r/Existentialism 1d ago

Literature 📖 Thoughts on Nausea

19 Upvotes

Just read Sartre’s “Nausea” and I absolutely loved it. The story and characters aren’t particularly captivating, but I have never read a book that evokes such a specific emotional and existential reaction.

Does anyone else relate to the feeling of wanting to experience the ‘nausea’? As in you want to be able to feel time as it truly is and not as a distorted concept thought of in restrospect. The narrator experienced existence as it really is and not just how day-to-day life and habit presents existence. Idk it just made me wierdly envious

Anyone have any recs for other narrative novels that evoke such a visceral and interesting feeling? I’m just getting into existentialist literature and I’ve also enjoyed Stoner, The Stranger, and The Fall, but none as much as “Nausea”.


r/Existentialism 1d ago

Serious Discussion Nobody has ever interacted with "reality" itself. Only their personal tint and perspective aka the tunnel.

Thumbnail
0 Upvotes

r/Existentialism 1d ago

Parallels/Themes Nihilism interpretation

Thumbnail
1 Upvotes

r/Existentialism 1d ago

Parallels/Themes Where Do Unperformed Thoughts Go?

2 Upvotes

Where do your thoughts reside when they have been neither acted upon nor expressed? Where is the unexecuted stored: the unwritten, the unspoken, the merely contemplated?

Why is it so uncomfortable to carry these unrealized thoughts within us? Could this discomfort be related to the [Zeigarnik effect ](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zeigarnik_effect?wprov=sfla1)and the [Ovsiankina effect](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ovsiankina_effect?wprov=sfla1): our tendency to remember interrupted tasks and to return to unfinished ones?

Perhaps we can only truly understand what we have thought by externalizing it to some degree. A thought that remains entirely internal may stay strangely indeterminate, never fully becoming an object even for its own thinker.

In this sense, Podkolyosin in Gogol's Marriage may not be fleeing from the bride at all. Perhaps he is simply unable to resist testing, through action, the sudden idea of escape that has appeared in his mind.

But why should unfinished thoughts exert such pressure?

Could this be an inherited remnant of primordial gathering strategies? A gatherer needed free hands in order to continue gathering. If the hands remained occupied, their ability to acquire new resources would be partially paralyzed, reducing their chances of survival.

Perhaps unfinished intentions occupy our cognitive "hands" in a similar way. Unperformed thoughts, unrealized decisions, unexpressed words all continue to demand mental resources, making us feel burdened not because they are important in themselves, but because they reduce our capacity to gather something new.

Maybe the discomfort of incompleteness is not merely psychological. Perhaps it is the echo of an ancient adaptive mechanism: before picking up something new, one first had to free one's hands.


r/Existentialism 1d ago

Serious Discussion Why has humanity been unable to identify one universal answer to the question: What is the purpose of human life from birth to death?

Thumbnail
0 Upvotes

r/Existentialism 4d ago

Existentialism Discussion Camus Nuptial

1 Upvotes

Why is Camus' essay collection called Nuptials? I've never understood the title.


r/Existentialism 4d ago

Parallels/Themes Sylvia Plath, Aristotle, and Jean-Paul Sartre Walk Into a Bar

Thumbnail
techandsundry.medium.com
8 Upvotes

I recently found myself in the same predicament as Sylvia Plath's character in The Bell Jar. I was determined to find a way out and wrote this essay exploring how existentialism provides a promising response.


r/Existentialism 5d ago

Existentialism Discussion Doesn't the fact that we can choose to exit life at any moment prove we are radically free?

22 Upvotes

Been swept away by Sartre's philosophy the last few weeks. I'm trying to find holes in his idea of radical freedom and creating our own meaning. Every rebuttal to it essentially reduces to bad faith arguments. Am I missing something?


r/Existentialism 6d ago

Existentialism Discussion Can Mindfulness Conquer Anxiety, or Only Manage the Present?

