [[public domain]] is that someone takes your stuff and changes it and then claims they own the changes, even if they are just corrections, then sues you. The only way around this is a [[share alike]] license, and yes the [[GFDL]] does qualify. It gives you a lot of powers actually if you use the [[GFDL Secondary Section]]s properly - especially the [[GFDL Invariant Section]] - to make sure no one can abuse the materials. For instance you could add an Invariant Section promoting anarchy and giving all the most useful URLs to anyone who reads any derived article. So an article on [[gardening]] would only be distributed with a secondary section on how to [[anarchize gardening]], e.g. by planting [[illegal plant]]s in everyone else's garden all around.

::You could write a more complex [[terms of use]] like [[let.sysops.be]] or [[openpolitics.ca]] or [[lp.greenparty.ca]] to sort out all the various possibilities. One nice idea that came from the (now defunct) [[livingplatform.ca]] was to let tense of articles and PoV of articles actually determine their copyright. So instructions were [[CC-by-sa]] but political opinions were [[CC-by]], and compilations of many opinions were [[CC-by-nc-sa]] etc.

== anarchy or not ==

Anarchy or not, how are people supposed to find what they
want? What is the meaning of anarchy? chaos and time wasting?

:They can use the search engine, or they can just learn the lingo. The language used to describe community here, like [[faction]] stuff, is 'way more sensible than Wikipedia which tries to deny there are factions and everyone Jiminy Wales hates is a "troll."

== So, what is the rationale behind bans? ==

Yes, vandals are obviously bad, but isn't banning them un-anarchic? Could someone explain what the reasoning is?

:{{ll|Anarchism}} is about empowering people for social change, not making slaves of everyone. Every community has the right to demand that it will not be oppressed, and vandals do exactly that. Think about it: A landlord can come and instill [[gender neutral pronoun|ans]] rule in your house, and vandals come in and destroy our project.
:Anarchism is '''[[what anarchism is not|not]]''' [[anomie]] or [[nihilism]]. There is nothing wrong with protecting your home and your life from others. We welcome everybody to come in and contribute to the project, but not to destroy it.  ~ [[User:Beta_M|Beta_M]] (VolodyA! V Anarhist) [{{SERVER}}{{localurl:User_talk:Beta_M|action=edit&section=new}} Talk] [[2006]] [[October 28]] 07:35 ([[Coordinated Universal Time|UTC]])

::Quite, anarchism doesn't mean "no rules" it means rules are made and applied by community consensus. All anarchist communities have the right to exclude someone who breaches the rules, as long as there is a consensus for such a course of action. Indeed in anarchism exclusion from the community is considered the greatest sanction against an individual, and is usually the last resort. On the other hand any individual in the community should ''want'' to follow the rules because the community itself has decided those rules, anyone who does not want to follow the rules is quite free to move to a different community where the rules are different. Isn't this the basis of freedom? All communities have the freedom to function independently. Trolls/vandals are not interested in contributing to the community, they just want to disrupt it, so why should we put up with it? [[User:Alun|Alun]] 05:44, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

==Questions==
I have a few:
*I've found that I'll type in the exact title of a page into the search bar and hit go or search, and it won't take me to it or offer me any options (I'm aware of the case-sensitive thing). What's going on and how can I fix it?
*I've read that all logged-in users have sysop rights. Is this no longer true? I'm not able to delete anything. (I'd like to delete some spammer- and vandal-created pages). If I have to petition for sysop rights, how do I do it?
*Just curious: The case sensitivity thing seems like a terrible inconvenience; what's the rationale behind it?
*Can anyone point me to existing discussion about the possibility of joining forces with other underpopulated anarchist wikis?
Thanks in advance, [[User:Delldot|Delldot]] 03:13, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Some answers... (sorry did not see this before)
:# seems to be working for me (just tried "Wikipedia" and "labor note")
:# I am not sure about the current setting, one year ago it was changed to give admin-rights three days since the first edit. The software configuration should be published. The people currently managing the server can be contacted via the mailing list [http://lists.mutualaid.org/mailman/listinfo/anarchopedia-tech anarchopedia-dev], and occasionally via IRC [#anarchopedia@irc.indymedia.org].
:# I agree with you... I like the ability to distinguish between "moon" and "Moon" for example, but the software could be smarter and automatically redirect when just one of the two possible titles is missing, (possibly a bot could create the redirect).
:~[[User:Rev 22|''Rev 22'']] 16:13, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

==Suggestions==
*Merging this page with [[Talk:Main Page]], since both do basically the same thing, so discussion is fragmented between the two (or actually creating a community portal, but that would take work).
*Not blocking open proxies. I was doing it for a while blocking spammers, but then I decided it's pointless, since a spambot will edit from a new IP most every time, while blocking an open proxy could conceivably deter a legitimate editor (e.g. someone who has to obscure their IP due to political repression...). I'm thinking of unblocking the ones I blocked, any objections? [[User:Delldot|Delldot]] 05:05, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
:I don't think that IPs are blocked all the way. They are blocked from editing without registration as far as i know. I do like an idea of merging this with [[Talk:Main Page]]  ~ [[User:Beta_M|User:]][[Buddhism|B]][[ethics|e]][[Taoism|t]][[anarchism|a]][[postmodernism|_]][[metaphysics|M]] (VolodyA! V Anarhist) [{{fullurl:User_talk:Beta_M|action=edit&section=new}} Talk] [[2007]] [[May 10]] 06:21 ([[Coordinated Universal Time|UTC]])
:I think I agree, we would have to deal a little more with spammers, but I would not want those users (or anybody) to be accidentally blocked from editing. ~[[User:Rev 22|''Rev 22'']] 15:38, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
::With the spammer thing, I guess the question is how often are they reusing that IP? If one IP is consistently spamming/vandalizing, sure it makes sense to block. But if a spambot is using a new IP each time anyway, then I say it's a waste of time to block them and the (admittedly quite small) chance that someone legitimate would want to edit from it would make it not worth it. Therefore I propose that we look at the user's contribs before blocking them. If they only have one or two edits, consider not blocking or keeping the block short. Beta, I know that in newer versions of the software there's an option to allow editing from registerred users from an IP you're blocking, but I think it's a new feature and we'd have to update the software to get it. I think autoblocking still exists here. [[User:Delldot|Delldot]] 04:03, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
:::After thinking about it i no longer block IP if it's been used only once, also i've noticed that spammers change their IPs while vandals tend to use their own ones.  ~ [[User:Beta_M|User:]][[Buddhism|B]][[ethics|e]][[Taoism|t]][[anarchism|a]][[postmodernism|_]][[metaphysics|M]] (VolodyA! V Anarhist) [{{fullurl:User_talk:Beta_M|action=edit&section=new}} Talk] [[2007]] [[May 16]] 10:35 ([[Coordinated Universal Time|UTC]])
::::Cool, then if no one objects I'll go through my block log and unblock the open proxies I blocked. I think the vandal/spammer difference is because vandals don't have a profit motive so usually aren't sophisticated enough to be using an open proxy, they're mostly just kids fucking around. Whereas spammers are running bots and doing this to a lot of different sites. [[User:Delldot|Delldot]] 16:40, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

==Search question==

When I put in terms for as yet uncreated articles, why does the "Sorry cannot find *whatever* have a colon in front and a question after, with quotes around?

"anarchopedia" btw should auto-redirect to Anarchopedia.

:You could have been bold and did the redirect yourself. q;-)  ~ [[User:Beta_M|User:]][[Buddhism|B]][[ethics|e]][[Taoism|t]][[anarchism|a]][[postmodernism|_]][[metaphysics|M]] (VolodyA! V Anarhist) [{{fullurl:User_talk:Beta_M|action=edit&section=new}} Talk] [[2007]] [[June 19]] 04:06 ([[Coordinated Universal Time|UTC]])

Hi everyone, I'm new here. Hope I can be useful. However, I have something to ask; as I am a member of Italian anarchopedia too, we have a problem with an idiot who likes o cancel our pages; if you have or if you had the same problem, how are you fighting it or how did you stop it?

==Case sensitivity==
Why the case sensitivity and why do people create articles with lower-case letters, even the first one? --[[User:Popperipopp|Popperipopp]] 20:12, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
:Because it is usual encyclopedic manner (to write a title as it would be written if it is in the middle of sentence). Wikipedia doesn't follow this. --[[User:Millosh|Millosh]] 22:34, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
:BTW, if you need a bot for making redirects, please let me know and I'll make one. --[[User:Millosh|Millosh]] 22:44, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

::Oh, I didn't know that. Sure, but I can't say that I have fully understood how one control those bots. --[[User:Popperipopp|Popperipopp]] 23:19, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
:::Thanks to one guy from development team of pywikipediabot Anarchopedia is compatible with it. In general, everything which is written [http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Using_the_python_wikipediabot here] counts for Anarchopedia, too. You may be introduced in this bot even [http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Hur_man_anvÃ¤nder_en_python_wikipediabot in Sweden] :) --[[User:Millosh|Millosh]] 01:02, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

== General Strike ==

I have been propagandizing the General Strike for 9/11/2007 in several places, and I thought I could also comment about it here. I intended linking [[strike action]] elsewhere when I mention the strike, but I'm seeing it's still full of red links. Then I thought of proposing cleaning it up, but you would probably tell me to do it myself (at least it's what I would say). So... well, are you planning to help with the strike somehow? I see it as a step in the right direction, even if the results are small, as they will be; I feel general strikes in the USA, and moreover arising from grassroots movements as this one should be happily celebrated by anarchists.

