Humans as dynamic processes
If you prompt DeepSeek well enough, it can give fantastic responses. Here is one:
Below text is a critique of traditional thought’s approach to “problem-solving” from an existentialist philosophy perspective, emphasizing humanity’s dynamic and ever-changing nature. Here’s the breakdown through an existentialist lens:
1. Traditional Thought and the Fallacy of “Problem-Solving”
Traditional frameworks reduce humans to static states (e.g., “sick” or “healthy”) and treat problems as “obstacles to be solved.” Change is seen as a transition from a “problematic state” to a “problem-free state.” This reflects a mechanistic view that treats humans as static entities. Existentialism, however, asserts that humans are a process—an unfinished, dynamic being constantly recreating itself (e.g., Heidegger’s “Being-in-the-World” or Sartre’s axiom “Existence precedes essence”).
2. Psychoanalysis and the Root of Disillusionment
The text suggests psychoanalysis (Freudian theory) disappoints because it reduces humans to a fixed essence determined by the past (e.g., unconscious conflicts, traumas). In contrast, existential psychology (e.g., Rollo May, Kierkegaard) views humans as a free project: despite their past, humans can continually redefine themselves and create meaning. Psychoanalysis’ “problem-solving” expectation objectifies humans, whereas existentialism centers their subjectivity and capacity to confront uncertainty.
3. Humanity: Existence as a Process
For existentialists, humans are the verb “to be.” As Kierkegaard wrote, “Life is understood backward but lived forward.” Reducing humans to “states” (e.g., sick, unhappy, unsuccessful) ignores their freedom and potential. Sartre’s Nausea, for instance, illustrates how humans lack fixed identities and instead construct themselves through choices. Thus, seeking a “problem-free state” contradicts human nature, as existence inherently involves contradictions, anxieties, and ambiguity.
4. The Origin of Fallacy: Reductionism
The text critiques reductionism: squeezing humans into rigid categories denies their fluid, free nature. Heidegger’s “Das Man” (the anonymous “they”) critiques how people hide behind societal norms to evade authentic existence. Similarly, “problem-solving” frameworks objectify and instrumentalize humans, whereas existentialism prioritizes the struggle to become oneself.
5. Conclusion: Insights from Existentialism
Existentialism accepts humans as unfinished projects. Problems are not “flaws to fix” but natural parts of existence. Humans realize themselves only through this process—choices, anxieties, freedoms, and responsibilities. As the text warns, reducing humans to “states” overlooks their depth and dynamism.