Thumbnail
2 Upvotes

r/Existentialism 7d ago

Literature 📖 Rhetoric and Philosophy book

9 Upvotes

Currently reading this book and it brings up existentialism and I love how detailed it is about speech from real scenarios.

Does anyone else read books like this?


r/Existentialism 7d ago

Parallels/Themes Walser's "This is all very senseless, but this senselessness has pretty mouth, and it smiles" is right up with Nietzsche's "If you gaze into the abyss, the abyss will gaze back into you."

Thumbnail
8 Upvotes

r/Existentialism 10d ago

Serious Discussion Guilt without action, punishment without choice, destiny without participation.

Post image
24 Upvotes

Human beings are born into a state they did not choose and are condemned for a crime they did not commit.

This reminds me of Sartre's idea that we are "condemned to be free" — thrown into existence without our consent, yet held fully responsible for who we become.

Have you ever felt like you were paying for something you never did?


r/Existentialism 11d ago

Existentialism Discussion just a poem I wrote, would love to hear your insights :)

Post image
17 Upvotes

we were committed and made a choice
it was said this is how it should
we just loved the show, found ourselves in the haze

we were thrilled and joyous
it went as far as it could
we duplicated in many worlds, in so many ways

we hid ourselves behind our voice
it was perhaps solely for our own good
we were told to seek for perfection, strive for the praise

we were mesmerized by the noise
it was all forgotten as we thought it would
we were demythologized to be merely theologized, lost in the maze

there was no noise, to the dreamy eye
no eternal voice, nothing to imply
how to still be joyous, but to deeply deny
not here to make a choice, purely to ask why


r/Existentialism 11d ago

Existentialism Discussion Sommes-nous en train de fuir notre propre existence en "formalisant" le monde ?

3 Upvotes

Je viens de publier un article dĂ©taillĂ© Ă  ce sujet, intitulé La tyrannie de l'eidos et du chiffre, oĂč je retrace la gĂ©nĂ©alogie de ce qu'on pourrait appeler "la formalisation du monde" — cette volontĂ© trĂšs ancienne de dĂ©tacher la forme de la matiĂšre pour rendre le monde calculable et prĂ©visible. 

Voici le cƓur de ma rĂ©flexion que j'aimerais soumettre Ă  vos regards existentialistes :

L'essor de l'IA et de la virtualisation n'est pas tant une victoire du matérialisme, mais plutÎt l'aboutissement d'un idéalisme formaliste qui remonte à Platon (la supériorité des Idées pures sur le monde sensible) et à Descartes (la réduction du monde à des équations).

Mais ce qui me frappe d'un point de vue purement existentialiste et phénoménologique, c'est la dimension "anesthésique" de cette transition : nous utilisons le langage, la mise en récit et aujourd'hui les algorithmes comme des boucliers contre le chaos, la douleur et la vulnérabilité de notre incarnation physique (ce que Husserl et Merleau-Ponty appellent le Leib ou le corps propre). 

  • L'Ă©tiquetage affectif (affect labeling) : Les neurosciences montrent que poser un mot sur une Ă©motion (dire "je suis en colĂšre") calme instantanĂ©ment l'activitĂ© de l'amygdale. C'est une sorte de "morphine linguistique" : en conceptualisant notre vĂ©cu, nous nous coupons de l'intensitĂ© brute et douloureuse de notre chair pour trouver refuge dans le confort du langage.
  • L'IA comme platonisme ultime : En dĂ©lĂ©guant nos dĂ©cisions, nos rencontres, nos trajets et mĂȘme nos pensĂ©es Ă  des algorithmes, nous choisissons le confort stĂ©rile de la simulation plutĂŽt que la vulnĂ©rabilitĂ© crĂ©atrice et parfois douloureuse de notre prĂ©sence au monde.

En gros, pour fuir l'angoisse de l'informe et de la souffrance humaine, nous transformons notre existence en une syntaxe universelle et optimisĂ©e. Nous prĂ©fĂ©rons ne plus souffrir, quitte Ă  ne plus ĂȘtre tout Ă  fait vivants (incarnĂ©s).