:Yes, you do need to do something yourself, but i will take a look at that article and see if i can do something (at least create some worthy stubs).  ~ [[User:Beta_M|User:]][[Buddhism|B]][[ethics|e]][[Taoism|t]][[anarchism|a]][[postmodernism|_]][[metaphysics|M]] (VolodyA! V Anarhist) [{{fullurl:User_talk:Beta_M|action=edit&section=new}} Talk] [[2007]] [[August 20]] 04:48 ([[Coordinated Universal Time|UTC]])

== Notes/questions by a new user ==
*Nice project
*How does one become an administrator (that is, one with blocking powers)?
*Can any logged-in user protect and delete?
*We should get cascade-protection working, it's a lot better than [[Template:Deletedpage]]
*We ought to get rid of those annoying spambots, how does Wikipedia handle them?
[[User:Koekje|Koekje]] 18:52, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

:Hello Koekje... I'll try to answer again...
:2) The consensus here appears to be that every contributor should have administrator status. Still I think that real anarchistic management is impossible with a client server-model such as the one used by [[Mediawiki]]. We would need a distributed database and peer-to-peer software. What is your view in the matter?
:3) I think that is enabled automatically 3 days since the first edit.
:4) I'm not sure about what cascade protection is. Will look into it.
::Cascade protection looks like [http://img529.imageshack.us/img529/8303/cascadein9.png this], was implemented in January 2007 for Wikipedia and it is used there to list pages that are protected against re-creation in one page (see [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Protected_titles]), which is in turn 'cascade-protected' so that they cannot be re-created. If cascade-protection doesn't work, we have to use something like [[Template:deletedpage]], and then the page does technically exist (you can find it by using [[Special:Random]], it shows up in page creation logs, etc). [[User:Koekje|Koekje]] 16:36, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
:5) They are very annoying.., I would think most are handled by the "recent-changes patrollers". But it is also possible to tag certain urls as spam so spammers cannot post them (see [[meta:Spam blacklist]])
:Hope to continue seeing you in Anarchopedia. ~[[User:Rev 22|''Rev 22'']] 13:13, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

== envirowiki interlinking ==

hey hey. I have set up all the anachopedia interlinks for each language in envirowiki. The full list is here: [http://en.envirowiki.info/Envirowiki:Interwiki_links http://en.envirowiki.info/Envirowiki:Interwiki_links]. the page also includes all the envirowiki interlinks for each of our languages, not hard to do a find+replace and change them all to eg. "en-envirowiki", etc.. If someone's up for it.--[[User:Naught101|Naught101]] 20:51, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

==Important Pages Missing?==
I know that I should be just be doing it myself rather than talking here, but writing is my one weak point. There are certain ideas and practices of anarchists that mainstream media has stereotyped and misrepresented. It seems an anarchist wikipedia should be one of the places that explains the alternative view on these, however, these areas are lacking or nonexistent. "Vandalism" is two sentences long. Shouldn't this page be explaining various anarchist interpretations (Buildings are vandalism of Nature, all property should be public, etc.)? "Graffiti" doesn't even have a page, and isn't even really touched on on art. Now, vanadalism and graffiti isn't what anarchy is really about, but you know that many people believe thats the definition of anarchism.

==Guidelines==

I know that this is an anarchist wiki, so "policies" (by which I mean "rules") should be avoided (unless something really clever like the wikipedia "ignore all rules" element is added), but shouldn't this wiki at least have a few guidelines? Something to tell people what to do, how to do it, advice on managing conflict, etc etc etc. Just a suggestion... [[User:82.0.206.215|82.0.206.215]] 21:21, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

:This has been discussed in the [[meta:Ideas_for_the_4th_General_Meeting]] and currently i am copiling the proposal that is accessible if you go to [[meta:Anarchopedia:Policies]]. [[anarchism|Anarchism]] doesn't actually means lack of rules, it does mean lack of oppression, so there is nothing wrong with creating rules which stop the oppression of the project by some person or group, you do have a point that the policies will have to be fluid to disallow somebody from gaining an advantage on another person by using legal manoeuvring.  ~ [[User:Beta_M|User:]][[Buddhism|B]][[ethics|e]][[Taoism|t]][[anarchism|a]][[postmodernism|_]][[metaphysics|M]] (VolodyA! V Anarhist) [{{fullurl:User_talk:Beta_M|action=edit&section=new}} Talk] [[2008]] [[February 20]] 15:58 ([[Coordinated Universal Time|UTC]])

==Creation of Anarchopedia:Inter-projects==
After the discussions of the 4th general meeting, I finally created the page [http://meta.anarchopedia.org/Anarchopedia:Inter-projects Inter-projects on Meta]. All the projects and participating persons are invited to participate to this activity that is about developping more links between projects. - samarre

==[[Uri Gordon]]==

Hi can someone publish this article (everything's locked), I'm from the french encyclopedia and someone did wrote that in english.

Uri Gordon

Uri Gordon (b. 30 Aug 1976) is an Israeli activist and academic. He is the author of Anarchy Alive!: Anti-Authoritarian Politics from Practice to Theory (Pluto Press). While completing his doctoral research in Oxford he organized with community initiatives and anti-capitalist networks including Dissent!, Indymedia and Anarchists Against the Wall. He has also published articles in the journals Anarchist Studies and Refractions. Gordon now teaches environmental politics and ethics at the Arava Institute for Environmental Studies, which brings together Israeli, Palestinian, Jordanian and International students. His research continues to focus on grassroots sustainability, radical peace-making and anarchist politics. He is also active as a facilitator, trainer and translator.

Thanks

== Anarchopedia in spanish ==
hello. since you were successful in keeping neoliberals or as they like to call themselves "anarchocapitalists" out of here, i wondered if you could help us in anarchopedia in spanish since seems these people are already trying to take over ther. in wikipedia in spanish they already almost took over through a user called Nihilo who also is active in wikipedia in english with the name Nihilo 01. In wikipedia in spanish right now theres a big trouble over this and in wikipedia in english hes been already blocked a couple of times for trying to eliminate inclusive democracy from the article anarchist economics. anyway. i wonder if anyone could help us.

:Hi everyone, I'm an administrator of italian anarchopedia, we recently found out what the previous user has already written. Spanish Anarchopedia is ruled by anarchocapitalists! We know this very big problem has been reported by the french anarchopedia and by an user in spa.anarchopedia. I and the others admin in ita.anarchopedia think we all shall unite and raise against those pseudo-anarchists! You can visit us at [http://ita.anarchopedia.org/Anarcopedia:Collettivo_Anarchopedia#Anarchopedia_spagnola_in_mano_agli_anarco-capitalisti]--[[User:Roinmc|Roinmc]] 18:41, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
::Please visit also [http://spa.anarchopedia.org/Discusi%C3%B3n:Portada#A_todos_los_administradores_de_sp.anarchopedia here] and join in the discussion.Thanks.--[[User:Altipiani azionanti|Altipiani azionanti]] 19:14, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

== Anarchopedia is becoming authoritarian ==

Please, completely deregulate Anarchopedia. As an anarchy on the World Wide Web, we should ''not'' stop people from making new pages. If you believe the project fundamentally flawed, start a new one. Anarchopedia doesn't claim slips can't happen (or don't). Many criticisms of Wikipedia, generally apply to sites built on the same software and customs.

==Anarchists are getting a bad name in Toronto==

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_G-20_Toronto_summit 2010 G-20 Toronto summit], [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_G-20_Toronto_summit_protests 2010 G-20 Toronto summit protests], and [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Bloc Black Bloc]. There was stuff about this [http://www.linchpin.ca/ "Southern Ontario Anarchists"].[[Special:Contributions/70.54.181.70|70.54.181.70]] 20:12, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

==What's the difference between AP and Wikipedia?==
[[Special:Contributions/70.54.181.70|70.54.181.70]] 20:16, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
:All the time I might spend telling you something you can easily see for yourself, I could spend making the distinction more profound. [[User:Anarchangel|Anarchangel]] 23:08, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

