Study smarter with Fiveable
Get study guides, practice questions, and cheatsheets for all your subjects. Join 500,000+ students with a 96% pass rate.
Existentialism isn't just a historical movement—it's a toolkit for thinking about the questions that philosophy exams love to probe: What makes a life meaningful? How do we exercise freedom responsibly? What's the relationship between the individual and society? When you're tested on existentialism, you're being asked to demonstrate how these thinkers tackled the fundamental tension between human freedom and the apparent absurdity or groundlessness of existence. Understanding the distinctions between atheistic and theistic existentialism, between absurdism and authentic being, will help you navigate comparison questions and construct nuanced essay arguments.
These thinkers share a commitment to concrete human experience over abstract systems, but they diverge dramatically on questions of God, ethics, embodiment, and meaning-making. Don't just memorize names and book titles—know what philosophical problem each thinker is solving and how their approach differs from others in the tradition. That's what separates a mediocre exam response from one that demonstrates genuine philosophical understanding.
These thinkers established the core existentialist concerns before the movement had a name. They diagnosed the crisis of meaning in modern life and proposed radical responses centered on individual choice and subjective truth.
Compare: Kierkegaard vs. Nietzsche—both reject systematic philosophy and emphasize individual choice, but Kierkegaard leaps toward faith while Nietzsche demands we create values after faith's collapse. If an essay asks about existentialism's relationship to religion, these two frame the debate.
These thinkers confront human existence in a universe without divine purpose. The absence of God doesn't diminish human responsibility—it intensifies it, making us solely accountable for who we become.
Compare: Sartre vs. Camus—both are atheists confronting meaninglessness, but Sartre emphasizes creating meaning through committed action, while Camus insists we acknowledge absurdity without resolving it. Camus rejected the "existentialist" label precisely because of this distinction.
These thinkers ground existentialism in careful analysis of how existence actually appears to consciousness. They ask not just "what should I do?" but "what does it mean to be at all?"
Compare: Heidegger vs. Merleau-Ponty—both use phenomenological method, but Heidegger focuses on temporal existence (being-toward-death), while Merleau-Ponty emphasizes bodily existence (perception and flesh). For questions about existentialism's relationship to phenomenology, these are your key figures.
These thinkers retain religious commitment while embracing existentialist themes. They argue that authentic existence requires openness to transcendence and genuine encounter with others.
Compare: Jaspers vs. Marcel—both are theistic existentialists emphasizing transcendence and interpersonal encounter, but Jaspers approaches transcendence philosophically through limit situations, while Marcel grounds it in concrete experiences of love, fidelity, and hope. Marcel is more explicitly Catholic in orientation.
| Concept | Best Examples |
|---|---|
| Radical freedom & responsibility | Sartre, de Beauvoir, Kierkegaard |
| The Absurd | Camus, Dostoevsky |
| Authenticity vs. inauthenticity | Heidegger, Sartre (bad faith) |
| Embodiment & perception | Merleau-Ponty |
| Faith & transcendence | Kierkegaard, Jaspers, Marcel |
| Creation of values | Nietzsche, Sartre |
| Intersubjectivity & the Other | de Beauvoir, Merleau-Ponty, Marcel |
| Confronting mortality | Heidegger, Jaspers |
Which two thinkers would you compare to illustrate the difference between atheistic and theistic approaches to existential freedom?
How does Sartre's concept of "bad faith" differ from Heidegger's notion of "inauthenticity"—and what do they share?
If an essay asked you to explain how existentialism addresses the body, which thinker provides the strongest response, and why?
Compare Camus's "rebellion" against the absurd with Nietzsche's "creation of values"—what problem is each solving, and how do their solutions differ?
Which thinker would best support an argument that existentialism has political and social implications beyond individual self-creation? What concept would you use?