What is the meaning of life? What is hell? No Exit by Jean-Paul Sartre is a compelling play that reveals what inhibits behind the doors of hell through three characters, Garcin, Inez, and Estelle. It was performed in Vieux-Colombier three months before the city's liberation from the Nazi occupation, May 1944. Written by an influential French philosopher, playwright, novelist, political activist, biographer, and literary critic of the 20th century, Sartre lived from June 21, 1905, to – April 15, 1980. As a co-founder of the Existential movement, Sartre put exemplifications of his philosophy shown through each of the characters in their circumstances. Out of all the kind of styles of room available, such as Chinamen and Indian, this story takes
Sartre wrote "Anti-Semite and Jew" in France in 1948, before the establishment of Israel. This book is interesting because he spoke with a nationalistic point of view, which means that some of his conclusions don't really apply to America yet still makes meaningful points that we can understand. Also, because he wrote in 1948, the issues of anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism disguised as attacks on Israel had not become in vogue yet. In that sense, his work is somewhat dated but many of his findings carry through into today which is quite important in a scholarly book.
In his lecture, Existentialism is a Humanism, Jean-Paul Sartre discusses common misconceptions people, specifically Communists and Christians, have about existentialism and extentanitalists (18). He wants to explain why these misconceptions are wrong and defend existentialism for what he believes it is. Sartre argues people are free to create themselves through their decisions and actions. This idea is illustrated in the movie 13 Going on Thirty, where one characters’ decision at her thirteenth birthday party and her actions afterwards make her become awful person by the time she turns thirty. She was free to make these decisions but she was also alone. Often the idea of having complete free will at first sounds refreshing, but when people
Addressing the critics of Existentialism was a necessity for both Sartre and de Beauvoir, as it was initially dismissed by many critics, such as the Communists and the Christians, as nihilistic or overly pessimistic. While understandable at a superficial level, Sartre and de Beauvoir challenged these critics to rethink their idea of existentialism and foster a deeper meaning of the philosophy of existentialism.
What the previous statement means, is that a reader can take that quote two different ways. One is that since each character needs one another,it would be MAN vs. MAN, but in reality a person does not need one other person making it all in their heads giving the reader the MAN vs SELF. In the play, Inez realizes what is happening when she says “Ah, that’s the way it works, is it? Torture by separation” (Sartre 8). Inez in that quote is realizing that she is not in literal hell but she is in a variation of hell and the “torturing” that happens from the “devil”. When someone thinks in their head that they need another person that can put them in hell, as stated here by Méra, “Which means that if my relations are bad, I am situating myself in a total dependence on someone else. And then I am indeed in hell” (Méra 14). Whitaker expresses in this quote, “Estelle, a narcissist who complaining that she has no sense of existing unless provided with some visible self-reflection, depends on the mirroring gaze of others to make her seem a valued object”, that in her mind she needs to see herself to believe that she has a sense of existing (Whitaker 170). Why does a person need to see him/herself to believe that s/he has a sense of existing in life? Sartre makes the three characters live their life in hell with what happened in their past as said in this quote by Barnes, “What I am is what I have done at
We choose, act, and take responsibility for everything, and thus we live, and exist. Life cannot be anything until it is lived, but each individual must make sense of it. The value of life is nothing else but the sense each person fashions into it. To argue that we are the victims of fate, of mysterious forces within us, of some grand passion, or heredity, is to be guilty of bad faith. Sartre says that we can overcome the adversity presented by our facticity, a term he designs to represent the external factors that we have no control over, such as the details of our birth, our race, and so on, by inserting nothingness into it.
the play may be pass to modern society, that one may not learn, or even
I am a firm believer that as a child, there are stages you go through to become the person you are today. Many theorists have developed their own propositions as to how we are who we are and why. Jean Piaget, a swiss psychologist, was one of the few who believed that all individuals progress through a set of fixed stages of cognitive development. Cognitive development is the building of thought processing or in simpler words known as remembering, problem solving, and decision making. He believed that you not only increase knowledge in every stage, but that your ability to understand increases as well. Piaget focused his research mostly on the change in cognition from childhood to adulthood using the stages Sensorimotor, Preoperational, Concrete
“It is better to encounter your existence in disgust, then never to encounter it at all.” What Sartre is saying is that it is better to determine who you are in dissatisfaction, rather than never truly discovering yourself. Sartre’s worst fear in life would be to realize that you have never truly lived. For example, if you were to land a career that you were not interested in and you were just going through the motions of everyday life, Sartre would say that life was not a life worth living. Sartre’s goal in life was to reach the ultimate level; he said life was “Nausea” , because we are always trying to reach the next level, we are always in motion. Sartre had two theories that determine our way of life, Being-In-Itself and Being-For-Itself. Being-In-Itself is the ultimate level, if you reach this level you have fulfilled yourself completely, you have lived your life to the fullest. Being-For-Itself is where we as human beings are, we are always trying to work to become perfect. Our goal in life is to find an authentic existence, and we get there by saying no. Sartre’s philosophy of freedom is obtained by saying no, when we say no we are giving ourselves the option of what we do in our life. By saying no, we receive freedom of our life. “You should say no about every belief if there is a doubt about it.” Sartre also says our human existence is always in
Three people, trapped in a lavish room, and stuck together for all of eternity. The only communication any of them can have is with the other members in this room. Not bad, right? Wrong. These three people exemplify one another’s imperfections and create a high level of torment with one another. Welcome to hell. Literally, this is the view of hell according to Jean-Paul Sartre in his play, “No Exit.” The characters are unknowingly alone, in terms of finding betterment within inner selves. The only thing the other people in the room create is anguish for one another. The epitome is although these characters are truly not alone, each is lonely and the hell in this is a timeless never ending torture in one another dragging each of themselves into furthered grief and despair. What is hell then? Simply, it is our current living. Sartre is clear in saying “hell is other people” (Sartre 45). The repulsiveness of human nature makes us all infinitely empty and it is something that is inescapable. Depression and loneliness are simple byproducts of acceptance of the ugliness of our world at least according to Sartre. Even if the concept of “hell is other people” is refuted, it does not place one’s own inner nature. Regardless, “No Exit” holds a message of being forever alone at least to achieve a state of happiness. Therefore, loneliness must be examined in three scopes sadness, love, and communication as to understand the purpose of this life, which John G. Mcgraw addresses in his article, “God and the Problem of Loneliness.”
