Tag: Existentialism

Philosophy of Bo Burnham

Bo Burnham’s comedy uniquely explores contemporary life, merging humor, music, and introspection to confront deep philosophical themes. Unlike traditional stand-up, his work blends theater, music, and poetry, offering a layered critique on identity, mental health, and the digital age. By dissecting his performances, we uncover Burnham’s engagement with philosophical concepts that invite audiences to examine the nature of performance, authenticity, and existence in an increasingly mediated world.

One of Burnham’s defining traits is his use of meta-comedy, turning the spotlight on comedy itself. This reflexive approach aligns with postmodernism, which rejects objective truths and embraces irony, questioning representation. Burnham frequently breaks the fourth wall, reminding audiences of the constructed nature of his performances. In doing so, he critiques the entertainment industry’s demand for polished authenticity, where performers must be both relatable and extraordinary. His emphasis on artifice resonates with Jean Baudrillard’s concept of hyperreality, where the line between performance and reality blurs, suggesting that modern life consists of constructed narratives.

Burnham’s work frequently explores authenticity, both personal and artistic. His struggle to reconcile his public persona with his private self aligns with existentialist philosophy, particularly the ideas of Jean-Paul Sartre and Søren Kierkegaard. He embodies the existential conflict of being both creator and product, navigating the pressures of celebrity while striving for individuality. Elements of absurdism pervade his comedy, using surreal skits, abrupt tonal shifts, and narrative subversions to provoke existential contemplation. His work echoes Albert Camus’s notion of the absurd, suggesting that life’s lack of inherent meaning makes the search for purpose distinctly human. Through this lens, Burnham invites audiences to embrace life’s contradictions and unpredictability as fundamental aspects of the human experience.

A recurring theme in Burnham’s work is his critique of technology and its influence on self-perception and mental health. Echoing media theorists like Marshall McLuhan, he examines how digital platforms shape and distort human interaction. McLuhan’s assertion that “the medium is the message” applies well here, as Burnham showcases how social media doesn’t merely facilitate communication but fundamentally alters our perception of reality. He portrays the internet as both an endless source of information and a consuming force that erodes genuine well-being. His commentary on hyper-connectivity highlights how the boundaries between online consumption and reality become indistinguishable, reflecting concerns about the technological sublime—an awe-filled yet unsettling surrender to technology’s dominance in modern life.

Burnham’s openness about anxiety and depression extends beyond self-disclosure, prompting broader reflection on the human search for meaning amid suffering. His work resonates with existentialist ideas, particularly Camus’s argument that life’s absurdity compels individuals to create their own meaning. Burnham’s humor often embodies this existential predicament, where performance serves as both refuge and burden. Across his work, he wrestles with the paradox of seeking connection through performance while feeling fundamentally isolated, echoing existential themes of loneliness and vulnerability. His comedy draws attention to the mental toll of relentless self-performance, offering a lens through which audiences can reflect on the universal need for connection in an increasingly individualistic society.

Irony and satire play central roles in Burnham’s comedic style, entertaining while provoking critical thought. By exaggerating common scenarios and critiquing societal values, he exposes the absurdity of everyday life. His satirical pieces on the commodification of creativity reveal how fame and art are often conflated, reducing genuine expression to marketable content. This critique aligns with Socratic irony and the Frankfurt School’s approach to cultural critique, where irony reveals contradictions and hidden assumptions in social norms.

Burnham also questions the role and responsibility of the artist in society, raising concerns about the ethical demands of entertainment. He stages technical mishaps and scripted audience interactions to highlight the fragility of the performer-audience relationship. Dramatic lighting shifts and intensified sound, followed by self-deprecating humor, emphasize the tension between audience expectations and the performer’s emotional reality. His meta-comedic style critiques the high expectations placed on entertainers, reflecting on how performance often conceals as much as it reveals.

Robert Pickering Burnham, born August 21, 1990, started making YouTube videos at 16, rising to fame through self-produced comedic pieces. By blending humor with existential themes, Burnham challenges audiences to reflect on identity, authenticity, and technology’s impact on human experience. His work is more than comedy—it is an introspective exploration of what it means to exist in a world increasingly shaped by performance.

Deciding Between a PhD in Philosophy and Law School: A Comprehensive Guide

When faced with the decision of pursuing a PhD in Philosophy or a Juris Doctor (JD) degree from law school, it’s essential to weigh the pros and cons of each path carefully. Both paths have their unique challenges, benefits, and long-term implications for your career and life. Here’s a breakdown to help you make an informed decision.

1. Career Paths and Goals

PhD in Philosophy

  • Typical Career Trajectory: A PhD in Philosophy is generally pursued by those aiming for an academic career. This often involves teaching and conducting research at universities. However, the job market for philosophy PhDs is notoriously difficult, with limited tenure-track positions available and fierce competition for those that do exist.
  • Job Market Realities: Even graduates from top-tier philosophy programs face a grueling job market. Securing a tenure-track position might require applying to 50-100 jobs and possibly relocating to a less-than-ideal location. The average starting salary for a tenure-track assistant professor is around $60,000, which, while respectable, may not reflect the years of study and the intense competition involved.

