This blog has been written in response to a flipped learning task on existentialism assigned by Prof. Dr. Dilip P. Barad. The activity required independent engagement with a series of video lectures and supplementary readings, encouraging an active rather than receptive mode of learning. Through this process, I was invited to examine existentialist ideas by thinking critically about concepts such as absurdity, freedom, anxiety, and responsibility in relation to lived human experience. Instead of treating existentialism as a purely abstract philosophical framework, this blog reflects an attempt to understand it as a mode of thinking that directly confronts everyday choices and uncertainties. It also provides a space to reflect on the questions raised while engaging with the works and ideas of thinkers like Camus, Sartre, Kierkegaard, and Nietzsche.
Introduction
Modern existentialist philosophy takes shape at a moment when traditional sources of meaning—religion, moral codes, and metaphysical systems—no longer offer unquestioned certainty. Instead of attempting to restore these lost assurances, existentialism turns directly toward the individual and the lived experience of existence. It asks what it means to live, choose, and act in a world that provides no fixed purpose or guaranteed truth. Philosophers such as Kierkegaard, Nietzsche, Sartre, Heidegger, and Camus respond to this condition by placing human freedom, responsibility, and finitude at the center of philosophical inquiry. Their shared concern lies in the gap between humanity’s longing for meaning and the apparent silence of the universe. Rejecting the idea that human nature is predetermined, existentialism asserts that meaning must be actively shaped through choice and action. Concepts like absurdity, anxiety, and rebellion are not treated as weaknesses but as inevitable conditions of existence that demand honest confrontation. In this way, existentialism emerges not merely as a school of thought, but as an ongoing challenge to live consciously and authentically within uncertainty.
Video 1: What Is Existentialism?
Faith as Escape and the Encounter with the Absurd
This video reshaped my understanding of how existentialism approaches the question of God and belief. From a Camusian perspective, turning to God as a final answer to suffering can function as a form of evasion rather than resolution. Camus describes this escape as philosophical suicide—a refusal to remain within the uncomfortable awareness that life offers no guaranteed meaning. Existentialist thinkers repeatedly stress that human existence unfolds in an indifferent universe, where meaning is not provided in advance. Within such a framework, faith may serve as emotional relief, offering comfort at the cost of intellectual honesty, and allowing individuals to step away from the difficult responsibility of confronting uncertainty on their own terms.
Choosing Without Guarantees: Freedom and Authenticity
The video also highlights why existentialism treats belief in predetermined purpose with suspicion. When meaning is believed to be already established—whether by God, destiny, or tradition—the burden of choice is diminished. Existentialism deliberately removes this reassurance, forcing individuals to face freedom without excuses. This condition inevitably produces anxiety, but it is precisely this anxiety that opens the possibility of an authentic life. To live authentically, in existentialist terms, is to accept that one’s actions cannot be justified by external forces. As Sartre insists, human beings are unavoidably free, and this freedom brings with it absolute responsibility. Though unsettling, this responsibility grants human life its depth, urgency, and ethical weight.
Video 2: The Myth of Sisyphus (The Absurd Reasoning)
The Absurd as a Philosophical Starting Point
Human reflection has long revolved around the question of whether life is worth living, and Albert Camus places this question at the very center of The Myth of Sisyphus. By declaring suicide the most urgent philosophical problem, Camus confronts the moment when life appears stripped of meaning. He describes the absurd as the clash between humanity’s deep longing for order and explanation and a universe that remains silent and indifferent. Faced with this tension, individuals are often drawn toward two extremes: the rejection of life itself or the comfort of imagined meanings that soften reality. Camus, however, refuses both despair and illusion, urging instead a confrontation with the absurd that does not seek escape.