“No Exit,” by Jean-Paul Sartre, is a play that illustrates three people’s transitions from wanting to be alone in Hell to needing the omnipresent “other” constantly by their sides. As the story progresses, the characters’ identities become more and more permanent and unchangeable. Soon Inez, Garcin, and Estelle live in the hope that they will obtain the other’s acceptance. These three characters cannot accept their existentialist condition: they are alone in their emotions, thoughts and fears. Consequently, they look to other people to give their past lives and present deaths meaning. Forever trapped in Hell, they are condemned to seek the other for meaning in their lives; even when given the chance to exit the room, the characters choose to stay with each other instead of facing uncertainty and the possibility of being detached from the stability of their relationships with the others. Without other people, the characters would have no reason to exist. Each characters’ significance depends on the other’s opinion of them; Garcin needs someone to deny his cowardliness, Inez yearns for Estelle’s love, and Estelle just wants passion with no commitment. This triangle of unending want, anguish and continual disillusionment because of the other is precisely Sartre’s definition of pure Hell.
“We are left alone, without excuse. This is what I mean when I say that man is condemned to be free” (Sartre 32). Radical freedom and responsibility is the central notion of Jean-Paul Sartre’s philosophy. However, Sartre himself raises objections about his philosophy, but he overcomes these obvious objections. In this paper I will argue that man creates their own essence through their choices and that our values and choices are important because they allow man to be free and create their own existence. I will first do this by explaining Jean-Paul Sartre’s quote, then by thoroughly stating Sartre’s theory, and then by opposing objections raised against Sartre’s theory.
...e’s theory relies upon his belief that because there is no creator, human beings have no essence, and so they are “left alone, without excuse” and “born without reason.” He says that people realize this “the moment you lose the illusion of being eternal.” Similarly, White too admits to Black that he has always hated life and that when he realized that religion was just a “guise,” his hatred turned into boredom (138). White’s skepticism about life and God echoes throughout the play and through the suicidal choice that White makes even before the dialogue begins. Comparably, Father Vincent Minceli voices similar concerns about Sartre, concluding that Sartre’s philosophy leads directly to despair and suicide. McCarthy’s comparison of White and Sartre is remarkable, as both are not only atheists, but also convey life’s useless nature through using synonymous phrases.
John Paul Sartre is known as one of the most influential philosophers of the twentieth century. He wrote many philosophical works novels and plays. Much of his work is tied into politics. The essay Existentialism is a Humanism is just one of his many works. Existentialism is a Humanism is a political essay that was written in 1945. Its purpose was to address a small public during World War II in Nazi occupied France. This essay stressed the public not to conform. Sartre introduced a great number of philosophical concepts in Existentialism. Two of these concepts are anguish and forlornness. They are simply defined, as anguish is feeling responsible for yourself as well as others and knowing that your actions affect others and forlornness is realizing that you are alone in your decisions. These two concepts are interwoven throughout the essay and throughout many of Sartre's other works. Sartre's view of anguish and forlornness in Existentialism is a Humanism addresses his view of life and man.
Existentialism is a term that was coined specifically by Jean-Paul Sartre in regards to his own life. Sartre had adopted the Atheistic approach to life and its meaning, and while he was not the first or only one to do so, was the first and only one to come up with a way to describe it. Under Existentialism, man lives without higher power or guidance and must rely solely on himself and what he is aiming to do in order to lead a fulfilling life. This can be anything. Critics of Sartre propose that, because such a vast array of options exists within the meaningfulness of life, this philosophy is obsolete and trivial in nature. This is not true, as it is seen in everyday examples – celebrities, namely – that a thirst
If you have ever heard the phrase, “I think; therefore I am.” Then you might not know who said that famous quote. The author behind those famous words is none other than Rene Descartes. He was a 17th century philosopher, mathematician, and writer. As a mathematician, he is credited with being the creator of techniques for algebraic geometry. As a philosopher, he created views of the world that is still seen as fact today. Such as how the world is made of matter and some fundamental properties for matter. Descartes is also a co-creator of the law of refraction, which is used for rainbows. In his day, Descartes was an innovative mathematician who developed many theories and properties for math and science. He was a writer who had many works that explained his ideas. His most famous work was Meditations on First Philosophy. This book was mostly about his ideas about science, but he had books about mathematics too. Descartes’ Dream: The World According to Mathematics is a collection of essays talking about his views of algebra and geometry.