The lecture “The
Existentialism is a humanism “of Sartre is one of the best-selling French
philosophy books
Pronounced at the Sorbonne
(well known university in Paris) in 1946, two years after Being and Nothingness
(his theory of ontology theory) being published, the lecture aims to remove
misunderstandings and criticisms directed to this book, especially marxists and
catholics ones.
The thesis of the conference
is : my philosophy is a humanist philosophy, which places human freedom above
all. In summary: “existence precedes essence.”
Critics
of Sartrean existentialism:
Marxist
criticism:
For Marxists, existentialism
is a philosophy of failure, inactive. A bourgeois and contemplative philosophy.
But also a individualistic philosophy. But according to Sartre, his philosophy
is based on action.
On the individualistic
criticism, Sartre has difficulty to argue. He will do that later in the
Critique of the Dialectical Reason, where he attempts to reconcile the
collective logic and the individual approach (concept of praxis).
Catholic
critics on the existentialism
If Sartre undertakes the atheism of his thought, he
does not concede that his philosophy is nihilistic (no values). According to
him, man is the creator of his own values (as opposed to the spirit of
seriousness).
For Sartre, the idea of a
Christian existentialism (Jaspers, Kierkegaard, Pascal) is inconsistent: if God
exists, then the existence of man is no longer contingent : the essence
precedes existence, which is incompatible with human freedom.
Sartre
and the existence:
Ek-sistere, for Sartre, means
to project oneself outside. Man exists in that he is nothing definite, he
becomes what he has decided to be. The notion of human nature is absurd, since
it gives the man an essence which man can not tear himself away (only the
objects have a nature, a specific function)
Sartre
and Freedom:
“Man is condemned to be free”
This sentence is ethical and
metaphysical at the same time : If human freedom is absolute, the subject is
still involved in a situation (= facticity of being so). But it is man who
gives meaning to the situation. Thus a situation is intolerable in itself,
because it becomes a project of revolt gave him that. “We have never been more
free than under the Occupation.” A tragic situation makes it more urgent action.
The world is never the mirror of my freedom.
Freedom is seen as a power of
annihilation, as exceeding the given (man is a “for-itself”).
“Being free to be condemned,
it means you can not find my limits freedom of others than herself.” Not
choosing is a choice (choosing not to choose). The only limit to my freedom is
my death, which transformed my life in essence, be in destiny.
Man lives yet poorly this
situation of total freedom. He invents subterfuges, including bad faith to
escape his freedom. Bad faith is to pretend that one is not free, it is
something to dream. Consciousness, Sartre tells us, always trying to coincide
with itself, to be completed, to be “in-itself”
Man makes his facticity excuse
to get in-itself. Sartre distinguishes 6 types of facticity:
– Being born in a society and
a given time
– Having a body
– Having a past
– The fact of existing in a
world that existed before
– Does exist among other men
(question of intersubjectivity)
– The fact of death (finitude)
For Sartre, we must assume our
contingency.
Sartre
and intersubjectivity:
The ratio of consciousness in
Sartre is in the mode of conflict, as a relation of recognition: each requires
the other consciousness to be recognized as conscientious, as free. Now, if I
recognize free as free, I’m doing it my master. Others becomes another person
when his will, his liberty is opposed to mine (others, “it me who is not me”)
Analysis of the light is
illuminating: the gaze of others I found its existence. “People see me so I can
see.” The For-itself is also a For-hire.
But when I look at the others
in its being fixed, I do my thing looked, so I will be exalted. Conversely, if
others look at me, I’m choséifié. I am what others see me.
If the text of Existentialism
is a humanism is far from being as specific as the thought of Sartre, it at
least has the merit of making his ideas more accessible. It gives an overview
of its main concepts (awareness, others, freedom, responsibility, …) and thus
remain to be read, again and again.
No comments:
Post a Comment