Existentialism 2e Book

As someone interested in understanding Existentialism, three obstacles stood in the way. First, the fact that rather than a cohesive movement, I found that "Existentialism" was more of an umbrella term that grouped certain writers based on vague similarity. These writers did not have the same style or agenda and often fiercely disagreed. In fact, many even feuded and renounced their association with each other. Secondly, the primary texts of Existentialism are notoriously difficult. Specifically, Being and Time and Being and Nothingness. I wanted to know more about Existentialism, but maybe not that intensely. At least not yet. Thirdly, it was difficult to understand the Existentialists in the traditional philosophical terms: epistemology, metaphysics, and ethics. The best I could say is that the epistemology and metaphysics are melted together and ethics are nonexistent. So for these reasons, an honest summary was difficult to find. Luckily for me, I came across this book and I think the author, David Cooper, solved my problems.
First, Cooper decides who is in the Existentialist club. Kierkegaard, Nietzsche and Husserl are precursors, not members. Camus and novelists are out. The two major members are Sartre and Heidegger and the minor members are de Beauvoir, Merleau-Ponty, Marcel, Jaspers, Buber, Gasset, and Ortega. Then he separates Existentialist thought into discrete parts and presents them one topic per chapter. Alienation, phenomenology, ontology, anti-dualism, self-identity, Angst, Absurdity and ethics are all covered in that order. The order is important because each chapter builds on the one previous and thus, builds Existential philosophy from the ground up. As I complained before, Existentialism is an interconnected philosophy and, just like tinkering with a radio, taking something apart and putting it back together is a fine way to learn. These discrete chapters are only possible because Cooper does an excellent job deciphering and synthesizing the congruent ideas among the many philosophers. I figured before that the Existentialists must be grouped together for some reason, but it was not obvious to me from cursory reading. Despite their individual styles and interests, Cooper is able to extract the common themes of these writers and translate them into understandable points. Cooper also clarifies this philosophy by creating the Existentialist. This is a hypothetical philosopher that embodies the best and most comprehensible form of Existentialism. When two writers make the same argument, Cooper chooses the clearest one for the Existentialist. When two writers seem to disagree, Cooper reconforms them to show their actual agreement and attributes the new formation to the Existentialist. When one philosopher is lacking in an area of analysis, Cooper will fill that gap with a philosopher who addresses it. Thus, you have the clearest and best ideas of Existentialism put into the head of the Existentialist. Cooper will also put the Existentialist to use by inferring what the Existentialist would think about things that are vague or unaddressed by the real Existentialists. Lastly, throughout the book he makes sure to dispel the many myths and stereotypes of Existentialism.
I should note that because I have not read the primary Existentialist writings, I can't really claim that Cooper accurately describes Existential philosophy. I am sure that other philosophers would disagree with some of his interpretations. However, I can say that the arguments are convincing and the entire scheme of the book is coherent. So in Coopers attempt to teach Existentialism through synthesis and clarification, he might actually be contributing to Existential philosophy as well.
In short, Cooper is successful in this introduction to Existentialism for two reasons. First, he reveals the ideas of Existentialism by dissecting them out of the complicated writings and displaying them in the light of clear language. Second, he takes the ideas he extracted and shows how they combine together.