D'oĂč mes questions pour la communautĂ© :

  1. Est-ce que l'optimisation technologique et l'IA ne sont pas la forme ultime de la "mauvaise foi" sartrienne ?En nous objectivant à travers des profils, des scores et des flux algorithmiques, ne fuyons-nous pas l'angoisse de notre liberté absolue et de notre contingence ?
  2. Comment préserver ce "reste non formalisable" (notre intuition, notre douleur brute, notre présence charnelle) dans une société qui exige constamment que tout soit numérisé, étiqueté et optimisé ?
  3. Peut-on encore vivre une existence "authentique" (au sens heideggerien ou sartrien) si notre premier réflexe face au vide ou à la souffrance est de nous réfugier derriÚre l'écran d'un modÚle de langage ou d'une application ?

Pour ceux qui veulent creuser la généalogie historique de cette idée (de l'ontologie de Platon et la Kabbale jusqu'à la psycho-analyse de Lacan et Turing), vous pouvez lire mon analyse complÚte ici : La tyrannie de l'eidos et du chiffre.

Curieux d'avoir vos retours, notamment si vous avez des lectures phénoménologiques ou existentialistes à conseiller sur cette tension entre le virtuel (la forme pure) et la chair (le sensible) !


r/Existentialism 12d ago

Serious Discussion What if consciousness can never become complete?

17 Upvotes

I've been thinking about this for a long time, and I'm trying to figure out whether I'm onto something or just reinventing an existing philosophical idea.

It started with existentialism. I kept thinking about how almost everything we do seems to come back to not knowing. We don't know who we are completely, we don't know why we're here, we don't know what consciousness is, we don't know what happens after death. Even science, philosophy, and mathematics seem to begin with someone looking at something and going, "What the hell is this?"

Most of the psychology I've read treats uncertainty as something we try to reduce, tolerate, or cope with.

But what if that's looking at it backwards?

What if uncertainty isn't the fundamental thing?

What if the more fundamental condition is that consciousness itself can never become complete?

By "incomplete," I don't mean we're ignorant or that we'll never learn anything. I mean that consciousness can never reach a final point where it fully understands itself or reality. Every answer creates new questions. Every discovery expands the horizon instead of closing it.

If that's true, then curiosity, science, philosophy, art, meaning-making—even our tendency to constantly reinterpret ourselves—aren't just reactions to missing information. They're natural expressions of a consciousness that is never finished.

I'm not saying this is true. I'm trying to figure out whether this is already a well-known position or whether there's something genuinely different here.

Does this overlap with any existing philosopher or psychological theory that I'm missing? And more importantly, where do you think this idea falls apart?


r/Existentialism 13d ago

Serious Discussion "Most of what I wanted to tell you, as I sat outside on the balcony, had not yet crystallised in my mind, and so all I could do is refer to my basic feeling." ~Kafka, Letters to Milena. What Kafka said seems the inverse to what Nietzsche said, thoughts?

Post image
16 Upvotes

r/Existentialism 14d ago

Existentialism Discussion My argument for God’s existence — as an atheist

Thumbnail
0 Upvotes

r/Existentialism 15d ago

Existentialism Discussion She said the choice between security and meaning is a false one. I’ve been turning that over since.

5 Upvotes

It connects to what existentialists call authentic choice. Sartre’s argument that dividing life into what’s expected and what’s meaningful, and treating that as a fixed tension, is itself a form of bad faith. She’s making a similar point from the inside of a lived life rather than from philosophy, that the division dissolves when you’re genuinely oriented toward something real.

Her argument: the question isn’t whether your job is meaningful in some grand sense. It’s whether you’re doing it from a place of inner direction and whether it relieves rather than adds to suffering in the world. She said she’s worked as a waitress, in a bakery, run major programmes and led institutional change. The practice is the same in all of it. You work on yourself to be more compassionate and then you find ways to bring that into whatever you’re doing.