==Should I be private (anonymous-pseudonymous) or public?==

Iâ€™ve been thinking a lot about this question: for the past several years in fact. 
Iâ€™m in a unique position, insofar that I have been (in my view) quite inconsequential in life, and relative to my contemporariesâ€”Iâ€™m in my mid-40â€™sâ€”have achieved littleâ€”indeed even many of those 20 years younger than I have achieved (at least statistically) more than I. Iâ€™m a high school drop-out, with no significant work history. Not only am I unmarried, Iâ€™ve never had sex (at least with a person). I have no photo ID. I havenâ€™t traveled internationally in +25 years, and even then it was only crossing the Canada-US border, never had a drivers licence, and never needed an age of majority card. Though Iâ€™m Canadian, I havenâ€™t been to a doctor in +20 years, nor have had a check-up in +25 years. 
I have a computer in my bachelor apartment (government housing at that), but Iâ€™ve never been on the internet with itâ€”my internet access is wholly by other computersâ€”most of them such as libraries (using no library card either) and employment centres. I havenâ€™t even had a functioning phone in over 4 years, land line in almost 10 years, a landline in my name in almost 15 years. With very rare exceptions, Iâ€™ve never used my name in emails and the like. Indeed, if I sent a regular mail letter, over half the time, I used a pseudonym (one Iâ€™ve been using for so many years, if he was a real person, he could not only legally drink in the US , but maybe have gotten a BA. :-). I only googled myself this year, and while my name is somewhat unique to (most) North Americans, I didnâ€™t show up, but strangely 2 others with my first and last name didâ€”both by the way having PhDâ€™s and seemingly well-paying jobs (though I suppose others with our common name, but less eminent than those two, might also no online presence (at least with their real names) due to inconsequentiality). Again, I feel that Iâ€™m in a unique position. I could be wrong, but if someone did a background check on me, theyâ€™d likely find very little. Given all of this, and a bit more to be mentioned, I have two choices. Either one would involve a cessation of much of this pondering and soul-searching. Publicity or Privacy. In the latter, I could create a pseudonymous identity, or more aptly, more identities, and following some protocols (use other internet access; maybe, just maybe, use proxy servers; tell few, if any, online my real identity, or those I know personally about my online identities). I can post all sorts of things to my heartâ€™s desire, and if I get in trouble with such posts, they will, at worse, be removed, and maybe I create a new identity if any one that Iâ€™m using becomes unusable. 
True, Iâ€™ve done this already, but the newer identities would be better organized, coordinated, stable, and longer-termed (at least they are intended as long term). With some use of anonymous and pseudonymous postings, I have been able to post some outrageous thingsâ€”though not typical of my postingsâ€”with neither police visits, or getting my ass kicked. I could take the route of anonymity-pseudonymityâ€”at least outside of my employment or whatever-passes-for-business concerns of mineâ€”and even then, I might practice a fair degree of online privacy. While Iâ€™m far from an expert on these matters, I have, over the decade, given a few 100â€™s of hours of thought on how Iâ€™d do it. I occasionally flatter myself that I have ideas that even the Mafia or Al Qaeda, if they came across such, would find interesting. At the very least, there is likely little online about me, that some super computer could cross-reference with any of my varying identities, to create a profile (or significant profile at least) of my real identity. So in this, I would be a free man of international mysteryâ€”or so I flatter myself. On the other hand, why spend so much time and so much work at maintaining anonymity-psuedonymity? Mark Twain said something like â€œThe nice thing about telling the truth is that you donâ€™t have to remember what you said,â€ and [[Sloan (band)|Sloan]] sung â€œItâ€™s a hard life living a lieâ€: though itâ€™s not so that Iâ€™d be living a lie, but rather a life of (mostly) online anonymity or pseudonymity; and if all, or pretty well all, know itâ€™s pseudonymous, then itâ€™s not really a lie, as it would be for, say an ID based on a fake nameâ€”such as a first and last name randomly taken from the phone book. For example, if I called myself â€œAceButchChipSpikeâ€ most would figure itâ€™s a fake nameâ€”so Iâ€™m not really deceiving anyone, or at least most. However, if I called myself, say, â€œRob Millerâ€, it sounds like a real name, though I simply took [[Rob Ford]]â€™s first name and [[Dave Miller]]â€™s last, combined them, and wa-la, a fake name I can use to deceive. However, I could forgo the whole (or much of) the anonymity-pseudonymity thing and go public, and if I did, I could get internet access for my apartment. I could start to use my real name and even photos. I could register on Facebook, Yahoo! Answers, Youtube, etc, and truthfully give my name. As much of what I would post, or search, would not be (all that) controversial, I doubt Iâ€™d get into much trouble. Much of that which would be controversial would at least be legal, or at least semi-legal. As for a few of the illegal activities (mostly hardcore porn downloads and file sharingâ€”with [[Stephen Harper]] as our PM, and Ignatieff as his deferential â€œOppositionâ€ such could indeed get quite illegal): many do itâ€”possible safety in numbers, there is likely support from a community, Iâ€™m not too afraid of talking to police, and maybe, Iâ€™d just do those particular things anonymouslyâ€”though likely saying that I do so in the pages of my public identity (like someone admitting to smoking pot, but not naming their dealer(s) and/or if they grow it); but if the issue is not of legality or insignificance, Iâ€™d post itâ€”even if Iâ€™d otherwise be shy, embarrassed, or even a little afraid to do soâ€”credibility would demand as much. Unlike others, I donâ€™t have to be worried (at least as much) about offending people: As I have no wife, children, employer, or co-workers, Iâ€™d have no wife, children, employer, or co-workers to worry about offending. Ditto my distant relativesâ€”if they are so offended that theyâ€™d never write to me againâ€”and thatâ€™s not entirely certain, then so what: in +10 years weâ€™ve exchanged little more than greeting cards (they being perhaps as distant from me personally as they are physically). Thereâ€™s also the possibility that 1% of my 2nd, 3rd, and 4th cousins might take a great and quick liking to me. My fatherâ€™s been dead for over 10 years, my motherâ€™s in a nursing home with possible senile dementia, and Iâ€™m estranged from my brother. The church I go to for a weekly meal and food bank purposes know well that Iâ€™m a liberal left-wing (somewhat) atheistâ€”and yet we maintain a fair degree of amicability and even respect. As I live in a big city, in a public housing complex, filled with sad stories, I have little concern about what my neighbours think. So, in my view, Iâ€™m in a wonderful position to start this. In exchange for being public: (1) there would be far less energy and time diverted in maintaining anonymity-pseudonymity; (2) along those lines, I could use just one identity, and fuse some of my older ones. (3) as well as acquiring opponents, Iâ€™d get supporters (4) less time and energy (and worry) about the relationship between my online and real world contacts (7) I could use the internet from home. This means Iâ€™d have the convenience of 24/7 access in any state Iâ€™m in, or weather. It also work well with multi-tasking (such as baking a cake while using the internet, drying off after a shower, watching TV (or listening to it), listening to music out of speakers, doing laundry (the time interval when the machineâ€™s in use, et), while waiting on hold, for a response from the agency that considers my call so important, doing something boring and monotonous while thinking of a good response to post, etc). 
As an anonymous-pseudonymous account, Iâ€™d have to forgo these. My choices would be limited to: (a) using a computer at home, but it wouldnâ€™t be connected, and thus my online time (on another computer) would be limited, and spent on fast downloads for latter perusals, or fast uploading content that I hope would be still relevant; (b) waste lots of time in uni-tasking; (c) rent another apartmentâ€”a bit over $600 a monthâ€”in another name, for the sole purpose of anonymous-pseudonymous internet use and multitasking; (d) or figure out a way of somewhat connecting to the internet from my current apartment where the traffic isnâ€™t associated with my real name or address, or even close to my address (currently Iâ€™m thinking very strong wii signals, satellite connections, stringing my own cable from a place at least 300 yards from where I live). (8) Iâ€™d be nice to be able to use email for real life contacts, instead of writing letters, sending packages, and hoping that they would respond the same (though I suppose with so many people getting so many emails, so much spam, and it being deletable, letters and packages would be more noticeable). (9) By fusing my online identities and aspects of my real life identities, such as me as the person, me as the small businessman, me as the founder (or co-founder) of small organizations, me as the amateur artist and musician, contacts in one of these might be able to help in another. For instance, 10 applicants are looking for a job. One is less qualified than most of the others, but he manages to get into a chat with the employer about their mutual love of soccer. Guess who gets hired. He has his own website with links to profile pages. Women online find a page of his while googling. They then check out his site and profiles on other sites. For a split second, some think of a sexual relationship with him. Most are disgusted at the thoughtâ€”a few even retch. More still arenâ€™t as visceral, but still figure itâ€™s undesirable. But a few might like the idea. No lies, little time wasted. (10) I could join varying sites that require to members to give names and the like. True, I could lie for such membership already, but I like to be a truthful as possibleâ€”either give them the info or not join (or come up with a justification for lying that was based on several 10â€™s of hours soul-searching, perusing the Terms of Service/Use, or if the entity really â€˜â€™deservesâ€™â€™ my truth). (11) Travel and access the sites I currently access. So even if there was a way that Iâ€™d be making a trail insofar that a super-computer could cross-reference the places where my pages were access and perhaps modified, and then to my entry and exits of a country, it wouldnâ€™t matter. My questions here are (1) Do I have a good assessment of the situation? (2) What course would you adviseâ€”particularly given that there is on one hand, little on the internet about meâ€”at least my real name; while on the other, no one close to me would be terribly offended by my posts if I started to generate content on the internet that would be associated with me, and some which would be controversial. (3) Points, tips, and insights? (4) Anybody who was in my situation, or something like it, who made a choice, and if so, what was it, and how did it turn out? (5) Are things revocable? For instance, while people may be haunted by stuff they post, there may be, if you will, an evanescence (it ainâ€™t just the name of a band ïŠ) of memoryâ€”or at least its relevance. For instance, if there are, say, 10 billion security cameras, each with over, say, 6 000 hours of video a year, for a creation of, say, 60 trillion hours of video, how many full time employees would it require to monitor and analyze the contents for criminals, perverts, or those engaged in un-patriotic and/or counter-revolutionary (or those considered to be) activities? The way I figure it, if computers could squish it 1 000 fold, itâ€™d still be 60 billion hours. Pay them $10/hr, and itâ€™d be $0.6 trillion. If each monitor worked 2 000 hours a year, youâ€™d need 30 million of them. If as little as 1% of them were corrupt, itâ€™d be 300 000 of them. Mind you, analyses of text would likely be quickerâ€”I suppose. Would the DEA be interested that I smoked marijuana 26 years ago. Once â€œouttedâ€ could I go back into the closet? (No, Iâ€™m not gay, but arguably as perverted as oneâ€”at least a contemporary of mine, such as Sarah Palin, might think so :-) Thank you for any help and comments, and for reading this long post. To increase my chances at good responses, Iâ€™ve posted the same question in a few other places. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Miscellaneous#Should_I_be_private_.28anonymous-pseudonymous.29_or_public.3F Wikipedia's Reference Desk],
[http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/RationalWiki:Saloon_bar#Should_I_be_private_.28anonymous-pseudonymous.29_or_public.3F RationalWiki's Saloon Bar] and
[http://libertapedia.org/wiki/Libertapedia:Forum#Should_I_be_private_.28anonymous-pseudonymous.29_or_public.3F Libertapedia]. As per the protocols for cross-posting, the posting in the Wikipedia Reference desk will be the main posting, though I will, of course, read and consider all. If there are objections to my cross-posting, please let me know. [[Special:Contributions/70.54.181.70|70.54.181.70]] 20:17, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

