Jean Paul Sartre's Being and Nothingness Chapter 1

In this video, Professor Thorsby discusses the first chapter of Jean Paul Sartre's "Being and Nothingness." This video focusses on the origin and role of negation in consciousness. Negation is the ability in consciousness to posit nothingness.

[pabloyanez]

Former NJCU student here- my minor was philosophy. Just picked up Being and Nothingness. These videos are so useful. Thank you

[thekiwi]

Thank you! This is incredibly clear and helpful.

[hiervi]

"Freedom is the human beeing putting his past out of play by secreting his own nothingness". I would not be able to say that sentence with a stright face:) I realy like the way you lay out your vids. if I glitch out, witch i do on the reg, there are visual stuff to go by when i rewind. I like that very mutch.

ED: Anguish is a very intresting word. Google tells me its `Kvaler` in norwegian, `die Qual` in German (It also translates as die Pein) but its something other than `Angst`, isnt it? More embodied, if i get to use the parlance of our times. Another good word for use in leasure conversations with boomers and zoomers alike.

ED2: `grumble` Sartre is Bourgeois `Grumble`.

[rerite]

Sartre turned down the Nobel Prize but did he accept the check?

[cindy-wzcf]

amazing video, thank you so much wow :D :)

[MrMarktrumble]

If to be is to be determinate (form), then each being is limited. This is the concept of limit (metron in Greek I think). If the limit is intrinsic to the formed, then the relationship of one formed thing to another is a relationship of contiguity. Each thing is discrete, a unit and is self contained in itself. (it was Plato that defined surface as the limit of a solid) . Each thing is a thing as compared to itself, it itself is finite and is its own standard (and thus one, and individual). But if the limit is not intrinsic to the form, but imposed from without ( form is made and maintained by the negation upon it from all other forms, and reciprocally, its negation of all other forms sets a limit of force of oppositions, and defines its shape), the not one thing exists in itself, as the limit of each of all of particular things sets the limits for the entire complex. Apparently individual things would then be in a relationship of continuity with all others, then the limit of one thing would depend on the balance of forces for all things and would need an entire cosmos to exist. Each thing would share the limit or boundary with all other things that go to limit thus form it, and the balance of forces would maintain its shape both ontologically and logically.

[Vicky-zrpb]

Great lecture. You should get a dollar for every time you say ‘being’.

[raycosmic]

0. Potential = Being
1. Actual = Becoming (actualized)

[surenderkumarohlayan]

Bad accent not suitable for non English listeners 😮😢