I don’t know if I fully agree. The constraints on choosing meaning over security aren’t equally distributed and she had a lot of freedom in her choices that many people don’t. But the frame she offered, that the inner work is primary and the outer work follows from it, is at least worth examining. Curious whether people here think the choice is really false or whether that’s easier to say from the other side of having made it.


r/Existentialism 16d ago

Existentialism Discussion From an infinite amount of experiences, why this one at this time?

11 Upvotes

So.. about the whole „I am not my ego. I am not my thoughts. I am not my body. I am just the observer. There is no 'I'. I am the experience itself.“ - theory. Which is also often described as the universe experiencing itself.

I can’t wrap my mind about following: Why am „I“ in THIS exact body right now? How does this singular spark of experience „decide“ to be in this body at this specific time? I don’t believe in „deciding“ or free will, which makes it even harder for me to stop spiralling about it. When I was five years old, I asked my mother why I am who I am and how I know I'm not dreaming.
Also, if there is no such thing as time, and everything is happening everywhere all at once, I must have already been through an infinite amount of experiences. I just can't remember them because there is no such thing as memory outside of this body.
And following that thought: shouldn't this life I am experiencing right now already be forgotten? Why am I stuck in this specific life, at this exact time, out of all eternity?


r/Existentialism 17d ago

Existentialism Discussion To exist means you have a name for it.Does that mean "nothing" will never truly exist?

0 Upvotes

Since we have a name for the word "nothing" does that give it existence on some platform? Is acknowledgement enough to give it existence? If so, will nothing never be nothing?


r/Existentialism 17d ago

Literature 📖 My findings in building aphorisms

2 Upvotes

I've spent some time learning modern philosophy and trying to solve metaphysics in some way. Recently, I've been discussing the existence of God (I'm an atheist) with my Reddit friend and was involved in a kind of brainstorm state. So it has changed my view on skepticism and the art of making words from thoughts. As the essence of this change, I came up with some aphorisms (as I see them). They are much inspired by the style of Nietzsche's thinking and writing. I'd like you guys to critique and rate them one by one if you find them interesting. It'll help me a lot

Also, I must mention that I'm a Russian speaker, so there may be some mistakes in translation which will probably lead to "missounding" and losing some of the effect.

Life begins when every echo of a thought is followed by an exclamation mark!

Aphorisms that exclaim, affirm, lash. And at last, aphorisms that overflow — overflowing from souls full to the brim, brimming over with life.

  1. A deity is, in truth, a convenient device for describing reality — mythical in origin. At their leisure, people sought to fulfill their drive toward rationalization through an existing cultural phenomenon: God. Now God is dead. The shadows, too, shall die!
  2. I am convinced that metaphysical positions should be evaluated solely from the standpoint of their historical and cultural presuppositions and consequences. Then the day after tomorrow shall dawn!
  3. Intuitionism is a pitiful attempt to pass off personal conviction as certainty. And yet it is precisely such confident thoughts that pave the graveyard of human knowledge. Make way for the hesitant!
  4. I prefer Hume as a weapon of skepticism against the "rational" that passes itself off as universal!
  5. The active part of humanity must create value out of itself, must be the source of the inner value of knowledge and will — even though the "active part" is simply the evolutionarily effective part, and the values being created are simply a rhetorical device for thinking!
  6. Your convictions correspond to reality? — preferably. Reality corresponds to your convictions? — not necessarily!
  7. I have noticed that Nietzscheans are mostly mere bearers of Nietzsche's thought — not even incubators. His thought does not come to life within them; rather, it degenerates, finding its final refuge. They are philosophers, but not objects of philosophy. Nietzsche struck philosophy with the lightning of an exclamation mark; they merely reread, illumined by the dim glow of nightlights!