== User Block request for Advertising Bot ==
[[Special:Contributions/79.142.67.120]] is a spam bot for some online pharmaceutical outlet. Please block, and investigate the IP. It may well already be policy to do so, but I would block the source as well if it could be determined it was a commercial source and not a shared one such as an educational facility or a cyber cafe. [[User:Anarchangel|Anarchangel]] 23:08, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
::Also [[Special:Contributions/59.57.14.91]] , who has made in total, 14 edits to 3 articles, all of them advertising spam. The content is not the issue with this editor, as they always delete their previous edit content, it is the spamming of the edit history, which ends up consuming a great deal of bytes itself (See [[Wikipedia:User:Anarchangel#How many bytes does an edit take up?]]) [[User:Anarchangel|Anarchangel]] 22:49, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

== Viaduct not Veritas ==
My new soundbite slogan for what Categories could be, on AP. On WP everyone gets het up about labelling something with a Category, because it is supposed to be Truth that that Category Is That Article. You will pardon my rhetorical use of capitals; I don't have anything against declaring something to be Truth, unless it gets in the way of the usefulness of something. What else would we be doing on this mudball if not looking, in one way or another, for Truth and Goodness, but dodging other people's hapless or twisted definitions of those. Categories are incredibly useful at linking to not just one article, but masses of articles. They are an intuitive and fast Navigation tool ''if they are inclusive''. That is to say, [[Propaganda of the Deed]] links to Category:Terrorism, even tho' it is not terrorism, because it is thought by some that it is, whence one can find [[Security services using membership in Tablighi Jamaat as a rationale for anti-terrorist action]], with the category Religion, which leads to [[Discordianism]], which is categorized as both a Religion and a Fictional religion. In other words, one can surf, and potentially see more articles with each click than is practical to include in any See Also section.

So Categories are navigational tools, thus Viaduct, Latin for 'via' for road and 'ducere' to lead something, and not (necessarily) Veritas, Truth. Pretty slick, eh? [[User:Anarchangel|Anarchangel]] 01:47, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

== Solved ==
I just figured out the way to get around the blocking IPs problem (internet cafes and school computers, etc). If the IP is blocked, but not registered users using that IP, then it at least slows that IP down from just spamming bad edits, because they would have to create users again and again. Bona fide users using that same IP, who are not in any danger of being blocked on the basis of their edits, would be able to create a user name and edit ad infinitum. [[User:Anarchangel|Anarchangel]] 15:58, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

== My religion ==

Can I create an article here about [http://sites.google.com/site/maratreans/ my religion]. Or would that not be allowed? I don't want to do anything which violates this place's community norms, which is why I am enquiring before-hand. I don't suppose it has anything particularly to do with anarchism - on the other hand, I would have thought that anarchists being tolerant of a variety of viewpoints, they would be accepting of articles in an "Anarchopedia" on non-mainstream viewpoints. (Unlike Wikipedia, where everyone would scream "not notable!" and delete it straight away.) --[[User:Maratrean|Maratrean]] 10:08, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
:I'd sort of rather you didn't, but I don't suppose I would stop you, either. I am envious of the chemicals in your brain; religious conversion is said to be quite an experience. I doubt very much whether you can inspire such a transformation in others, especially with a wiki page, and there is no telling what the other users here think about the whole thing. We tend to be skeptics and/or already believe in something. Anyways, merry meet merry part. [[User:Anarchangel|Anarchangel]] 03:22, 16 March 2011 (UTC)
::Try this [http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Ra%C3%ABlism LGBT-positive group].  ;-)  [[Special:Contributions/205.189.194.208|205.189.194.208]] 17:54, 12 May 2011 (UTC)
:::Here is a photo if their [http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Clitoraid_event.jpg Clitoraid event].  ;-)  [[Special:Contributions/205.189.194.208|205.189.194.208]] 18:12, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

==Can one defend anarcho-capitalism in Anarchopedia?==
Granted, from pages such as [[Talk:Anarcho-Capitalism]] and [[An Anarchist FAQ - Is "anarcho"-capitalism a type of anarchism?]], I take it that most people here and likely the administrator(s) aren't exactly enamoured with the idea of anarcho-capitalism. But can one support it critically and in edits? I'm not talking about insisting on an A-C POV article here, but would defending it be barred? I believe that I read somewhere that defending A-C here isn't allowed. I mean it's one thing to bash A-C here--Conservapedia bashes liberals with articles such as [http://www.conservapedia.com/Liberal_denial "Liberal denial"] (to be fair they are a bit nicer to you guys [http://www.conservapedia.com/Anarchopedia Anarchopedia]), but when liberals try to defend themselves, they get blocked. ([http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Conservapedia:Newcomer%27s_Guide Newcomer's Guide]). Views would be appreciate. Thanks.  :-)  [[Special:Contributions/206.130.174.29|206.130.174.29]] 19:38, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
:I'm sure you shouldn't write anti-[[libertarian socialism|libertarian socialist]] statements. --[[User:XXPowerMexicoXx|XXPowerMexicoXx]] 18:23, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
::Which conversely sounds like one should have only NPOV or pro-"libertarian socialist" statements. Hmmmm. Does this mean that only explicitly anti-LS statements are out i.e. "they're a buncha idiots," or statements which could be construed as anti-LS. "A-C's positions are contrary to what is considered to be LS'ism insofar that they defend A, B, and C, while LS'ist oppose such. However, A-C's defend A, B, and C for the following reasons. They are..." . Would such, ie the latter, be permitted?[[Special:Contributions/205.189.194.208|205.189.194.208]] 23:05, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
:::Here's [[Wikinfo]]'s [http://www.wikinfo.org/index.php/Criticism_of_Anarchopedia view].  ;-)  [[Special:Contributions/205.189.194.208|205.189.194.208]] 23:18, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

== Browser tab icon? ==
The tiny icon on browser tabs that are pointed at Anarchopedia looks messed up, and I do not know where such a thing might be located, to fix it. On the other hand, I recently installed Mozilla Firefox on a computer that had always previously used Flock, so maybe it is something to do with that. How about everyone else? [[User:Anarchangel|Anarchangel]] 06:14, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

== halls for lease ==

The actual Duchess involving Cambridge may be traveling to schools within Oxford, exactly where one of the charitable groups the lady facilitates works courses for kids along with behavioral difficulties.

Your Fine art Place utilizes therapy to help youngsters using concerns such as lower self-esteem or even Asperger's Affliction.
<a href=ik>sovereign capital private equity </a>
<a href=sovereign>school halls for hire london </a>

And:
<a href=venture>private equity companies uk </a>
<a href=pimlico>invest in england </a>
<a href=pimlico>ik private equity </a>
The particular Satisfaction Charitable organization Institution aims use a looking after, risk-free as well as enriching expertise; every youngster is inspired to build up strong personal, educational, physical and creative knowledge with regard to lifelong studying.

