Sounding back at Existentialism

A good friend of mine wrote this response recently to a post from about a week ago (The Existentialist Sceams, Nothing Is Heard). I was afraid no one would get a chance to see it, what with my massive daily blogs that quickly bury the old blogs. The most recent blog (at the top of the page), is therefore sitting on what we might call Reverse Quicksand. Anywho, his response and ideas on logocentrism (some say it was the catalyst for the decline of the West, more on that later) and love are especially valuable. Thanks for the thoughtful response.
And here it is:

Existentialism kind of seems to me (from your post) just the questioning of existence itself. Kind of from your quotes of Kirkegaard and others, it seems that he was trying to explain reality around himself, and basically, was very confused by it.

Nietzsche, while brilliant, from what i have heard, he was a very isolated and depressed man. I think that anytime you are isolated and alone, without real relationships and close human contact, it will be very instrumental on the ideas you make about the world. What i'm trying to say is that Nietzsche's own life and feelings, effects everything he writes about and makes assumptions, opinions, and ideas about.

When you are isolated and alone, and live a hermit type life like Nietzsche did, your philosophy on life is going to spawn from your own outlook on it. And while brillaint, I think that clearly comes out in his view of women, sexuality, and relationships. In the end, Nietzsche drove himself mad with ideas, without any close physcial human contact and love.

As far as existentialism, perception is everything. The way we look at the world affects everything. The way we interpret situations, and the way we relate to others. So WHO WE ARE determines what we see. That is critical.

It's the classic tale of the optimist and the pessimist. The two may have the exact same situation or problem occur, but they look at it and approach the problem entirely differently. The glass is half empty vs. the glass is half full. Everyone interprets things differently.The question is, as an existentialist, how do we know how to interpret things correctly.

Who we are (are being) is far more important than our doing, or even or knowing. The bible teaches about love. That love is the most important thing in the world. That we can have faith that moves mountains, can speak in tongues, can prophisize, can have all the money in the world, but without love it means nothing (paraphrased from 1 Corinthians 13). Love conquers all.

And love, Michael, I would argue, is the central ingredient in our outlook on life, and on existence itself. Love determines how we look at situations, how we react to people, how we look at life, and thus how we live life.

And I believe, that God's love for us and our love for others is intertwined. God sent Jesus' down to die for our sins, to FREE us from the bondage of sin. Check out Galatians 5 in the New Testament if you have a chance. It is probably my favorite section of the Bible, and addresses this well. "It is for freedom that Christ has set us free [from sin]... but do not use your freedom to indulge in the sinful nature. but rather serve one another in love.. The entire law [of the old and new testament] is summed up in a single command: "Love your neighbor as yourself."