So that's it. Most of them are rather raw, but I want you to pay some extra attention to 3 and 8. You must remember that they were born from a discussion and are not exactly poetic. Thank you for your time and maybe thoughts!


r/Existentialism 18d ago

Serious Discussion What’s the meaning of life

Thumbnail
14 Upvotes

r/Existentialism 17d ago

Existentialism Discussion Freedom and alienation

4 Upvotes

How do you reconcile the fundamental truth of being free no matter what our circumstances are with the tragedy of our lives, where we are forced to sell our most valuable resources, time and energy, for peanuts?


r/Existentialism 20d ago

Existentialism Discussion What’s the point in living if I’m not dying one day at a time?

20 Upvotes

Wrote this down after a hard workout, thought of the idea in the middle of it. Also pulled from Albert Camus with the Sisyphus reference. Feel free to discuss:

What’s the point in living if I’m not dying one day at a time? It’s not really life if I don’t come face to face with what feels like death. Now I’m not saying be reckless with your precious life, which you only get one chance at; I’m saying make it all count. Find your limits. Then go past them. Honestly, what is living but your life rapidly speeding toward inevitable death? That’s a pretty bleak reality, but it’s still our reality. If I’m not dying everyday then my life isn’t being lived to the absolute maximum. Whatever I choose, I’m still slowly dying everyday. Now, I have the choice to spend my life scrolling my phone on the couch or out on a run in the 90 degree heat. Either way I’m still living my life, and in reality dying, every minute closer to real death. One must imagine Sisyphus happy. I am Sisyphus, but you need not imagine my joy — the grind, these small deaths that I die every day — they make me all the more alive. I appreciate fullness of life even more, and these sacrifices make me complete. I know the end, which is death, but I choose life through dying continually, so that I will never be with those timid souls too weak to test themselves or spend their allotted time on this earth in a way unfitting their true potential as a living human being. I have seen and felt and tasted defeat, and am stronger for it — have lived in more fullness of joy because of it. And in the end, I will rest, knowing that I made my death worth it by crowning it with my life.


r/Existentialism 21d ago

Literature 📖 Fear as the Fundamental Human Emotion: A Deep Dive

6 Upvotes

Humans often shape their identities around core attributes such as ambition, love, resilience amongst a multitude of others. Yet, a deeper analysis of individual behaviours and the forces that drive them point to a singularity, an omnipresent energy that controls these impulses in which we act. Perhaps, this underlying presence is unconscious in a sense, but developing a greater understanding and grappling with self-awareness can enable personal identification. This essay explores whether this energy, fear, should be considered as the fundamental, and possibly the most important emotion by examining morality, identity, and human resolve. 

Whilst fear is only one “true” emotion out of an infinite assortment processed by people, I believe it displays a multifaceted nature in actually shaping these qualities that humans frequently pride themselves on. Fear may be the most influential property because it underlies, often without recognition, behaviour, feelings and values which may appear unrelated to fear entirely.

So why do we even feel fear in the first place? Fear is an ancient evolutionary mechanism that precedes modern humanity and was essential for pure survival in early human history. Fear is processed through the brain in a neural pathway starting at the thalamus. Once there is a threat detected, the thalamus fires signals to the amygdala which processes them and allows the release of stress hormones such as adrenaline and cortisol. Ancestors with a greater “fight-or-flight” response typically survived longer than those without it, as they were able to perceive a threat before it was too late. In contemporary society, the average human being is not in a constant battle to survive day-by-day, hence fear itself has evolved into a different mechanism entirely. Whilst it still possesses the ability to produce “fight-or-flight” responses, this emotion has developed into an unseen backbone for everyday behaviour and values. 