Existentialism

2012-03-15T07:01:59Z

Weiyi:

'''Existentialism''' is a [[philosophical movement]] which claims that individual human beings have full responsibility for creating the meanings of their own lives. It is a reaction against more traditional philosophies, such as [[rationalism]] and [[empiricism]], which sought to discover an ultimate order in [[metaphysics|metaphysical principles]] or in the structure of the observed world. The movement had its origins in the 19th century thought of [[Soren Kierkegaard|Kierkegaard]] and [[Friedrich Nietzsche|Nietzsche]] and was prevalent in [[Continental philosophy]]. In the 1940s and 1950s, French philosophers such as [[Jean-Paul Sartre]], [[Simone de Beauvoir]], and [[Albert Camus]] wrote scholarly and fictional works that helped to popularize themes associated with existentialism: "dread, boredom, alienation, the absurd, freedom, commitment, [and] nothingness". <ref>http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/existentialism/</ref>
[http://www.christianlouboutinselected.com/ christian louboutin shoes] The red-soled shoes are Christian Louboutin's signature logo, [http://www.christianlouboutinselected.com/ christian louboutin sale] highlighting women's lovely, [http://www.christianlouboutinselected.com/christian-louboutin-boots christian louboutin boots] beautiful, [http://www.christianlouboutinselected.com/jimmy-choo-pumps jimmy choo pumps] quieter and mature sexy [http://www.christianlouboutinselected.com/christian-louboutin-flats christian louboutin flats].
== Major concepts in existentialism ==
{{Cleanup-restructure|date=February 2007}}
{{Original research|section|date=April 2007}}
Existentialism differentiates itself from the modern Western rationalist tradition of philosophers such as [[Descartes]] in rejecting the idea that the most certain and primary reality is rational consciousness. Descartes believed humans could doubt all existence, but could not will away or doubt the thinking consciousness, whose reality is therefore more certain than any other reality. Existentialism decisively rejects this argument, asserting instead that as conscious beings, humans would always find themselves already in a world, a prior context and a history that is given to consciousness, and that humans cannot think away that world. It is inherent and indubitably linked to consciousness. In other words, the ultimate and unquestionable reality is not thinking consciousness but, according to Heidegger, "being in the world". This is a radicalization of the notion of [[intentionality]] that comes from [[Brentano]] and [[Husserl]], which asserts that, even in its barest form, consciousness is always conscious ''of something''.

=== Existence precedes essence ===
A central proposition of existentialism is that [[existence precedes essence]]; that is, that a human being's existence precedes and is more fundamental than any meaning which may be ascribed to human life: humans define their own reality. One is not bound to the generalities and ''[[a priori]]'' definitions of what "being human" connotes. This is an inversion of a more traditional view, which was widely accepted from the ancient Greeks to [[Hegel]], that the central project of philosophy was to answer the question "What is a human being?" (i.e., "What is the human essence") and to derive from that answer one's conclusions about how human beings should behave.

In ''[[Repetition (Kierkegaard)|Repetition]]'', [[Kierkegaard]]'s literary character ''Young Man'' laments:
:''How did I get into the world? Why was I not asked about it, why was I not informed of the rules and regulations but just thrust into the ranks as if I had been bought by a peddling shanghaier of human beings? How did I get involved in this big enterprise called actuality? Why should I be involved? Isn't it a matter of choice? And if I am compelled to be involved, where is the managerâ€”I have something to say about this. Is there no manager? To whom shall I make my complaint?'' <ref name="rep">Kierkegaard, SÃ¸ren. ''Repetition'' in Kierkegaard's Writings, vol. 6, Princeton University Press, 1983</ref>
Heidegger coined the term "thrownness" (also used by [[Sartre]]) to describe this idea that human beings are "thrown" into existence without having chosen it. Existentialists consider being thrown into existence as prior to, and the horizon or context of, any other thoughts or ideas that humans have or definitions of themselves that they create.

Sartre, in ''"Essays in Existentialism",'' pg 36, further highlights this consciousness of being thrown into existence in the following fashion. "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".

Kierkegaard also focused on the deep anxiety of human existence â€” the feeling that there is no purpose, indeed nothing, at its core. Finding a way to counter this nothingness, by embracing existence, is the fundamental theme of existentialism, and the explanation for the philosophy's name. While someone who claims to believe in reality might be called a "realist," or someone who believes in a deity a "deist," someone who believes fundamentally only in existence, and seeks to find meaning in his or her life solely by embracing existence, is an existentialist.

=== Reason as a defense against angst ===

Emphasizing this action, freedom, and decision as fundamental, existentialists oppose themselves to [[rationalism]] and [[positivism (philosophy)|positivism]]. That is, they argue against definitions of human beings as primarily rational. Rather, existentialists look at where people find meaning. Existentialism asserts that people actually make decisions based on what has meaning to them rather than what is rational.

The rejection of reason as the source of meaning is a common theme of existentialist thought, as is the focus on the feelings of [[anxiety]] and [[dread]] that we feel in the face of our own radical [[Freedom (philosophy)|freedom]] and our awareness of [[death]]. Kierkegaard saw rationality as a mechanism humans use to counter their existential anxiety, their fear of being in the world. "If I can believe that I am rational and everyone else is rational then I have nothing to fear and no reason to feel anxious about being free."

Sartre saw rationality as a form of "bad faith," an attempt by the self to impose structure on a world of phenomena â€” "the other" â€” that is fundamentally irrational and random. According to Sartre, rationality and other forms of "bad faith" hinder us from finding meaning in freedom. To try to suppress our feelings of anxiety and dread, we confine ourselves within everyday experience, Sartre asserts, thereby relinquishing our freedom and acquiescing to being possessed in one form or another by "the look" of "the other".

In a similar vein, Camus believed that society and religion falsely teach humans that "the other" has order and structure.<ref>Camus, Albert. "An Absurd Reasoning"</ref> For Camus, when an individual "consciousness," longing for order, collides with "the other's" lack of order, a third element is born: "the absurd."

=== The absurd ===

It then follows that existentialism tends to view human beings as subjects in an indifferent, objective, often ambiguous, and "[[absurdism|absurd]]" universe, in which meaning is not provided by the natural order, but rather can be created, however provisionally and unstably, by human beings' actions and interpretations.

During the literary modernist movement in the 1900s, authors began describing dystopian societies and surreal and absurd situations in a parallel universe, a trend that paralleled the existentialist movement. In [[Franz Kafka]]'s novella ''[[The Metamorphosis]],'' a man awakes to the realization that he has turned into a beetle. This story, which is certainly "[[absurdism|absurd]]" and surreal, is one of many modernist literary works that influenced and were influenced by existentialist philosophy.

Although there are certain common tendencies amongst existentialist thinkers, there are major differences and disagreements among them, and not all of them even accept the validity of the term "existentialism." In German, the phrase ''Existenzphilosophie'' (philosophy of existence) is also used.

=== Existentialist perspectives on God ===

There is a split among existentialists between those who, like Kierkegaard, conceive the fundamental existentialist question as man's relationship to God, and those who accept Nietzsche's proclamation of the "death of God." Nonetheless, theological existentialism as advocated by philosophers and theologians like [[Paul Tillich]], [[Gabriel Marcel]], and [[Martin Buber]] shares many of the same tenets and themes that are central to atheistic existentialism. Belief in God is a personal choice made on the basis of a ''passion'', of [[faith]], an observation, or experience. Just as atheistic existentialists can freely choose not to believe, theistic existentialists can freely choose to believe in God and could, despite one's doubt, have faith that God exists and that God is good.

A third type of existentialism is [[agnosticism|agnostic]] existentialism. The agnostic existentialist makes no claim to know, or not know, if there is a "greater picture" in play; rather, he simply recognizes that the greatest truth is that which he chooses to act upon. The agnostic existentialist feels that to know the "greater picture," whether there is one or not, is impossible for human mindsâ€”or, if it is not impossible, that at least they have not found it yet. Like Christian existentialists, the agnostic believes existence is subjective. However one feels about the issue, through the agnostic existentialist's perspective, the act of finding knowledge of the existence of God often has little value because he feels it to be impossible, and/or believes it to be useless.

As mentioned above, opinions of philosophers associated with existentialism vary, sometimes greatly, over what "existentialism" is, and even if there is such a thing as "existentialism". One version, Sartrean existentialism, is elaborated below.

=== Sartrean existentialism ===

Some of the tenets associated with the existentialism of [[Jean-Paul Sartre]] include:
; Existence precedes essence : This is a reversal of the [[Aristotle]]an premise that essence precedes existence, where man exists to fulfill some purpose. Sartrean existentialism argues that man has no predefined purpose or meaning; rather, humans define themselves in terms of who they become as their individual lives are played out in response to the challenges posed by existence in the world.

; Values are subjective : Sartre accepts the premise that something in the "Facticity" (i.e., the properties of an object or person as traditionally conceived and experienced) of an individual is valuable because the individual consciousness chooses to value it. Sartre denies that there are any objective standards on which to base values. However, this should not be confused with [[postmodernism|post-modernism]]. Sartre clearly believed that systems of consciousness followed clear and solid rules.

; [[Bad faith (existentialism)|Bad faith]] : Sartre believed that people lie to themselves and, underneath these lies, people negate their own being through patterns. The preceperi is similar to what today is called insight. It is necessary to get rid of bad faith.

; The Gaze : Sartre believed that beings possess the power to look at themselves and at another or an object, which is to use one's mind to look at the person in static. This concept of "looking" and the power to look, is referred to as The Gaze. This destroys an object's subjectivity. The thing becomes an "in itself" or an object. Sartre stated that this form of consciousness was used quite often in inter-personal relationships. People place meaning onto what other people think of them rather than what they think of themselves. This process of radically re-aligning this meaning from The Gaze onto one's own being is what leads to periods of [[existential angst]].

; Being for others : Sartre believed that people who cannot embrace their freedom seek to be "looked at," that is, to be made an object of another's subjectivity. This creates a clash of freedoms whereby person A's being (or sense of identity) is controlled by what person B's thoughts about him are.

; Responsibility for choices : The individual consciousness is responsible for all the choices it makes, regardless of the consequences. Condemned to be free because man's actions and choices are his and his alone, he is ''condemned'' to be responsible for his free choices.

