The existence of Black Existentialism does not preclude a broader all-encompassing viewpoint.

A direct examination of the concept from the perspective of one specific group is perfectly valid, and could even be a precursor to a broader theory.

And I’m sure that a closer examination of other disenfranchised groups would also reveal meaningfully distinct characteristics between those groups such that a single group cannot perfectly generalize to all groups, thus requiring a much broader effort to properly construct a general theory.

The skeptic already values freedom, hence why he's asking. You can value both freedom and reason. However, freedom isn't agent-relative. Valuing freedom in one requires valuing it universally.

Daniel Dennett's "Darwin's Dangerous Idea" covers this ground pretty thoroughly, arguing that evolution, science, and many human systems (progress in general) progress as negative selection mechanisms, weeding out failure rather than marching toward any particular end.

If that's what you got from his discussion of seriousness as a refusal to see nuance in all situations then as others have pointed out you literally are too serious about the use of the word. If there's anywhere you should be open to understanding the context and entirety of what's written rather than being pedantic it's in philosophy.

Yes there are some, that maybe an absolute case, but again are products of environment and genetics. In general most everyone is not an absolute.

Again in what country. In a tribal society you would get taken care of. If you have no pension or retirement then you don't have much to live off of. Social security is not enough. But many American don't have a retirement and work their lives away. A good example would be a migrant worker that is illegal, but will never receive Social Security, even though they work and produce.

You are thinking in another default of cultural assumptions etc.

Also being both isn't necessarily a contradiction.

Quite true, experience is the primary concern for existentialists; however, there may not be a simple relationship between experience and the labels we normally use for identity. The question “Who am I?” is at the heart of existentialism. The question “What is my identity?” isn’t quite same question, at least in the terms we usually use for identity—class, race, gender,etc.

At least, that’s where my thinking is at right now.

> Yeah I mean human behavior, motives, and their placement in a society are far more complicated and nuanced. No person is an absolute parasite or absolutely productive.

I agree most people do live in contradiction to some degree but I don't know why there would be some arbitrary absolute that declares "No person is an absolute parasite or absolutely productive."

> I mean by this standard all retired old people are useless parasites.

I very much disagree. I think most retired old people live off their past productive effort (for the most part).

Then valuing freedom on it's own should also go against valuing reason, right? Because it's arbitrary, and thus irrational.

Basically, both "I value freedom" and "I value my own freedom" are by your own admission arbitrary values. If the latter goes against valuing reason because it's arbitrary, why doesn't the former? If the former is acceptable because you need values to have morals, why isn't the latter?

I can't believe my initial comment was deleted for the reason given. 90% of the sub should be nuked given that reason.

Yeah I mean human behavior, motives, and their placement in a society are far more complicated and nuanced. No person is an absolute parasite or absolutely productive.

I mean by this standard all retired old people are useless parasites.

>I do, however, wonder how far existentialism is compatible with any form of “identity” in the normal sense of the word.

It works for me. Identity is always (seriously, always) strongly tied in with context/environment/circumstance. Those are filtered through our imperfect perceptions and memories, etc. but they are still there and still very powerful. I don't think any serious existentialist would suggest that everyone can just casually discard their lived experience. It's there, and it shapes identity. True, we have more choices about that than we are often led to believe, but it's not a binary: our context is a powerful force, whether we flow totally with it, try to swim against the current, or try to find some way to zig with/against it orthogonally or whatever. It's there and it will always matter.

Because reason is valued.

Please keep in mind our first commenting rule:

> Read the Post Before You Reply

> Read/listen/watch the posted content, understand and identify the philosophical arguments given, and respond to these substantively. If you have unrelated thoughts or don't wish to read the content, please post your own thread or simply refrain from commenting. Comments which are clearly not in direct response to the posted content may be removed.

This subreddit is not in the business of one-liners, tangential anecdotes, or dank memes. Expect comment threads that break our rules to be removed. Repeated or serious violations of the subreddit rules will result in a ban.

This is a shared account that is only used for notifications. Please do not reply, as your message will go unread.