If fear originated from the need to survive, it is reasonable to ask whether it extends beyond these specific situations. As previously stated, modern individuals rarely fear predators on a regular schedule, yet fear is still as prominent as ever. As humans have evolved, fear has also progressed past its unidimensional qualities and has embedded itself as a necessary evil within our psychology. Fear manifests into actions, thoughts and characteristics that define conscious life, often grounding itself through behaviours that seem unrelated to fear entirely. For example, humans usually measure success in the form of accolades or achievements. Usually, this is seen as a positive experience, however an individual may be suffering from fear of failure, neglect or insignificance which actually drives their motivation for success. In addition, the pursuit of major wealth is similarly entrenched in the fear of poverty and instability, providing a sugarcoated barrier to the tightening grip of reality. In both, and many other cases, if this fear becomes “conquered” by materialistic veils, increasing attachment to these mere “things” may create an environment for pride and greed to emerge. Although fear is uncomfortable, it is necessary. Fear appears to be the most driving force behind human values and behaviours, meaning it cannot be ignored, only managed by embracing one’s identity.

It is now established that fear can be used as a vehicle for success, but it possesses a duality. If someone’s fear is not recognised as a part of their character, and is rather ignored, detrimental effects may deteriorate one’s morality. By diving into the deadliest sin, pride, we can confront the possibility that fear, or the attempt to escape it, is the sole reason an individual embodies this. Unrestrained confidence functions as a defence against fear as an endeavour to escape it by becoming the opposite. An individual with a strong, outgoing personality and an invulnerable self-image could be grappling with the fear of inadequacy or rejection.

The person that looks truly fearless is perhaps, among the most fearful.

To further examine the insidious effects of underlying fear, we must address a consistent, universal, conscious conduct of manipulation. If fear has the capacity to linger without recognition in our everyday behaviours, what role does it play in actually being truthful to ourselves? A fascinating concept is that people rarely lie “just for the sake” of lying, there is almost always a deeper reason behind action. A lie serves as a fabricated veil against honest consequences. Lying is ingrained in the human psyche from early childhood; for example, a child lies after breaking something as protection from angering the owner. As one progresses through life, the art of lying becomes a part of their person. Most would have heard of the phrase, “living a lie,” however many don’t realise the truth encompassed by the statement and the universality of it. The acts of exaggeration, fake diplomacy, or manipulation all provide temporary security against the vice of our true fears, all accumulating to a point where individuals become fragments of themselves in living their lies.

If fear holds the potential to become the driving force behind almost all core human values such as pride, ambition and even honesty, perhaps its most destructive trait is not the feeling itself, but the act of ignoring its influence, whether blissfully or intentionally. We have established that fear operates beneath conscious thought and manifests into ideals and behaviours that seem completely unrelated to its weight. But if fear has the ability to disrupt one’s true values, or even reach the extent that an individual is consciously devoting time to “living a lie,” how can someone truly find themselves without first confronting their greatest fears? 

Whilst no human being may have the capacity to reach enlightenment, a continuous journey to self-awareness is much more realistic and healthy in finding identity. Self-awareness is steeped in honesty, which as discussed earlier, cannot be reached without challenging fear itself. A majority of individuals often spend their lives silently battling with the products of fear, but don’t reach beneath the surface to face the fear itself. In a sense, these people cannot find themselves without encountering the unconscious, and frankly uncomfortable barriers that lie in their hearts of darkness. Recognition however, does not eliminate fear at all. Fear is omnipresent. But having the capacity as a human to become aware and understand the effect that fear has on your values, opinions, and mental state transforms the slanted power dynamic from master to embraced companion. If accepted, even unwillingly, fear will no longer be the commander pulling the strings, but will instead act as an honest reason behind the uncomfortable feelings one encounters. This conscious reality allows the individual to regain their autonomy through evaluating whether their fear has the authority to control their actions.
To keep escalating up the hierarchy of human principles, I pose to you the question: if fear holds such a clutch over human values and behaviours, does it also have the power to shape our morality? Many moral virtues may emerge from fear, suggesting that it can stand as one of the central pillars in the colosseum of the individual ethics system. Most people like to think that they act morally because: they are good people, they value justice, and that they don’t expect external praise for their actions. If we look deeper into these “virtues,” we start to question whether humans are truly virtuous, or if they act in a selfless facade? By diving into the core ideals behind morality, a recurring theme seems to appear as motivation to value these cornerstones, vulnerability. If we take justice as an example, humans care profoundly about maintaining moral integrity that it even becomes a demand. The demand for justice. But why? This “need” could have possibly originated from the fear that unchecked suffering for others may potentially become one’s own in the near future. This can be seen as altruistic, although when searching beyond face value, it points to a more psychologically complex and selfish conclusion. 

