Summary: The Rise Of Existentialism

Existentialism as a philosophy has modern roots in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. At the time of its development the movement was not readily accepted in academia. It would not be until the twentieth century until it would find greater merit. According to research submitted by Nobin Narzary in his thesis The Rise of Existentialism, the unique history of the twentieth century including world wars, scientific breakthroughs, and the devaluation of human life provided adequate ground for existentialism to take hold [ CITATION Nob12 l 1033 ]. The tragedy of world warfare and loss of human life inspired philosophical debate as to the nature of human existence and its relation to common principals of divinity and human destiny. According

As the proponents search exclusively to what is discoverable they are better to yield conclusions that are verifiable to others of similar pursuit. Unlike traditional topics of discussion such as deity that is dependent upon circular reasoning (proposition evidenced by premise), existentialism deals what is readily known to its acolytes. Yet even in the presences of objective observations and conclusions there does exist some inherent weaknesses. Existentialism contains within itself many paradoxes that can not be resolved by existentialism alone. One very famous existential paradox and anecdotal is the chicken and the egg question. It is a common question and paradox known to children the world over. But strict reasoning alone can not settle the debate as the true answer exists outside of the scope of the original question. Another issue with existentialism is its attention to freedom and individuality. Both according to author Dallas Roark are common tropes of existentialism [ CITATION Dal82 l 1033 ]. However, human individuality according to the author is typically defined by it relation to other individuals and objects. Because of this, a paradox exists between notions of human individuality and the language and relationships needed for its exploration [ CITATION Dal82 l 1033

When considered, one is faced to stand in judgment of his or her own faith and preconceived notions regarding human destiny and purpose. Existentialism sought to explore that which could be known. This for many was enough. Yet others found its principals incomplete. As the existentialist says “human beings cannot be understood as entities with fixed characteristics or as subjects interacting with a world of objects” [ CITATION Sch17 l 1033 ]. And perhaps this is as it should be. Life should have some mystery to it. It is that mystery that lends itself to self-discovery. And is self-discovery not the path of the