Your comment was removed for violating the following rule:

>Read the Post Before You Reply

>Read/watch/listen the posted content, understand and identify the philosophical arguments given, and respond to these substantively. If you have unrelated thoughts or don't wish to read the content, please post your own thread or simply refrain from commenting. Comments which are clearly not in direct response to the posted content may be removed.

Repeated or serious violations of the subreddit rules will result in a ban.

This is a shared account that is only used for notifications. Please do not reply, as your message will go unread.

Your comment was removed for violating the following rule:

>Argue your Position

>Opinions are not valuable here, arguments are! Comments that solely express musings, opinions, beliefs, or assertions without argument may be removed.

Repeated or serious violations of the subreddit rules will result in a ban.

This is a shared account that is only used for notifications. Please do not reply, as your message will go unread.

Your comment was removed for violating the following rule:

>Read the Post Before You Reply

>Read/watch/listen the posted content, understand and identify the philosophical arguments given, and respond to these substantively. If you have unrelated thoughts or don't wish to read the content, please post your own thread or simply refrain from commenting. Comments which are clearly not in direct response to the posted content may be removed.

Repeated or serious violations of the subreddit rules will result in a ban.

This is a shared account that is only used for notifications. Please do not reply, as your message will go unread.

Your comment was removed for violating the following rule:

>Read the Post Before You Reply

>Read/watch/listen the posted content, understand and identify the philosophical arguments given, and respond to these substantively. If you have unrelated thoughts or don't wish to read the content, please post your own thread or simply refrain from commenting. Comments which are clearly not in direct response to the posted content may be removed.

Repeated or serious violations of the subreddit rules will result in a ban.

This is a shared account that is only used for notifications. Please do not reply, as your message will go unread.

Your comment was removed for violating the following rule:

>Argue your Position

>Opinions are not valuable here, arguments are! Comments that solely express musings, opinions, beliefs, or assertions without argument may be removed.

Repeated or serious violations of the subreddit rules will result in a ban.

This is a shared account that is only used for notifications. Please do not reply, as your message will go unread.

Your comment was removed for violating the following rule:

>Argue your Position

>Opinions are not valuable here, arguments are! Comments that solely express musings, opinions, beliefs, or assertions without argument may be removed.

Repeated or serious violations of the subreddit rules will result in a ban.

This is a shared account that is only used for notifications. Please do not reply, as your message will go unread.

Your comment was removed for violating the following rule:

>Argue your Position

>Opinions are not valuable here, arguments are! Comments that solely express musings, opinions, beliefs, or assertions without argument may be removed.

Repeated or serious violations of the subreddit rules will result in a ban.

This is a shared account that is only used for notifications. Please do not reply, as your message will go unread.

Your comment was removed for violating the following rule:

>Argue your Position

>Opinions are not valuable here, arguments are! Comments that solely express musings, opinions, beliefs, or assertions without argument may be removed.

Repeated or serious violations of the subreddit rules will result in a ban.

This is a shared account that is only used for notifications. Please do not reply, as your message will go unread.

Sounds like an interesting read! I’ll check it out.

Philosophy is how we interface with the world, so I agree that the argument is nuanced. It has to be or it’s useless. Camus’ famous quote “the only way to deal with an unfree world is to become so absolutely free that your very existence is an act of rebellion,” for me, is the action at the conversation’s end. Everything else are scars on our personal boulder for us all to fawn on, proselytize about, and so on… which is all apart of the absurdity (to me), but it makes for spirited conversation… 🤓

[removed]

Well stated. I hope i could include my 4 biracial grandchildren. I teach them things removed from history books. You have a beautiful perspective ✨🥇👍💯

Then give it a different name. While black people (in america) are heavily disenfranchised, so are the Uyghurs in China, the tibetans in Tibet, Ethnic Muslims in many parts of the world, whites (currently) in south africa, the list goes on.

Ignoring the fact that from the viewpoint of most biologists 'race' as a concept doesn't exist, what he's tlaking about (according to your summary) has nothing intrinsically to do with african americans, more to do with dominant and sub-dominant subcultures.