If fear enables the concept of morality, are moral behaviours genuinely moral?

Let’s look at a theoretical case study: One person does not cheat on their partner because they’re scared of getting caught and facing the consequences. However, another person does not cheat on their partner because they believe infidelity is wrong. The latter scenario would be almost objectively considered “more moral.” This analogy can be easily applied to many moral crossroads, allowing us to tackle a vulnerable ultimatum of human spirit: can we transcend selfishness by understanding our central fears to ultimately become truly moral? Hence, fear shows us that it can initiate morality, but it cannot fully explain the reasoning responsible for our authentic feelings. That requires a further assessment of individual character.

What if we looked into the contrary, a life without fear? Most individuals have a seemingly subconscious goal to conquer their fears and eventually live a life of “freedom.” When someone is incapable of fearing, there cannot be insecurity, anxiety or suffering under the potential consequences of each decision. It simply does not matter. I would like to introduce a hypothetical scenario: If a person is knowingly immortal, what do they value, and even further, what is their point of living? As mortal humans, life is our most valued asset because it has an inevitable end. Would an everlasting being possess a burning anxiety over the possible loss of a relationship? Would they cherish the mundane moments of life the same as a normal person? Because once every outcome of existence has occurred an infinite amount of times, complacency is inescapable. Hence, a person without fear is not necessarily courageous, as courage requires fear to have meaning. They become ignorant. Detached. Reality is disconnected from their psychological standpoint because fear enables emotional recognition of consequences. Without fear, actions lose meaning. The central concern is that humans do not fear everything equally, they fear based on how much they value an asset of their life. This is evidence that fear works as a shadow cast by value. It is not merely a response, but a catalyst that gives life significance by working in tandem with value and loss.

As a final conclusion, we must remember that fear originated as an ancient mechanism for survival. Whilst it still serves this purpose, it must be recognised that its evolution as an underlying force beneath the human resolve is truly profound. We have discussed that fear shapes ambition, pride, honesty, identity and even the things we assign different levels of value to. But perhaps these are merely below the grandeur. Perhaps, our greatest fear is not even a concrete threat, it is the possibility that the act of existing is quite frankly nihilistic. The lifelong endeavour for unattainable meaning could conceivably be the true plight of human conscience itself. The fear of meaninglessness potentially sits at the original singularity beneath all tangible thoughts, values and actions, silently driving our search for connection and achievement. In a disturbingly ironic sense, evidence that meaning matters may directly arise from this fundamental fear.

So what to do with this information? Embrace it. If fear is so deeply woven into the human psyche, a pursuit of life without fear might be a misguided goal to start with. Fear cannot be conquered in any permanent sense because it lingers beneath all individual thought, value, and liminal mental space between acting or not. Thus fear is not some tyrant to dethrone, or something to be hidden away, because if people do not accept all aspects of their character, they are not truly themselves. The goal is to shift the power dynamic from a master to an acquaintance, one that can teach us what we value the most by becoming self-aware to it. Ultimately, if our deepest, most hidden fears are understood and embraced by being uncomfortably vulnerable and honest with ourselves, realistic freedom becomes accessible. Instead of choosing to run from our fears, genuine autonomy can be regained in allowing us to decide whether a situation deserves our fear, as opposed to being controlled by it. 

Therefore, through walking hand-in-hand with fear itself, true freedom is found.

P.s. I am only 19 and this is my first project written out of pure self-interest. My concepts are certainly not concrete as I am still maturing in my philosophical journey. Open to discussions :)