Happiness as Defiance, Not Illusion
The image of Sisyphus endlessly pushing his rock becomes Camus’s most powerful metaphor for modern existence. His labor, repetitive and seemingly pointless, mirrors the cycles of work, effort, and struggle that define much of human life. Yet Camus’s assertion that Sisyphus must be imagined happy overturns conventional ideas of success and fulfillment. This happiness does not arise from hope of completion or reward, but from conscious awareness. By acknowledging the futility of his task and continuing nonetheless, Sisyphus transforms punishment into resistance. The stone does not disappear, but it loses its authority over him. Meaning, in this framework, is not discovered in results but created through sustained engagement with struggle. In choosing to persist without illusion, Sisyphus affirms human dignity and freedom within a world that offers none by default.
Video 3: The Myth of Sisyphus (Philosophical Suicide)
Escaping the Absurd and the Temptation of False Meaning
Albert Camus suggests that when individuals fail to endure the experience of absurdity, they are often driven toward forms of escape. One such escape is despair, while the other is what Camus calls philosophical suicide. Unlike physical suicide, this act involves surrendering rational awareness in favor of comforting beliefs that promise transcendent meaning. In contrast to Søren Kierkegaard’s solution, which embraces faith as a response to the absurd, Camus insists that the absurd cannot be overcome or resolved. It must be faced continuously. Seen in this light, the ending of The Myth of Sisyphus does not offer closure or consolation; instead, it affirms a refusal to abandon consciousness in exchange for emotional security.
Living Without Resolution: Negation as Integrity
Camus’s use of “negation” should not be understood as pessimism or resignation. Rather, it marks a commitment to clarity. Philosophical suicide takes place at the moment one makes the “leap” toward belief or hope, allowing illusion to replace honest confrontation. By rejecting this leap, the individual accepts the discomfort of remaining within contradiction. This stance requires sustained awareness of both the human craving for meaning and the universe’s indifference. Choosing to live within this tension is not an act of despair, but of integrity. It reflects a refusal to deceive oneself, even when self-deception promises comfort. Through this persistent honesty, the existential individual maintains consciousness without illusion, affirming life not through answers, but through lucid endurance.
Video 4: Dadaism, Nihilism, and Existentialism
Dadaism and the Crisis of Civilization
Dadaism arose at a historical moment marked by profound disillusionment. The devastation of the First World War exposed the failure of political ideologies, cultural traditions, and claims of rational progress that had long presented themselves as markers of civilization. Rather than responding with order or refinement, Dada adopted fragmentation, nonsense, and provocation as deliberate strategies. Its rejection of aesthetic norms was not accidental but ideological, aimed at revealing how supposedly rational systems had normalized violence and mass destruction. By undermining nationalism, authority, and cultural seriousness, Dada redirected attention away from collective ideals toward the fractured psychological reality of the individual living amid chaos. This shift is reflected in modern literary expressions, especially war poetry, where heroic narratives give way to voices of trauma, loss, and alienation.
After the Rupture: Existentialism’s Entry
The connection between Dadaism and existentialism becomes clearer when viewed as a movement from negation to inquiry. Dadaism dismantles inherited meanings without attempting to replace them, leaving behind a space emptied of certainty. Existentialism enters this aftermath, not to reconstruct old belief systems, but to confront the consequences of their collapse. Once traditional values are stripped of authority, the existential question becomes unavoidable: how does one live without guarantees? While Dadaism mocks coherence and refuses stability, existentialism redirects focus toward the individual as the site where meaning must now be forged. Freedom, responsibility, and self-awareness replace external doctrines as guiding principles. In this sense, Dadaism prepares the ground by exposing illusion, and existentialism responds by asking how life can be lived honestly within that exposure.
Video 5: Is Existentialism Inherently Gloomy?
Why Existentialism Feels Unsettling
Existentialism is frequently labeled as bleak because it refuses to protect individuals from uncomfortable truths about existence. Instead of offering reassurance, it draws attention to experiences such as anxiety, confusion, isolation, and the awareness of death—elements many philosophies attempt to minimize or explain away. By questioning inherited beliefs and exposing the absence of guaranteed meaning, existentialism disrupts familiar ways of understanding life. This disruption is often misread as negativity or despair. In reality, the unease produced by existentialist thought arises not from exaggerating suffering, but from its insistence on confronting life without filters or comforting narratives.