JD (Juris Doctor)

  • Typical Career Trajectory: Law school graduates have a more direct and lucrative career path, primarily within the legal profession. This includes roles as lawyers, judges, or legal consultants. The legal field offers a broader range of opportunities across various sectors, including corporate law, public policy, and government.
  • Job Market Realities: While law school is a significant financial investment, often resulting in six-figure debt, the earning potential post-graduation is substantial. Starting salaries for lawyers can vary widely, but in lucrative markets or corporate law, it’s not uncommon to start at six figures, making the financial burden more manageable over time.

2. Financial Considerations

PhD in Philosophy

  • Cost and Funding: Most decent philosophy PhD programs offer full tuition remission and stipends through teaching assistantships or fellowships. These stipends can range from $14,000 to $30,000 per year, depending on the program’s rank and location. The upside is that you won’t graduate with debt, but the downside is the opportunity cost—spending 5-8 years in a program that leads to a highly competitive job market with limited financial rewards.

JD (Juris Doctor)

  • Cost and Debt: Law school is a considerable financial commitment, often requiring students to take on significant debt. Depending on the institution and financial aid, students might graduate with $90,000 to $300,000 in debt. However, the potential for high earnings in the legal profession can offset these costs. Moreover, there are public service loan forgiveness programs that can alleviate some of the debt burden if you work in qualifying public sector jobs.

3. Educational Experience

PhD in Philosophy

  • Academic Focus: A philosophy PhD involves deep immersion in philosophical texts, theories, and extensive research. The program typically includes comprehensive exams and culminates in a dissertation that contributes new knowledge to the field. It’s a rigorous intellectual journey, best suited for those with a passion for philosophy and a desire to contribute to academic discourse.

JD (Juris Doctor)

  • Practical Training: Law school is more about acquiring practical skills in legal reasoning, understanding doctrines, and preparing for the bar exam. It involves a mix of coursework, internships, and sometimes clerkships. While intellectually demanding, the focus is on applying legal principles in real-world situations rather than developing an independent research agenda.

4. Combined JD/PhD Programs

For those with intersecting interests in both law and philosophy, combined JD/PhD programs might be the ideal solution. Schools like NYU, Yale, Stanford, and Harvard offer joint degrees that allow students to delve into both fields. These programs are particularly beneficial for those interested in legal philosophy or who aspire to academic positions that bridge both disciplines. Joint programs also offer the advantage of reducing overall time and debt compared to pursuing both degrees separately.

5. Making the Decision

PhD in Philosophy:

  • Pros: Funded programs, intellectual fulfillment, potential for academic career.
  • Cons: Lengthy duration, highly competitive job market, limited alternative career paths.

JD (Juris Doctor):

  • Pros: Shorter duration, high earning potential, broader career opportunities.
  • Cons: Significant debt, intense academic and professional environment.

Combined JD/PhD:

  • Pros: Interdisciplinary expertise, broader career options, reduced overall debt.
  • Cons: Still a significant time investment, requiring careful management of dual commitments.

Final Thoughts

Ultimately, the decision between a PhD in Philosophy and law school comes down to your career goals, financial situation, and passion for the subject matter. If your primary interest is in the academic study of philosophy and you’re prepared for a tough job market, a PhD could be rewarding. However, if you’re looking for a more stable and lucrative career path with a wider range of options, law school might be the better choice. For those who want to blend both worlds, exploring a joint JD/PhD program could provide a balanced approach.

Unconditional Commitment: Embracing Kierkegaard’s Philosophy for Christianity

“Unconditional commitment” is the term Hubert Dreyfus used in explaining a core concept in Søren Kierkegaard’s philosophy. It is a risky leap of faith that overcomes nihilism and gives meaning to our lives and our every action. All other commitments are flimsy and can fail, so we need some ultimate commitment to prop up our lives and use as a lens to see our lives through. The example Dreyfus uses is Martin Luther King and his civil rights movement—King wakes up every day knowing all his actions are directed towards his cause, and this is what gives his life meaning. Every moment was around social justice and civil rights, and all of his choices or value in life is guided by this single source of purpose. For Dreyfus, his unconditional commitment is teaching, which engrosses him entirely and he puts everything into it. And it truly made Dreyfus one of the greatest teachers and made his 87 years on this earth truly meaningful. However, the opportunity costs, the incomplete knowledge of the decision, and the complete devotion are some of what make an unconditional commitment an inherently risky decision to take.