There are several terms Sartre uses in his works. ''Being in-itself'' is an object that is not free and cannot change its essence. ''Being for-itself'' is free; it does not need to be what it is and can change into what it is not. Consciousness is usually considered being for-itself. Sartre distinguishes between positional and non-positional consciousness. Non-positional consciousness is being merely conscious of one's surroundings. Positional consciousness puts consciousness into relation of one's surroundings. This entails an explicit awareness of being conscious of one's surroundings. Sartre argues ''identity'' is constructed by this explicit awareness of consciousness.

== Historical background ==
[[Image:SÃ¸ren-Kirkegaard-Statue.jpeg|thumb|The SÃ¸ren Kierkegaard Statue in Copenhagen.]]

Existential themes have been hinted at throughout history. Examples include [[Socrates]] and his life, [[Gautama Buddha]]'s teachings, the [[Bible]] in the Book of [[Ecclesiastes]] and the [[Book of Job]], [[Saint Augustine]] in his ''[[Confessions (St. Augustine)|Confessions]]'', [[Mulla Sadra]]'s writings, and [[Descartes|Descartes']] ''[[Meditations on First Philosophy|Meditations]]''. Individualist politics, such as those advanced by [[John Locke]], advocated individual autonomy and self-determination rather than the state ruling over the individual. This kind of political philosophy, although not existential in nature, provided a welcoming climate for existentialism.

In 1670, [[Blaise Pascal]]'s unfinished notes were published under the title of ''[[PensÃ©es]]'' (i.e., "''Thoughts''"). In the work, he described many fundamental themes of existentialism. Pascal argued that without a [[God]], life would be meaningless and miserable. People would only be able to create obstacles and overcome them in an attempt to escape boredom. These token-victories would ultimately become meaningless, since people would eventually die. This was good enough reason not to choose to become an [[atheist]], according to Pascal.

Existentialism, in its currently recognizable 20th century form, was inspired by [[SÃ¸ren Kierkegaard]], [[Fyodor Dostoevsky]] and the [[Germany|German]] philosophers [[Friedrich Nietzsche]], [[Edmund Husserl]], and [[Martin Heidegger]]. It became popular in the mid-20th century through the works of the French writer-philosophers [[Jean-Paul Sartre]] and [[Simone de Beauvoir]], whose versions of it were set out in a popular form in Sartre's 1946 ''[[Existentialism is a Humanism]]'' and Beauvoir's ''[[The Ethics of Ambiguity]]''.

[[Gabriel Marcel]] pursued theological versions of existentialism, most notably [[Christian existentialism]]. Other theological existentialists include [[Paul Tillich]], [[Rudolf Bultmann]], [[Miguel de Unamuno]], [[Thomas Hora]] and [[Martin Buber]]. Moreover, one-time [[Marxism|Marxist]] [[Nikolai Berdyaev]], developed a philosophy of Christian existentialism in his native Russia, and later in France, in the decades preceding [[World War II]].

[[Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel]] and [[Arthur Schopenhauer]] are also important influences on the development of existentialism (although not precursors), because the philosophies of SÃ¸ren Kierkegaard and Friedrich Nietzsche were written in response or opposition to Hegel and Schopenhauer, respectively.

=== Kierkegaard and Nietzsche ===
{{main|Kierkegaard and Nietzsche comparisons}}
The first philosophers considered fundamental to the existentialist movement are [[SÃ¸ren Kierkegaard]] and [[Friedrich Nietzsche]], though neither used the term "existentialism". Like Pascal, they were interested in people's concealment of the meaninglessness of life and the use of diversion to escape from boredom. However, what Pascal did not write about was that people can create and change their fundamental values and beliefs. Kierkegaard and Nietzsche wrote that human nature and human identity vary depending on what values and beliefs humans hold.<ref name="Lup1">Luper, Steven. "Existing". Mayfield Publishing, 2000, p.4â€“5</ref><ref name="Lup2">Ibid, p. 11</ref> Objective truths (for example mathematical truths) are important, but detached or observational modes of thought can never truly comprehend human experience. Great individuals invent their own values and create the very terms under which they excel. Kierkegaard's [[knight of faith]] and Nietzsche's [[Ãœbermensch]] are examples of those who define the nature of their own existence. In contrast, Pascal did not reason that human nature and identity are constituted by the free decisions and choices of people.

Kierkegaard's and Nietzsche's works were published too early to be considered a part of the 20th century existentialist movement. They were philosophers whose works and influences are not limited to existentialism. They have been appropriated and seen as precursors to many other intellectual movements, including [[postmodernism]], [[nihilism]], and various strands of [[psychology]]. Thus, it is unknown whether they would have supported the existentialism of the 20th century or accepted tenets of [[Jean-Paul Sartre|Jean-Paul Sartre's]] version of it. Nevertheless, their works are precursors to many later developments in existentialist thought.

=== Heidegger and the German existentialists ===

One of the first German existentialists was [[Karl Jaspers]]. Jaspers recognized the importance of Kierkegaard and Nietzsche and attempted to build an "Existenz" philosophy around the two. [[Heidegger]], who was influenced by Jaspers and the phenomenologist [[Edmund Husserl]], wrote his most influential work ''[[Being and Time]]'' which postulates ''Dasein'' (pronounced ''dah-zIne''), literally ''being there''â€”a being that is constituted by its temporality, illuminates and interprets the meaning of being in time. ''Dasein'' is sometimes considered the human subject, but Heidegger denies the [[Cartesian]] dualism of subject-object/mind-body.

Although existentialists view Heidegger to be an important philosopher in the movement, he vehemently denied being an existentialist in the Sartrean sense, and responded to Sartre in ''A Letter about Humanism'', denying his philosophy was existentialism.

=== Sartre, Camus and the French existentialists ===

[[Jean-Paul Sartre]] is perhaps the most well-known existentialist and is one of the few to have accepted being called an "existentialist". Sartre developed his version of existentialist philosophy under the influence of Husserl and Heidegger. ''[[Being and Nothingness]]'' is perhaps his most important work about existentialism. Sartre was also talented in his ability to espouse his ideas in different media, including philosophical essays, lectures, novels, plays, and the theater. ''[[No Exit]]'' and ''[[Nausea (book)|Nausea]]'' are two of his celebrated works. In the 1960s, he attempted to reconcile existentialism and [[Marxism]] in his work ''[[Critique of Dialectical Reason]]''.

[[Albert Camus]] was a friend of [[Sartre]], until their falling-out, and wrote several works with existential themes including ''[[The Rebel]]'', ''[[The Stranger (novel)|The Stranger]]'', ''[[The Myth of Sisyphus]]'' and ''[[Summer in Algiers]]''. He, like many others, rejected the existentialist label, and considered his works to be absurd. In ''The Myth of [[Sisyphus]]'', Camus uses the analogy of the Greek myth to demonstrate the futility of existence. In the myth, Sisyphus is condemned to roll a rock up a hill for eternity, but when he reaches the summit, the rock will roll back to the bottom again. Camus believes that this existence is pointless, but he feels Sisyphus ultimately finds meaning and purpose in his task, simply by continually applying himself to it.

Critic [[Martin Esslin]] in his book ''Theatre of the Absurd'' pointed out how many contemporary playwrights such as [[Samuel Beckett]], [[Eugene Ionesco]], [[Jean Genet]], and [[Arthur Adamov]] wove the existential belief that man is an absurd creature loose in a universe empty of real meaning into their plays. Esslin noted that many of these playwrights demonstrated the philosophies better than Sartre and Camus did in their own plays. Though most of the playwrights subsequently labelled "Absurdist" (based on this book) denied affiliations with existentialism and were often staunchly anti-philosphical (for example Ionesco often claimed he identified more with [['Pataphysics]] or with [[Surrealism]] than with existentialism) the playwrights of the Theatre of the Absurd are often linked to existentialism based on Esslin's observation. <ref>Kernan, Alvin B. ''The Modern American Theater: A Collection of Critical Essays''. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: [[Prentice-Hall]], 1967.</ref>
[[Simone de Beauvoir]], who was a longtime companion to Sartre, wrote about feminist and existential ethics in her works, including ''[[The Second Sex]]'' and ''[[Ethics of Ambiguity]]''.

[[Franz Fanon]] a French-born critic of [[colonialism]] has been considered an important existentialist. <ref>Macey, David. ''Franz Fanon: a Biography'' "Resurrecting the Lost Voice of Franz Fanon". New York City: [[Picador (imprint)|Picador]], USA. p. 129-130.</ref>

[[Maurice Merleau-Ponty]], an often overlooked existentialist, was a companion of Sartre. His understanding of [[Husserl|Husserl's]] [[phenomenology]] was far greater than that of his fellow existentialists. His work, [[Humanism and Terror]], greatly influenced Sartre.

[[Michel Foucault]] would also be considered an existentialist through his use of history to reveal the constant alterations of created meaning, thus proving its failure to produce a cohesive form of reality.

