Jacob Dean - PHIL 1030-010
Existentialism can be characterized by a number of introspective and philosophical thoughts, all of which pertain to some big question that linger in everyone's minds:
What does it mean to be human? What defines human existence?
Concepts of human existence (the differences between human existence and everything else in the natural world), freedom (free-will; determinism; autonomy), emotions and anxiety about our own being (our existence "standing on its own..."; living with ourselves) - all pertain to the one greater school of thought that has come to be known as existentialism. Overall, it deals with a vast realm of thinking with the goal of forming a definition for human existence and being - a goal that while optimistic, could also be seen as constant pursuit with no clear ending in sight (which isn't necessarily a bad thing!)
One of the most prolific and influential existentialists in history - who, curiously enough, likely rejected the label - was known as Jean-Paul Sartre. His thought-provoking writings sought to find the answers to some of the questions present about human existence, being, and our endless struggles to define such things. His writings on existentialism are believed to be some of the most profound - his particular iteration of existentialism, derived from and inspired by previous sources (Edmund Husserl's concepts of a free consciousness; Martin Heidegger's own version of existentialism), came to be widely known, and is still read and enjoyed by avid purveyors of philosophy today.
Sartre was born in Paris in 1905 and died in April of 1980. At a young age, Sartre fell under troubled times, his father passing when he was only a young child, leading him to live with his maternal grandfather, Carl Schweitzer, who was a German Professor at the Sorbonne.
Sartre attended the Lycée
Henri IV in Paris and soon after his mother remarried, he attended the lycée (high school) in La Rochelle. Following his time at these institutions, Sartre went on to the famed École Normale Supérieure, which he graduated from in 1929. From there, Sartre began work as a teacher at the lycées of Le Havre, Laon, and in Paris, spanning from 1931 to 1945. In the year 1939, however, Sartre was drafted and set to fight in World War II - there, he was held as a prisoner for a year, and was released in 1940.
During these times, Jean-Paul Sartre's writings were plentiful: his early works included several psychological studies L’Imagination (1936), Esquisse d’une théorie des
émotions (Outline of a
Theory of the Emotions), 1939, L’Imaginaire: psychologie
phénoménologique de l’imagination (The Psychology of Imagination). These writings were characterized by phenomenological analysis - derived from that of Edmund Husserl's method, they sought to place emphasis on taking things as they are instead of deducing them. While these works did outline some of Sartre's early beliefs, none of them really thrust him into the spotlight quite like his 1938 work La Nausée (Nausea) and 1943 novel Being and Nothingness.
Nausea set the groundwork for Sartre's later existential beliefs - in this novel, Sartre outlined his personal concepts of the human consciousness, told in a diary format, from the point-of-view of an individual who is confronted with the world of matter around him and the matter present in his own body. Upon having this realization, he is taken aback. Thus, Sartre laid the foundation for his later works and the concepts that he would have contained within them.
Sartre's later work - namely, Being and Nothingness - established his beliefs regarding human consciousness (or nothingness) and the divide that was placed between it and Being (or thingness). Sartre believed that consciousness was not a "thing" - it is not defined by the brain, soul, heart, etc. As a result, consciousness is not-matter, and remains untouched by determinism (more on that soon).
Because of this division between the nothingness and Being, we are set into a position where our consciousness cannot be attached to any strict one thing, or any one definition (as was previously mentioned with its non-connections to the brain, heart, or soul). But what, then, defines the human existence? To Sartre, it was the belief that we - our actions, the choices that we make with our freedom and this disassociation between our consciousness and our Being - are what define our existences.
These ideas also play into Sartre's concepts of freedom, free-will, and autonomy. Because the brain is immaterial and is not-matter, it remains untouched by determinism and thus proves that we are unattached to any Creator or higher power that may have our paths defined for us. As a result of this autonomy, however, we are solely responsible for our own actions, as our unlimited freedom is not without entire self-responsibility, a concept that Sartre stressed. This unlimited freedom is not characterized by our ability to act freely to begin with, but by the fact that we can perform these actions spontaneously as they relate to our consciousness - this idea that freedom is defined by having to make choices, and not being unable to avoid such a task.
We are utterly responsible for the choices that we make; us, and us alone, define what our human existence is by making the choices that we make throughout our lives.
Below: Jean-Paul Sartre and Existential Choice
Discussion Questions:
1. What would you say defines human existence? Could any one thing define what it means to be human?
2. Is it comforting to think of ourselves as completely and utterly alone in our decisions? Do you sometimes feel like there is an outside force compelling you - spiritual or otherwise - to make a decision one way or the other?
3. Quote: "Freedom is what you do with whats been done to you..."
Sources:
Further/additional readings:
I commented on the following posts:
Kayla Schindler's "A Life on the Eight-Bit Farm"
https://cophilosophy.blogspot.com/2019/04/a-life-on-eight-bit-farm.html?showComment=1556338734446#c1387538225720607837
https://cophilosophy.blogspot.com/2019/04/philosophy-behind-why-i-and-many-others.html?showComment=1556339044220#c3422853782844668192
"goal of forming a definition for human existence" - there's a problem for Existentialists who pursue this goal, since their view is that humanity in its subjective freedom CANNOT be precisely and fixedly defined in the way mere objects can be. Definitions, after all, are generally understood as specifying the ESSENTIAL attributes that make an object the object it is. So, paradoxically, we're "defined" as the indefinable species whose fundamental attributes are possessed as a matter of freedom rather than necessity, of existence and not prior essence. It's tricky.
ReplyDelete