Clarity Through Confrontation
Despite its heavy themes, existentialism does not advocate hopelessness. Its seriousness stems from a commitment to honesty rather than pessimism. By acknowledging that life lacks an inherent purpose and that individuals are responsible for shaping their own values, existentialism sharpens one’s awareness of existence. Evading these truths leads to self-deception, what Sartre describes as bad faith, where individuals hide behind roles or excuses to avoid responsibility. Facing anxiety and mortality, however, allows for a more deliberate and meaningful engagement with life. In stripping away illusions, existentialism does not diminish human worth; instead, it restores dignity by insisting that individuals live consciously, accept responsibility for their choices, and confront existence as it truly is.
Video 6: Existentialism and Nihilism
The Risk of Confusing Revolt with Despair
At an initial glance, Camus’s portrayal of Sisyphus may seem to trap human existence between two equally bleak options: passive acceptance disguised as happiness or futile rebellion against an uncaring world. From this angle, the absurd appears to erase all possibilities of meaning, pushing human effort toward insignificance. Such a reading easily slips into nihilism, where the absence of objective purpose leads to the conclusion that nothing truly matters and that action itself is pointless.
Affirmation Without Illusion
A deeper reading of Camus, however, dismantles this nihilistic interpretation. Imagining Sisyphus happy does not represent resignation or self-deception; rather, it signals a refusal to escape the absurd through false hope. Philosophical suicide would occur if Sisyphus sought consolation in divine reward, transcendence, or future justice—any promise that dissolves present awareness. Instead, Sisyphus persists with complete lucidity, fully conscious of the futility of his task. This persistence transforms labor into resistance. By continuing without illusion, he reclaims agency over his inner life. The absurd remains unchanged, but its authority weakens. Camus thus redefines revolt not as open defiance against fate or God, but as the sustained decision to live with awareness, dignity, and affirmation within a universe that offers no guarantees.
Video 7: Re-introducing Existentialism
Existentialism as an Open Inquiry into Human Life
This video revisits existentialism by presenting it not as a rigid philosophical doctrine, but as a mode of questioning rooted in everyday human experience. Its strength lies in showing that existentialism resists neat definitions precisely because it is concerned with life as it is lived. Instead of offering ready-made answers, the philosophy confronts individuals with fundamental questions about existence, purpose, and choice in a world that provides no absolute guidance. The video emphasizes that existentialism begins where inherited explanations—religious, moral, or philosophical—lose their authority, placing the individual at the center of meaning-making.
Freedom After Certainty: Creating Meaning Through Choice
A central idea revisited in the video is Sartre’s claim that human beings are not born with a fixed essence but shape themselves through action. This view directly opposes traditional assumptions that identity or purpose is predetermined. The video also makes an important distinction between existentialism and nihilism. While both acknowledge the absence of objective meaning, nihilism treats this absence as a dead end, whereas existentialism treats it as a point of departure. Drawing inspiration from Nietzsche’s emphasis on self-formation, existentialism reframes uncertainty as an opportunity rather than a loss. Meaning emerges not from discovery but from commitment, responsibility, and deliberate choice. In this way, the philosophy encourages individuals to engage actively with their lives, embracing uncertainty while resisting passive conformity or indifference.
Video 8: Explain Like I’m Five (Nietzsche)
Making Complex Ideas Approachable
This video experiments with presenting Nietzsche’s philosophy through a simplified, child-oriented approach. By using everyday situations—such as questioning rules set by parents or reflecting on what it means to be “good”—the video attempts to bridge the gap between abstract philosophy and ordinary experience. This strategy succeeds in showing that philosophical thinking does not belong only to academic spaces but can begin from familiar human questions. In this sense, the video demonstrates how accessibility can spark curiosity and invite engagement with ideas that are otherwise considered intimidating.
