"For if indeed existence precedes essence, one will never be able to explain one's action by reference to a given and specific human nature; in other words, there is no determinism - man is free, man is freedom". Sartre, 1946
This chapter will examine Sartre's existential stance of authenticity and will relate the implication of his theory to the notion of the denial of ageing, in terms of the dominant societal myths about old age and the subsequent desire to appear youthful.
Jean Paul Sartre (1905-1980)
Sartre’s clarifies his statement ‘existence precedes essence’ (1948) and states, to use Heidgegger’s terminology, that we are ‘thrown into the world’ (1927) and are undefined. We become what we make of ourselves. ‘Man is nothing else but that which he makes of himself. That is the first principle of existentialism.’ (1948, p.28). He argues that as humans we are different from objects whose essence precedes existence. He uses the example of a paper knife which has been created with a purpose and therefore, with an unalterable essence. As an atheist, Sartre did not believe in any f...
The term existentialist, according to Sartre, means existence precedes essence. This means that an individual first exists, and then they exercise free will over themselves to do things that define themselves, thus their essence. For this ideology to work for Sartre, an atheistic stance needs to be taken. This is so because of how he defines God. God is compared to an artisan producing a knife, through a definition and a formula. Thus, “when God creates he knows precisely what he is creating.” Under this identification of God, that Sartre dictates is a common implication in philosophical writings, God creates with intent and seemingly, purpose. Hence, God
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
At the end of Being and Nothingness,Jean-Paul Sartre concedes that he has not overcome one of the key objections to existentialism viz., an outline of ethics, and states that he will do so later. Although Sartre attempted the project of an existential ethics, it was never quite completed. Enter Simone De Beauvoir. In this book, De Beauvoir picks up where Sartre has left us, refusing to answer the question of ethics. For De Beauvoir, human nature involves and ontological ambiguity whose finitude is bound in a duality. This duality of body and consciousness is the ambiguity which remakes nature the way we want it to be as a facticity of transcendence. It is within this understanding that the project of ethics must begin in ambiguity. However,
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.
“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
...ar idea with Stephen; they both wanted to do anything and create their own human nature, and our value of freedom through those free choices. Generally, Sartre suggested that men have freedom to construct their nature and essence through their actions.
In order to explicate Sartre’s notion of intersubjectivity I will follow the progression that Sartre takes in Being and Nothingness. I will first distinguish between “being-for-itself” and “being-for-others”. Second, I will provide an explication of the subject’s encounter with the Other as an object. Third, I will explain the significance of “the look”. Here I will show how the look provides the foundation for the self. I will also show how the look of the Other affects the subject’s freedom.
At the time of his death on the fifteenth of April, 1980, at the age of seventy-four, Jean-Paul Sartre’s greatest literary and philosophical works were twenty-five years in the past. Although the small man existed in the popular mind as the politically inconsistent champion of unpopular causes and had spent the last seven years of his life in relative stagnation, his influence was still great enough to draw a crowd of over fifty thousand people – admirers or otherwise – for his funeral procession. Sartre was eminently quotable, a favorite in the press, because his statements were always controversial. He was the leader of the shortly popular Existential movement in philosophy which turned quickly into a fad for the disillusioned post-World War I generation, so even when the ideas criticized were not the ideas of Sartre’s Existentialism, he still came to the public mind. Sartre was alternately celebrated and vilified, depending on which side of the issue the speaker or writer was on, and whether or not Sartre had early espoused – and possibly later turned against – the ideals in question. Despite Sartre’s many political and philosophical about-faces, fellow Marxist political philosopher Herbert Marcuse said of him, “He may not want to be the world’s conscience, but he is.” [Hayman, 458]
The key belief of existentialists is that existence precedes essence. In order to understand that claim we must first understand what Jean- Paul Sartre means by the term “essence.” He gives an example of a person forging a paper-cutter. When an individual sets out to make any object, he/she has a purpose for it in mind and an idea of what the object will look like before beginning the actual production of it, so this object has an essence, or purpose, before it ever has an existence. The individual, as its creator, has given the paper-cutter its essence. Using the paper cutter example, Sartre argues that human beings cannot have an essence (or purpose) before their “production,” becaus...
(5) Jean-Paul Sartre, Being and Nothingness translated by Hazel Barnes(New York: Washington Square Press, 1956), pp 432-434.
...vious objections. In this paper argued 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 did this first by explaining Jean-Paul Sartre’s quote, then by thoroughly stating Sartre’s theory, and then by opposing objections raised against Sartre’s theory.
Through Jean-Paul Sartre’s plays, “No Exit”, “The Flies”, and “The Respectful Prostitute” I have come to the conclusion that Existentialism focuses mainly on a single person taking liability for their own actions, and those actions should be without the influence of society. This includes the idea that Sartre makes present in these plays; there are no easy answers, people must live by their own standards without searching for validation. While this idea seems rational in theory, I think the way Sartre presents it dismisses other people’s views and judges believers for them.
Integrity is an idea that has been discussed by individuals with a verbal acuity far beyond anything I could ever hope for. With that in mind, I will not delve deeply or poetically into what integrity is or should mean. However, I will simplify the meaning of integrity; at the core, integrity boils down to doing what is right even if nobody is watching. See a piece of trash on the ground and nobody is around...pick it up. Driving down the road with no cops in sight...drive the speed limit. Arrive at a tollbooth and no attendant is working…pay the toll. An applicant is not readily available to sign a form for enlistment…track them down and ensure they sign it. I could write examples until infinity becomes paltry in comparison, yet I am sure I have made my point clearly; the greater good must be upheld regardless of who is there to ensure it is happening. It seems obvious that integrity should be a trait every individual is hardwired with from birth. However, integrity is a thankless trait; nobody is around after all. An individual cannot expect someone to clap, to smile, to thank them, to do anything actually. By definition, integrity should be something that is followed through with simply because an individual wishes to do what is correct, not because they expect accolades of any sort.
To prosper as individuals, it is essential to control a sense of honesty, in simple hopes of maintaining humane, respectable standards and boundaries. This honesty, however, is often asked of extension, now presumed to mature into a component well known as integrity. Learning, consequently, is inhabited through these expectations of strict dedication and independence. And although learning is accomplished abundantly, there is only a certain extent of upholding this righteous behavior. Though teachers, bosses, parents, or companions may be satisfied with the efforts of their lesser, they fail to realize that the request of integrity has not been fulfilled. Integrity, being the unflawed ability to completely dedicate one’s personally believed morals is a specific, well-rounded trait, difficult to be entirely possessed by a faulty being.
Existentialism is a 20th century philosophical belief that emphasizes individual existence, freedom and choice. It was first brought to public attention, through Jean Paul Sartre’s book L’existentalisme est un humanisme in the mid 1940’s. The philosophy allows humans to define what the true meaning of life is, to make their own rational decisions despite living in an irrational world. It deals with the absurdity of life and emphasizes action, freedom and decision as a fundamental. And the only way to rise above the essentially absurd condition of humanity (which is typically categorized as suffering and death) is by exercising personal freedom and choice. The philosophy of Existentialism and the Absurd is presented through the literary works