Towards a New Conception of the Human Condition
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.65828/2nxvcy47Keywords:
Boundary Situation, History, Technology, Terrorism, FreedomAbstract
The present paper is a revised version of a talk given at the Department of Philosophy, Saint Petersburg State University, as part of a series of roundtable discussions held at the Laboratory for Metaphysical Researches in June 2007. At that meeting, the speaker raised the question whether existential thought has a vital contribution to make to our understanding of the postmodern condition. One approach to this question would be to examine the way the central tenets of existential philosophy have been explored. In this respect, the concept of the boundary or limit situation, defined as a universal situation that can neither be surpassed nor subjected to rational analysis, has been a key existential idea. But boundary situations are of two kinds: there are situations that are imposed upon us, and there are those that are brought about by our own actions. Early existentialism tended to focus on limit situations as impositions, but this approach to understanding limit situations leaves us with a conception of the human condition that is static. Moreover, only with the recognition of those limit situations that are created by our own actions (conflict, guilt, history, communication, evil, fidelity, technology, sexuality) do we arrive at a dynamic conception of human freedom. Whilst acknowledging the work of Sartre, Jaspers and Marcel in these areas, it will be the purpose of this paper to illustrate how the fundamental ambiguity that lies at the heart of our self-created boundary situations is revelatory of our capacity for creative freedom-towards-others.
Complete access to the full archive of articles is available with SEA membership. Existing members: please log in with your membership password to view full text. Non-members can buy a single article or issue by registering an account on this website, then selecting a padlocked full text button to purchase.
References
Berdyaev, N. (1935). The Fate of Man in the Modern World. New York: Morehouse Publishing. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3998/mpub.12948035
Berdyaev, N. (1939). Slavery and Freedom. New York: Scribners.
Berdyaev, N. (1960). The Destiny of Man. New York: Harper & Row.
Camus, A. (1982). The Outsider. Harmondsworth: Penguin Classics.
Camus, A. (2000). The Myth of Sisyphus. Harmondsworth: Penguin Classics.
De Beauvoir, S. (1976). The Ethics of Ambiguity. New York: Citadel Press.
De Beauvoir, S. (1996). The Coming of Age. New York: W. W. Norton.
Heidegger, M. (1962). Being and Time. Trans. Macquarrie, J. & Robinson, E. Oxford: Blackwell.
Jaspers, K. (1970). Philosophy (Volume 2). Trans. Ashton, E.B. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Jaspers, K. (1997). Reason and Existenz. Milwaukee, WI: Marquette University Press.
Kafka, F. (1994). The Trial. Harmondsworth: Penguin Classics. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/owc/9780199238293.001.0001
Kierkegaard, S. (1993). Either / Or. Trans. Hannay, A. Harmondsworth: Penguin Classics.
Marcel, G. (1973). Tragic Wisdom and Beyond. Evanston, Ill: Northwestern University Press.
Marcel, G. (2002). Creative Fidelity. New York: Fordham University Press.
Sartre, J. P. (1958). Being and Nothingness. Trans. Hazel Barnes. London: Methuen.