Where Simplification Becomes Reduction
At the same time, the video exposes the dangers of excessive simplification. Reducing Nietzsche’s idea of the Übermensch to unrestricted freedom risks overlooking the philosopher’s emphasis on self-discipline, self-transformation, and responsibility in value creation. Nietzsche does not advocate chaos or impulsive desire; rather, he challenges individuals to overcome inherited moral frameworks and consciously shape their own values. From an academic perspective, this highlights a persistent tension in teaching philosophy: how to simplify without distorting meaning. While accessibility is valuable, it must be balanced with conceptual care. For me, this video serves as a reminder that clarity should never come at the cost of accuracy when introducing complex philosophical ideas to wider audiences.
Video 9: Why I Like Existentialism (Eric Dodson)
From Theory to Practice
Eric Dodson’s discussion of existentialism stands out because it presents philosophy as a way of engaging with life rather than as a set of abstract arguments. His reflection moves existentialism beyond classrooms and texts, showing how it operates within everyday choices, struggles, and emotions. By emphasizing lived experience over conceptual definitions, Dodson captures the existentialist belief that human identity is shaped through action and involvement. In this sense, who we are is not determined by ideas alone, but by how we respond to life as it unfolds.
Growth Through Discomfort and Responsibility
A particularly compelling aspect of Dodson’s view is his insistence on confronting suffering honestly. Instead of treating pain and confusion as obstacles to be avoided, he presents them as experiences that can deepen understanding and self-awareness. This approach challenges the tendency to seek comfort at all costs and instead promotes resilience through acceptance. Dodson also highlights existentialism’s challenge to passive living by stressing freedom and responsibility. His call to recognize how free one truly is encourages individuals to move beyond spectatorship and actively shape their lives. Through this engagement, existentialism becomes a source of personal transformation, enabling individuals to construct meaning and approach life with greater intensity and awareness.
Video 10: Let Us Sum Up (Essentialism vs. Existentialism)
Essentialism and the Idea of Fixed Nature
This video begins by clarifying existentialism through its opposition to essentialism, a perspective that assumes every entity is defined by an inherent purpose before it comes into existence. Essentialism holds that identity is determined in advance by fixed qualities, much like a tool designed for a specific function. When applied to human beings, this way of thinking suggests that individuals are born with an already established nature, role, or destiny shaped by divine, moral, or metaphysical frameworks. By outlining this position first, the video creates a clear foundation for understanding the philosophical shift that existentialism introduces.
Existence Before Definition
Against this backdrop, existentialism emerges as a decisive challenge to essentialist thinking. The existentialist assertion that “existence precedes essence” denies any pre-given human purpose and instead places the responsibility of self-definition on the individual. Human beings are not completed designs but ongoing projects, shaped by choices, actions, and commitments. This shift moves philosophical attention away from certainty and toward freedom, emphasizing that identity is constructed rather than inherited. By placing essentialism and existentialism side by side, the video effectively demonstrates how existentialism redefines human life as an open-ended process, where autonomy and responsibility replace predetermined meaning as the core principles of existence.
The Video I Liked Personally
Among the videos included in this flipped learning activity, Video 8: Explain Like I’m Five (Nietzsche) stood out to me in an unexpected way. Unlike the more philosophically dense discussions, this video attempts to translate complex existential ideas into a simplified, almost playful form. What interested me most was not just the content itself, but the risk involved in such simplification. By reducing Nietzsche’s ideas to everyday scenarios, the video exposes how easily existentialist thought can be misunderstood when stripped of its depth. This tension between accessibility and accuracy made the video especially thought-provoking, as it revealed how existentialism is often diluted or misread in popular understanding.
