Satre Vs Lucretius

Satre and Lucretius, as influential philosophers, present their arguments and ideas of how the world ought to be and how humans should exist within it. Both philosophers present their point of view, which directs and answers the questions humans face about the world, not in the sense or in the way that religion would answer certain questions, but in a way for people to understand their existence. Satre’s view of the world is different from the view of Lucretius on many levels. However, there are many commonalities within these philosophers’ arguments. Our existence and our reason for being all begin with our nature as human beings. Lucretius and Satre pose their arguments from the physical realm we exist in now. Lucretius has a simplistic view …show more content…
The gods do not bring about supernatural phenomena but these phenomena have a natural and understandable meaning for why they occur. Similar to Satre, both philosophers view religion as a means or tool that deters humans in life. We are driven away from the truth of what things are and are held down by the fear that we will be punished or will be judged because of the actions we took in our lives. The world can be explained through naturally occurring things. We can understand the world, our purpose, and meaning entirely from what we have here on earth. A supernatural world is not necessary in order for humans to exist and to have …show more content…
His vivid description and appreciation of various things within nature define why he believes it is imperative that we get back in touch with nature and the natural harmony of the world. He describes the best humans as those who indulge and live by the simple things in life. Those who search for excess, material desires, desires of the flesh, greed, etc. all lead astray. Their happiness is determined and deemed by outside forces. As humans become engulfed by the fears of the world, the fears and false hopes gathered from religion, getting in touch with nature becomes more difficult. The more things we add to our lives, the further away we move from the simple and basic necessities we need to survive. When we add on more of these external desires and pressures, our happiness begins to depend on our intake and reception of the goods we think will better our lives, increasing our susceptibility to unhappiness. Satre’s distinction between essence and existence is a part of the foundation of his argument. We are physically a part of this earth. We take action, make choices, all of which equate as our form of existence. Our essence is what we do with our existence. This is one of the main differences in describing Satre to Lucretius’ way of describing the given world. The ways we live our lives define our existence. Once we begin to focus on what are our objectives, principles and morals that we set for