Opinions on Jean-Paul Sartre and his work.
Both political essays and his existentialist/nihilist fiction .
I much prefer philosophic essays but It is hard for me to to understand how such an eloquent and clever man can justify so much that is clearly evil. He seems to believe that violence and terrorism are a rational response to the Wests potential for violence.
And his fiction while very Beckett-esque lacks the humor or the tragic scene of Beckett . Also Once you’ve established that life is completely meaningless there isn’t really anywhere to go after that. Except that Sartre tried to fuse it with Marxism for some reason.
>>8108799
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=co7TqAJTBWM
>>8108799
>Opinions on Jean-Paul Sartre
Serial paedophile, along with Simone.
This discredits his work in perpetuity.
>>8108799
>It is hard for me to to understand how such an eloquent and clever man can justify so much that is clearly evil.
The French will say any old shit if they feel it might be shocking enough to turn the disaffected heads of their countrymen.
>>8108807
>dismissing him solely on a moral disagreement
God I'm am continually astounded as to how fucking ugly this man is
if anyone can point me towards good criticism of the man ,specifiably 'Being and nothingness', i'd appreciate it.
>>8109382
>>le French philosophers and existentialists are pedophiles meme
Nigga what? I'm pretty sure it's just that Sartre was a pedo.
>>8109425
*specifically (fucking phone)
>>8109428
Nietzsche, Simone, Sartre, Foucault, all have been accused of being a pedophile at some point or another. not sure if its even true but I doubt it when the moral police have a stake in painting them as such.
You type in "Simone De Bouviour pedophile" into google and you get about a dozen "EVIL MARXIST LESBIAN PEDOPHILE FREAK" posts
>>8109428
this "fucking 14 year olds = pedo" is an amerifat meme; nobody else buys it
>>8108799
Personal meaning is by definition, not meaningful.
>philosophy implodes
>>8108799
"[Sartre is] highly dubious and petty-bourgeois in our opinion."
>Fundamentals of revolutionary communism, 1957
>>8108799
>He seems to believe that violence and terrorism are a rational response to the Wests potential for violence.
Well, why do you disagree?
>>8110430
because the potential for violence is a necessary part of democracy . Peace is not a natural state of affairs and is only enforceable by a potential for violence that is at the very least equal to that of those who want to undermine it.
Also for the self evident reason that the potential for violence is not the same as actual violence which is what Sartre often advocated for (especially in the case of Frantz Fanon) .
>>8110349
>he wasn't a REAL Marxist, so his moral failures can't be applied to me personally
Leftists are such cowardly pseuds
pedophilia = patrician taste proved.
>>8110673
No, yuo.
