Talk:Being and Nothingness: An Essay on Phenomenological Ontology
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Modes of Being?
Why is there no discussion or explanation, however brief, of the being-in-itself, the being-for-itself, and the being-for-others? These are fairly important concepts that I think should be explicitly addressed on this page. If no one else does so, I'll add in a cursory discussion of them soon. -Tinpatches 03:53, 21 May 2006 (UTC)tinpatches
- Originally, these had articles of their own. I think they are all covered, briefly, in the article being, currently. -Smahoney 04:51, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Article Edit?
This is from the article, and tell me, does it make any sense to anyone? Is it supposed to be a quote, or is a translation of some french existentialist's criticism? :
Connection to No Exit Men and women will always be in a world of other people, who can capture him within their gaze, reducing him to his external materiality. They will take his measure, call him hero, coward, nonentity, fool, etc. And then, at last, they will tote up the balance sheet of his life after his death.
[edit] Consciousness as Transcendent?
The opening few sentences have me a bit confused. Being and Nothingness shows consciousness as transcendent and it advocates rationalism? This doesn't seem to capture the spirit of the book at all as far as what I've heard. Existence precedes essence. We are what our choices define us to be, not some kind of transcendent rational animal or featherless biped. Johnor 11:59, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
Again, see the article on being. It explains the relationship between Being and Nothingness.
This article has serious faults, which I have only started to correct. The books subtitle is 'an essay on phenomenological ontology', not a 'phenomenological essay on ontology'. (I notice however that the cover picture shown has a 'phenomenological essay on ontology' written on it - where did this come from?)
Perhaps the article should follow the structure of the book, so that it would discuss nothingness before discussing the other. This is what the French version of this article intends to do once somebody has been put beneath the headings. I guess I'll have to edit the French version too.
I think the section about sex has to go as the author hasn't cited sources and I won't vouch for its accuracy.
I came to this article hoping it would quickly fill in some gaps in my rusty flakey understanding of Sartre. (Many WP articles are quite good for this kind of thing.) I am now editing it as it seems that my knowledge, however flakey, is at least as good as that of people who have been here before. --Publunch 18:26, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] cover photograph
The photograph of Being and Nothingness shown is of a (badly) abridged version. It would be better to provide a photograph of the unabridged English translation.
[edit] Article Cleanup Co-Ordination Point
| Cleanup Co-ordination | |
|---|---|
 |
This article has recently been tagged as requiring cleanup to meet Wikipedia's quality standards. The article may have been flagged as needing cleanup because it has been suggested that:
For a full list of possible problems see Wikipedia:Manual of Style. As part of the cleanup process, the automated bot PocKleanBot has generated this notice as a focus of cleanup efforts, and also contacted several contributing editors of the article to bring their attention to the problem. You should use this section to discuss possible resolution of the problem and achieve consensus for action. Only when there is a consensus that the article is now cleaned up should you then de-list it by deleting the cleanup tag from the article, this causes the article to drop off the monthly cleanup-needed list page. |
[edit] Discussion |
|
