Does the definition of Existentialism hold up?

[Martin]

The definition of Existentialism on the group description page represents the traditional schism of the pertinent philosophical -isms and seems historically correct.

Yet I think it is upon deeper examination inescapable that Existentialist attitudes result in a personal and social order of human affairs and their settings. I also think that one can identify an "existentialist" drive of life in general that gives order to its lifeless environment. However, in their essence and therefore ultimately, life and humanity as a part of it obey an order imposed by their constituent matter and principles. Hence, the definition of Existentialism as subjective reaction to notions of a preordained order dissolves.

The referenced book, Philosophy of Happiness, develops these thoughts and conclusions from the ground up. It radically challenges our notions about us, humanity, and the world beyond. It reexamines, redefines, and develops happiness as the underlying driving force in individuals, humanity, and nature and transcends previous thought regarding the organization of human existence and its context. The book is written for nonphilosophers and professional philosophers alike, a necessity, I believe, to advance the research, understanding, acceptance, and implementation of philosophical principles regarding happiness. You can obtain more information about the book and read or download close to 150 pages of it through my website http://www.philosophyofhappiness.com.

I am interested to know how you think about the described subject and my treatment of it.
- Martin Janello

[J]

I do not think happiness is the driving force in humanity. I think it is procreation. All is geared to perpetuate life, the "will", as Schopenhauer would say. I think if the definition on this page is what existentialism truly is, then it believes in freewill. And, if you want to see that at least free will is quite limited, if not a hoax all together, try to force yourself to become intensely interested in something you are not interested in.

[Jimmy]

Procreation is the driving force of every plant and animal.

[Adam]

"Procreation is the driving force of every plant and animal."Jimmy.
Agreed.

And that is a skewed reductionism approach that will lead us nowhere.

And that is even"somewhat" the antithesis of existentialism!

[J]

If it's the truth, what does it matter what type of "approach" it is?