What is the application to the Christian life? It’s straightforward and what Kierkegaard originally intended, that is, Christianity is the proper unconditional commitment. We have to see our entire life through the lens of Christianity: every action, decision, and plan. Deviating from this leads to inauthenticity, existential anxiety, and a failure to be ourselves. To stick to a commitment is a truism. For a commitment to be unconditional means that it is ultimate. To become and be a Christian is to live a life based on an unconditional commitment to Christ.

Eternal priorities are the ultimate priority. It gives everything else meaning. They are the priorities that prioritize everything else in life. Eternal priorities are related to the purpose Christians are put on earth for: spiritual growth, serving others, and, above all, serving God. As we take every step, make every action, choose every decision, we must always remember our ultimate priorities. The priorities that transcend time. Past and future are insignificant in comparison, and, in the present, we must reflect and reorganize our priorities to match the eternal priorities.

Every morning we must take on our new life. We have to enter the perspective of eternity to know our true selves. How we forget so easily is beyond me. Perhaps our animalistic side is somehow primary and we have to deliberately enter into more sober thinking. Even beyond the human, we have to try our best to reconnect with the Lord and ask for forgiveness of our sins. We can be grateful for everything by virtue of the light the Lord provides. Nothing can shake this core of faith.

Why are these priorities of infinite importance yet so easily forgettable? Is it because we believe it’s a part of our private lives and it crumbles as soon as the public knocks on the door? If so, we must integrate our beliefs into all areas of our life. We have to remind ourselves every day we wake up. If we look through the lens of eternity properly, we can enjoy our lives and appreciate the insignificance of our day-to-day to enjoy it. Like a stroll through the garden, even war and plague are nothing in the eternal perspective.

We are not meant for this world. But we are not prepared for the eternal either. We struggle awkwardly to have a glimpse at the eternal. The gap between eternal priorities and what we have here on earth is so vast that it seems impossible to apply. How do we apply eternal priorities to everyday practical priorities? Aren’t they insignificant compared to the eternal? In a sense, yes. But our day-to-day can contribute minutely to the eternal and have lasting compound effects.

We should remember the new covenant in contrast with the old. We have been saved eternally and made anew to obey the command of God in each situation rather than through legalistic laws. The knowledge of God is readily accessible to us through the Holy Spirit insofar as spiritual purity and morality, but we also have intellectual confidence that the experience of the Holy Spirit is more real than anything here on earth.

Freedom is often the central topic for existentialist thinkers. Radical freedom is a trait specific to humans and the experience of being a human. Freedom leads to uncertainty, anxiety, and all sorts of life’s complexities. We may choose to ignore our radical freedom, but this too has consequences. Ignoring our freedom is also a choice. Perhaps not as deliberate, but this can be all the more toxic. Kierkegaard diagnoses this neglect of our own freedom as the chief source of existential anxiety. It is interesting that secular thinkers also neglect freedom as the ultimate sin.

For the Christian, the freedom we have is a gift from God. Perhaps it is our ultimate gift. We have to nurture it and exercise our freedom wisely. We must use it to grow and make choices that align with God. This is our true purpose and the reason why we are on this earth at all; truly, all of our choices need to be deliberate and informed by our commitment to Christ. Through prayer and meditation, we can slow down and be more aware of our choices. We cannot let the world distract us and usurp this power of choice. We cannot use our freedom for ourselves and dig our empty cisterns. We need the spring of living water and set God at our core. An unconditional commitment to God is the only way to be truly free.

By taking on a conditional commitment, one becomes what Kierkegaard calls, “a knight of infinite resignation.” The knight of infinite resignation deliberately makes the choice to resign everything in life to focus on one source of value. Infinite resignation is a movement whereby one gives up what is most precious to them, and, in relinquishing the finite, gaining an “eternal consciousness” so that only love for God remains. The idea is to resign ourselves to God. With pure faith, we can go beyond the ethical realm and the norms of our community or self-authorized morality. We are weak thinkers; we need God’s infinite wisdom for our partial wisdom to be perfected in us. We must take every step with reference to Christ. We must give up everything—approval of others, value from others, or any animalistic, selfish desire—and instead, we must make reference to the only purpose.

We recommit ourselves every day, moment, and second. We can forget momentarily but all of our meaning must return to God. All decisions, every step, and every thought. All we can do is have faith in his grace. Life becomes simple. The busyness of life and the many distractions become noise. The correct perspective aligns all your decisions to a singular point, and all else is resigned. In other words, we give our all to the lord; we lift it all up to him and faithfully resign our will to his.

That is why the real problem of the Christian life comes where people do not usually look for it. It comes the very moment you wake up each morning. All your wishes and hopes for the day rush at you like wild animals. And the first job each morning consists simply in shoving them all back; in listening to that other voice, taking that other point of view, letting that other larger, stronger, quieter life come flowing in. And so on, all day. Standing back from all your natural fussings and frettings; coming in out of the wind.

  • C.S. Lewis (Mere Christianity)