The video’s portrayal of freedom—particularly through the simplified explanation of Nietzsche’s ideas—made me reflect on how existentialism is frequently mistaken for unchecked liberty or moral chaos. When freedom is presented as merely “doing whatever one wants,” the essential existential emphasis on responsibility, self-discipline, and self-overcoming is lost. This misunderstanding mirrors a broader cultural tendency to embrace the attractive surface of existential freedom while avoiding its demands. In this sense, the video unintentionally highlights a core existential problem: people are drawn to the language of freedom but resist the burden that comes with it. For me, this realization connects closely with existentialist concerns about bad faith and self-deception. The video ultimately reinforced the idea that existentialism is difficult not because it is abstract, but because it requires individuals to think carefully, choose consciously, and accept responsibility for the meanings they create. It is precisely this difficulty—so easily erased by oversimplification—that makes existentialism both challenging and deeply valuable.
Learning Outcomes
Growth in My Understanding of Existentialism
This flipped learning activity played a decisive role in deepening my understanding of existentialist philosophy. Before engaging with these materials, my exposure to existentialism was largely confined to a limited number of thinkers, particularly Nietzsche and Camus. Through this activity, I encountered a wider philosophical landscape, including lesser-explored ideas and figures, as well as foundational concepts such as philosophical suicide, the logic of the absurd, and the contrast between essentialism and existentialism. The inclusion of related movements like Dadaism and nihilism further enriched my understanding by situating existentialism within a broader intellectual and cultural context rather than treating it as an isolated philosophy.
Confidence in Discussion and Writing
The process of engaging with multiple video perspectives and reflecting critically on them has significantly strengthened my confidence in both speaking and writing about existentialism. Instead of relying on surface-level definitions, I now have a clearer grasp of the philosophical background, central concerns, and internal debates within existentialist thought. This exposure has helped me express complex ideas with greater precision and coherence, allowing me to approach discussions and analytical writing on existentialism with more assurance and intellectual clarity.
Clarification of Earlier Confusions
One of the most valuable outcomes of this exercise was the clarity it brought to concepts that previously felt overlapping or confusing. I had earlier found it difficult to clearly differentiate between movements such as nihilism, Dadaism, and existentialism, particularly in how each responds to modern disillusionment and loss of meaning. This activity helped untangle those distinctions and provided a more structured understanding of how existentialist thinkers like Camus, Sartre, and Kierkegaard diverge in their treatment of freedom, meaning, and faith. In doing so, the exercise not only resolved earlier uncertainties but also strengthened my conceptual grounding for future engagement with philosophy and literature.
Questions for Critical Engagement
- If existentialism insists that individuals create their own values, how can conflict between personal values and social responsibility be resolved?
- To what extent does existentialism risk privileging individual freedom over collective ethical concerns?
- Can an existentialist life remain meaningful during periods of inactivity, stagnation, or powerlessness?
- How does existentialism account for individuals whose choices are shaped by social, economic, or political constraints beyond their control?
Is authenticity a continuous achievement, or can it be permanently lost through repeated acts of self-deception?
Conclusion
This flipped learning engagement with existentialism has reshaped my understanding of philosophy as an active process of questioning rather than a closed body of doctrine. Through sustained interaction with the video resources, key existentialist ideas—such as absurdity, freedom, responsibility, and authenticity—emerged as interconnected dimensions of human experience rather than isolated concepts. Thinkers like Camus, Sartre, Nietzsche, and Kierkegaard collectively demonstrate that the absence of predetermined meaning does not result in hopelessness, but instead demands conscious involvement in shaping one’s life. Existentialism rejects comforting explanations and insists on clarity, urging individuals to face uncertainty without evasion and to accept responsibility for the values they choose. Far from being a philosophy of despair, it affirms human dignity through honesty, awareness, and commitment, emphasizing that meaning is not received from external authorities but continuously formed through action and lived engagement. In this sense, existentialism calls for an alert and deliberate mode of living—one that embraces life’s tensions while remaining open to freedom, depth, and self-created purpose.
0 Comments