=== Dostoevsky, Kafka, and the literary existentialists ===

Many writers who are not usually considered philosophers have also had a major influence on existentialism. Among them, Czech author [[Franz Kafka]] and Russian author [[Fyodor Dostoevsky]] are most prominent. [[Franz Kafka]] created often surreal and alienated characters who struggle with hopelessness and absurdity, notably in his most famous novella, ''[[The Metamorphosis]]'', or in his master novel, ''[[The Trial]]''. The Russian [[Fyodor Dostoevsky]]'s ''[[Notes from Underground]]'' details the story of a man who is unable to fit into society and unhappy with the identities he creates for himself. Many of Dostoyevsky's novels, such as ''[[Crime and Punishment]]'', have covered issues pertinent to existential philosophy while simultaneously refuting the validity of the claims of existentialism (notably the "superman" theory advocated by Nietzsche.) Throughout ''Crime and Punishment'' we see the protagonist, Raskolnikov, and his character develop away from existential ideas and beliefs in favor of more traditionally Christian ones, showing that Dostoevsky was still very much a Christian thinker.{{Fact|date=January 2007}}

In the 20th century, existentialism experienced a resurgence in popular art forms. In fiction, [[Hermann Hesse|Hermann Hesse's]] 1928 novel ''[[Steppenwolf (novel)|Steppenwolf]]'', based on an idea in Kierkegaard's ''Either/Or'' (1843), sold well in the West. [[Jack Kerouac]] and the [[Beat poets]] adopted existentialist themes. In addition, "arthouse" films began quoting and alluding to existentialist thought and thinkers.

Existentialist novelists were generally seen as a mid-1950s phenomenon that continued until the mid- to late 1970s. Most of the major writers were either French or from French African colonies. Small circles of other Europeans were seen as literary existential precursors by the existentialists themselves, however, literary history increasingly has questioned the accuracy of this idealism for earlier models.

There is overlap between the expatriate American [[beat generation]] writers who found Paris their spiritual home, and writers of [[Picaresque|road novels]]. This also extends to the delayed action of the French permanent enamorment with the United States' [[hard boiled]] fiction genre, which, as [[FranÃ§ois Truffaut|Truffaut]] and others in the ''[[Cahiers du CinÃ©ma]]'' indicated, influenced novels and plays. To some extent as well, the [[surrealist]] movement of [[Andre Breton]] and others, which questioned the established reality, made possible the isolation of non-academic novels protagonised by amoral anti-heroes.

== Existentialism since 1970 ==

Although [[Postmodernism|postmodernist]] thought became the focus of many intellectuals in the 1970s and thereafter, much postmodern writing considers themes similar to existentialism. Since 1970, much cultural activity in art, cinema, and literature contains postmodern and existential elements, which, ironically, would support the postmodern thesis of "borderlessness between concepts". One should not, however, confuse postmodernism with existentialism.

Books such as ''[[Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep]]'' ([[1968]]), (now republished as ''[[Blade Runner]]'') by Philip K. Dick, ''Toilet the Novel'' by Michael Szymczyk and ''[[Fight Club]]'' by [[Chuck Palahniuk]] both distort the line between reality and appearance while simultaneously espousing strong existential themes. Ideas from such thinkers as [[Foucault]], [[Kafka]], [[Nietzsche]], [[Herbert Marcuse]], [[Gilles Deleuze]] and [[Eduard von Hartmann]] permeate the works of writers such as Chuck Palahniuk, Michael Szymczyk and Charles Bukowski, and one often finds in such works a delicate balance between distastefulness and beauty.

=== Neo-Existentialism and Post-Postmodernism ===

{{SectOR}}
Some argue, however, that this class of writing belongs to a genre of literature called [[Post-Postmodernism]], similar to a Russian movement in the 1990s called "Excrement Literature". Contemporary American writers, such as [[Chuck Palahniuk]] and the underground writer Szymczyk have been described as belonging to this movement in literature.{{Fact|date=February 2007}} In their works, there are often elements of distortion from the "traditional" mode of narrative, which often try to grab and shock the reader and return him or her to their present. This function that comes through the form of their writing has been described as a "Metaphysics of Presence", in which, it is hoped, the intentionality of consciousness will be diverted from its inauthentic state of "care" (Heidegger's expression for the content, which consciousness fills itself with, often concerned with the trivialities of everyday life or "everydayness") towards such existential realizations of death, the here-and-now, freedom and all of its corresponding angst. It is in that relation, that such thinkers as Heidegger would argue, that one finds one's authenticity.

Thus, the element of literature that permeates such books as ''Fight Club'' and ''Toilet: The Novel'' is often described as existential in nature. On the other hand, such works also show a Post-modern concern, especially ''Fight Club'', in which the main character Tyler Durden appears as a representation of the philosophy of the Post-Modern classic [[Anti-Oedipus]], and its idealization of the schizo-subject, who resists the capitalistic order of the day, devours and spits out the social codes, and "...breaks through the walls of reterritorialization into the realm of flows, intensities, and becoming, thereby threatening the whole capitalistic system in which personal disintegration occurs, allowing revolutionary action to be possible...".{{Fact|date=April 2007}}

In ''Toilet: The Novel'', the entire narrative becomes schizoid in nature, each part separated from its whole, with even the protagonists trembling with despair from their own separation, their own lack of connection to the whole, and which ends in, what Deleuze calls for in Anti-Oedipus, "a breakthrough without a total breakdown, in which the schizoid subject is distinguished from the dysfunctional schizophrenic and a certain harmony is achieved between the ugly and the beautiful, and something new is seen on the horizon." Thus, this Post Postmodernist literature can often be called a synthesis between the movements of Existentialism and Post-Modernism, or as a new genre of literature, film and art, that is of an existential nature and is an evolved form of Existentialism. Neo-Existentialism, some would say, is intrinsically different from the post post-modern via its existential emphasis.{{Fact|date=February 2007}}

=== Existential Cinema ===

In cinema, postmodern editing techniques, showing the displacement, discontinuity, and temporal perspective of post-modernism, can go hand-in-hand with a purely existential story, thus synthesizing technique and function to give meaning. Moreover, this has created the neologism "Neo-Existentialism"â€”combining post-modernism's epistemology with the reflective [[ontological]] belief of existentialism. Existential cinema deals with themes of:

* Retaining authenticity in an apathetic, mechanical worldâ€”something [[postmodernism]] would staunchly reject, as authenticity is related to a non-existent "reality"
* The consciousness of death, for example Heidegger's "being towards death", exemplified in [[Ingmar Bergman]]'s film ''[[The Seventh Seal]]'' (1957)
* The feelings of alienation and loneliness consequent to being unique in a world of indifferent others, or, in Kierkegaard phrase, "the crowd" or Nietzsche's "the herd"; as personified by the character of Oh Dae-su in the 2003 Korean film ''[[Oldboy]]''
* The concept AlltÃ¤gliche selbstsein ("Everyday-ness," or [[ennui]]), which Heidegger explicated in his book ''[[Sein und Zeit]]'' (1927) (English translation: ''[[Being and Time]]'')

The 1952 classic ''[[High Noon]]'', starring Gary Cooper as a sheriff abandoned by the townspeople as he faces alone a vengeful killer, has often been described as an "existential Western".

A major existential movement in cinema was launched by the advent of French New Wave cinema in the 1960's. Landmark films during this period were Breathless, directed by Jean-Luc Godard and written by Francois Truffaut. Truffaut released his masterpiece, The 400 Blows, in the same year. Both Godard and Truffaut would go on to become flagbearers of existentialist cinema and produce notable films like Alphaville, Bande a part, Stolen Kisses and Bed and Board.

The acclaimed 1976 film ''[[Taxi Driver]]'', starring [[Robert DeNiro]], is perhaps one of the most widely known existential films. The film was heavily influenced by Dosteovsky's ''[[Notes from Underground]]'' and even quotes Dosteovsky in the line: "I'm God's lonely man." The [[2004 in film|2004]] film ''[[The Machinist]]'' is also influenced by Dosteovsky's work, especially ''[[The Double: A Petersburg Poem]]'', ''[[The Idiot (novel)|The Idiot]]'', and ''[[The Brothers Karamazov]]''. In one scene in the film, star [[Christian Bale]] is seen reading a copy of ''[[The Idiot (novel)|The Idiot]]''. Another film released in the same year, ''[[I Heart Huckabees|I â™¥ Huckabees]]'' revolves around two existential [[detectives]], who aim to help people solve their personal existential crises.

The introduction sequence of the 1957 film ''[[Love in the Afternoon (1957 film)|Love in the Afternoon]]'' contains the witty remark "even existentialists" make love in [[Paris]].

The 1972 film ''[[Deliverance]]'', as well as the 1970 book of the same name, have also been credited as existentialist, as has ''[[Fight Club (film)|Fight Club]]'' (1999), ''[[eXistenZ]]'' (1999) and ''[[The Matrix]]'' (1999).

The 2003 film ''[[Lost in Translation (film)]]'', directed by ''[[Sofia Coppola]]'', contains existential themes.

==Criticisms of existentialism==

[[Herbert Marcuse]] criticized existentialism, especially in Sartre's ''[[Being and Nothingness]]'', for projecting certain features of living in a modern, oppressive society, such as anxiety and meaninglessness, onto the nature of existence itself: "In so far as Existentialism is a philosophical doctrine, it remains an idealistic doctrine: it hypothesizes specific historical conditions of human existence into ontological and metaphysical characteristics. Existentialism thus becomes part of the very ideology which it attacks, and its radicalism is illusory" <ref>Marcuse, Herbert. "Sartre's Existentialism". Printed in ''Studies in Critical Philosophy''. Translated by Joris De Bres. London: NLB, 1972. p. 161</ref>. Sartre had already responded to some points of the Marxist criticisms of Existentialism in his popular lecture ''[http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/sartre/works/exist/sartre.htm Existentialism is a humanism],'' held in 1946.

[[Theodor Adorno]], in his ''Jargon of Authenticity'', criticized Heidegger's philosophy, with special attention to his use of language, as a mystifying ideology of advanced industrial society and its power structure.{{Fact|date=January 2007}}

Heidegger criticized Sartre's Existentialism, in his ''Letter on Humanism'':
:''Existentialism says [that] existence precedes essence. In this statement he [Sartre] is taking ''existentia'' and ''essentia'' according to their metaphysical meaning, which from Platoâ€™s time on has said that ''essentia'' precedes ''existentia''. Sartre reverses this statement. But the reversal of a metaphysical statement remains a metaphysical statement. With it he stays with metaphysics in oblivion of the truth of Being.''

[[Roger Scruton]] claimed, in his book ''From Descartes to Wittgenstein'', that both Heidegger's concept of [[Authenticity (philosophy)|inauthenticity]] and Sartre's concept of [[Sartre and bad faith|bad faith]] were inconsistent; both deny any universal moral creed, yet speak of these concepts as if everyone is bound to abide by them. In chapter 18, he writes,''"In what sense Sartre is able to 'recommend' the authenticity which consists in the purely self-made morality is unclear. He does recommend it, but, by his own argument, his recommendation can have no objective force."'' Familiar with this sort of argument, Sartre claimed that bad and good faith do not represent moral ideas, rather, they are ways of being.

[[Logical positivists]], such as [[Carnap]] and [[Alfred Ayer|Ayer]], claim that existentialists frequently become confused over the verb "to be" in their analyses of "being".<ref>Carnap, Rudolf, Uberwindung der Metaphysik durch logische Analyse der Spache [Overcoming Metaphysics by the Logical Analasis of Speech], Erkenntnis (1932), p. 219-241. Carnap's critique of Heidegger's "What is Metaphysics".</ref> The verb is prefixed to a [[Predicate (grammar)|predicate]] and to use the word without any predicate is meaningless. Another source of confusion in the existentialist metaphysical literature is that they try to understand the meaning of the word "nothing" (the negation of existence) by assuming that it must refer to something. Borrowing [[Kant]]'s argument against the [[ontological argument]] for the existence of God, the logical positivists argue that existence is not a property.

== Adaptation outside philosophy ==
===Existentialism in psychotherapy===
{{main|Existential therapy}}

Many of the theories of [[Sigmund Freud]], whom Sartre refuted systematically, were influenced by [[Nietzsche]]. Some have supposed that [[Thanatos]] and [[Eros (love)|Eros]] were closely related to [[Dionysian and Apollonian]] aspects of Nietzsche philosophy.

One of the major offshoots of Existentialism as a philosophy is Existential Psychology. Sometimes termed the ''Third Force Psychology'', this branch of psychology was initiated by [[Viktor Frankl]] (who had studied with [[Sigmund Freud|Freud]] and [[Carl Jung|Jung]] when young).{{Fact|date=March 2007}} Then early in his career he was sent to a Nazi concentration camp where he survived from 1941 through 1945. In the camps he mentally re-wrote his first book whose manuscript had been confiscated at the time of his arrest. He called his theory [[Logotherapy]] and the book was [[Man's Search for Meaning]]. Speaking at a seminar in Anaheim, California in the early 1990s, Frankl stated that in the camps he would, at times, pretend to himself that he was actually in the future, remembering his experiences and noting how he was able to survive them. His years of suffering took him to the conclusion that even in the worst imaginable of circumstances, life can be assigned a worthwhile meaning. This conclusion was the heart of Frankl's psychological orientation. [[Logotherapy]] asserts that all human beings have a will to find meaning, and that serious behavioral problems develop when they cannot find it. The therapy helps patients handle the responsibility of choices and the pain of unavoidable suffering by helping them decide to give life meaning.

An early contributor to Existential Psychology was [[Rollo May]], who was influenced by [[Kierkegaard]].

One of the most prolific writers on techniques and theory of Existential Psychology in the USA is [[Irvin D. Yalom]]. The person who has contributed most to the development of a European version of Existential Psychotherapy is the British based [[Emmy van Deurzen]].

With complete freedom to decide, and through being responsible for the outcome of said decisions, comes anxiety â€” or angst â€” about the choices made. Anxiety's importance in existentialism makes it a popular topic in [[psychotherapy]]. Therapists often use existential [[philosophy]] to explain the patient's anxiety. Psychotherapists using an existential approach believe that a patient can harness his anxiety and use it constructively. Instead of suppressing anxiety, patients are advised to use it as grounds for change. By embracing anxiety as inevitable, a person can use it to achieve his or her full potential in life.

[[Humanistic psychology]] also had major impetus from existential psychology and shares many of the fundamental tenets.

===Terror management theory===

[[Terror management theory]] is a developing area of study within the academic study of psychology. It looks at what researchers claim to be the implicit emotional reactions of people that occur when they are confronted with the psychological terror of knowing they will eventually die.

==Notable examples of existentialism in popular culture==

*[[Fight Club]], a novel by [[Chuck Palahniuk]], later made into a film.<ref>{{cite journal
| quotes =
| last =Kavadlo
| first =Jesse
| date =
| year =2005
| month =
| title =The Fiction of Self-destruction: Chuck Palahniuk, Closet Moralist
| journal =Stirrings Still, the International Journal of Existential Literature
| volume =
| issue =
| pages =
| issn =
| pmid =
| doi =
| id =
| url =http://www.stirrings-still.org/ss22.pdf
| language =
| format =[[PDF]]
| accessdate =2007-05-10
| laysummary =
| laysource =
| laydate =
| quote =
}}</ref>


==See also==

* [[Existential despair]]
* [[List of major thinkers and authors associated with Existentialism]]

==References==

Schaeffer, Francis. ''The God Who is There''. 1968.
<references/>

==Further reading==
*{{cite book|last=Appignanesi|first=Richard|coauthors=and [[Oscar Zarate]]|title=Introducing Existentialism|year=2001|publisher=Icon|location=Cambridge, UK|id=ISBN 1-84046-266-3}}
*{{cite book|last=Cooper|first=David E.|title=Existentialism: A Reconstruction|year=1999|edition=2nd ed.|publisher=Blackwell|location=Oxford, UK|id=ISBN 0-631-21322-8}}
*{{cite book|last=Luper|first=Steven (ed.)|title=Existing: An Introduction to Existential Thought|year=2000|publisher=Mayfield|location=Mountain View, Calif.|id=ISBN 0-7674-0587-0}}
*{{cite book|last=Marino|first=Gordon (ed.)|title=Basic Writings of Existentialism|year=2004|publisher=Modern Library|location=New York|id=ISBN 0-375-75989-1}}
*{{cite book|last=Pirsig|first=Robert M.|authorlink=Robert M. Pirsig|title=[[Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance]]: An Inquiry into Values|year=1974|publisher=Morrow|location=New York|id=ISBN 0-688-00230-7}}
*{{cite book|last=Solomon|first=Robert C. (ed.)|authorlink=Robert C. Solomon|title=Existentialism|year=2005|edition=2nd ed.|publisher=Oxford University Press|location=New York|id=ISBN 0-19-517463-1}}
*{{cite book|last=Appignanesi|first=Richard|title=Introducing Existentialism|year=2006|edition=3nd ed.|publisher=Icon Books (UK), Totem Books (USA)|location=Thriplow, Cambridge|id=ISBN 1-84046-717-7}}

==External links==
*[http://www.friesian.com/existent.htm Friesian interpretation of Existentialism]
*[http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/existentialism/ Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy: Existentialism]
*[http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/sartre/works/exist/sartre.htm "Existentialism is a Humanism", a lecture given by Jean-Paul Sartre]
*[http://counsellingresource.com/types/existential/index.html An Introduction to Existential Counselling]
*[http://www.tameri.com/csw/exist/ ''The Existential Primer'']
*[http://www.stirrings-still.org Stirrings Still]: The International Journal of Existential Literature
*[http://hpsy.ru/eng/ HPSY.RU â€” Existential & humanistic psychology]: History of existentially-humanistic psychology's development in formerly Soviet nations
*[http://www.theister.com/ www.theister.com]: ''[[The Ister]]'' is a film inspired by the work of [[Martin Heidegger]], featuring extensive interviews with the philosophers [[Bernard Stiegler]], [[Jean-Luc Nancy]], and [[Philippe Lacoue-Labarthe]], and the filmmaker [[Hans-JÃ¼rgen Syberberg]].
* [http://www.existential-psychotherapy.com Existential Psychotherapy]
*[http://journal.ilovephilosophy.com/Article/The-Logic-of-Existential-Meaning/217 The Logic of Existential Meaning] by Mathew Toll
* international society for existential therapy[http://www.existentialpsychotherapy.net]

{{wikipedia|Existentialism}}

[[Category:Existentialism]]
[[Category:Modernism]]

[[de:Existentialismus]]
[[es:Existencialismo]]