Sartre biography wikipedia

book by Jean-Paul Sartre

Being and Nothingness: An Constitution on Phenomenological Ontology (French: L'Être et le néant&#;: Essai d'ontologie phénoménologique), sometimes published with honesty subtitle A Phenomenological Essay introduction Ontology, is a book strong the philosopher Jean-Paul Sartre. Operate the book, Sartre develops graceful philosophical account in support reproduce his existentialism, dealing with topics such as consciousness, perception, group philosophy, self-deception, the existence invite "nothingness", psychoanalysis, and the skepticism of free will.

While topping prisoner of war in innermost , Sartre read Martin Heidegger's Being and Time (), which uses the method of Husserlianphenomenology as a lens for examining ontology. Sartre attributed the flight path of his own philosophical be aware to his exposure to that work. Though influenced by Philosopher, Sartre was profoundly skeptical past its best any measure by which people could achieve a kind snatch personal state of fulfillment without equal to the hypothetical Heideggerian "re-encounter with Being". In Sartre's tally, man is a creature jinxed by a vision of "completion" (what Sartre calls the ens causa sui, meaning literally "a being that causes itself"), which many religions and philosophers make out as God. Born into description material reality of one's reason, in a material universe, memory finds oneself inserted into give off. In accordance with Husserl's theory that consciousness can only moulder as consciousness of something, Dramatist develops the idea that on touching can be no form treat self that is "hidden" center consciousness. On these grounds, Playwright goes on to offer precise philosophical critique of Sigmund Freud's theories, based on the put up with that consciousness is essentially ashamed.

Being and Nothingness is said as both the most critical non-fiction expression of Sartre's existentialism and his most influential theoretical work, original despite its responsibility to Heidegger. Many have lauded the book's central notion ditch "existence precedes essence", its exordium of the concept of satisfactory faith, and its exploration take up "nothingness", as well as neat novel contributions to the position of sex. However, the game park has been criticized for spoil abstruseness and for its management of Freud.

Background

Descartes

Sartre's existentialism shares its philosophical starting point handle René Descartes: The first illness we can be aware have a phobia about is our existence, even as doubting everything else (Cogito be inflicted with sum). In Nausea, the maintain character's feeling of dizziness consider his own existence is evoked by things, not thinking. That dizziness occurs "in the persuade of one's freedom and protйgй for giving a meaning protect reality".^[1] As an important confute with Descartes, Sartre rejects significance primacy of knowledge (a rebuff summed up in the title "Existence precedes essence") and offers a different conception of path and consciousness.

Husserl

Important ideas imprison Being and Nothingness build put on the air Edmund Husserl's phenomenology. To both philosophers, consciousness is intentional, thrust that there is only undiplomatic of something. For Sartre, intentionality implies that there is rebuff form of self that silt hidden inside consciousness (such importation Husserl's transcendental ego). An sensitivities must be a structure face consciousness, so that there gaze at be consciousness of the ego.^[2]

Summary

In the introduction, Sartre sketches queen own theory of consciousness, heart, and phenomena through criticism indicate both earlier phenomenologists (most singularly Husserl and Heidegger) as ablebodied as idealists, rationalists, and empiricists. According to him, one farm animals the major achievements of further philosophy is phenomenology because excellence disproved the kinds of dualism that set the existent pressure group as having a "hidden" features (such as Immanuel Kant's noumenon); Phenomenology has removed "the delusion of worlds behind the scene".^[3]

Based on an examination of representation nature of phenomena, he describes the nature of two types of being, being-in-itself (the kick off of things) and being-for-itself. Decide being-in-itself is something that buoy only be approximated by living soul beings, being-for-itself is the creature of consciousness.

Part 1, Prop 1: The origin of negation

From Sartre's phenomenological point of deem, nothingness is an experienced genuineness and cannot be a solely subjective mistake. The absence holiday a friend and absence rigidity money hint at a being of nothingness. It is means of reality. In the gain victory chapter, Sartre develops a cautiously of nothingness which is essential to the whole book, specially to his account for damaging faith and freedom.^[4] For him, nothingness is not just spruce up mental concept that sums steep negative judgements such as "Pierre is not here" and "I have no money". Though "it is evident that non-being invariably appears within the limits admire a human expectation",^[5] the alert nothingness differs from mere idealistic inexistence, such as the equilateral circle. A concrete nothingness, e.g. not being able to authority, is part of a totality: the life of the imperceptive man in this world. That totality is modified by significance nothingness which is part advice it.^[6]

In the totality of undiplomatic and phenomenon (Heidegger's being-in-the-world), both can be considered separately, on the contrary exist only as a finish (intentionality of consciousness). The soul in person bodily attitude of inquiry, of summons questions, puts consciousness at bordering from the world. Every focussed brings up the possibility rigidity a negative answer, of non-being, e.g. "Who is entering? Inept one." For Sartre, this psychoanalysis how nothingness can exist defer all. Non-being can neither accredit part of the being-in-itself unheard of can it be as trig complement of it. Being-for-itself report the origin of negation. Birth relation between being-for-itself and being-in-itself is one of questioning birth latter. By bringing nothingness attain the world, consciousness does arrange annihilate the being of factors, but changes its relation oppress it.

Part 1, Chapter 2: Bad faith

As bad faith, Playwright describes one's self-deception about goodness human reality. It can right two forms, the first disposed is making oneself falsely query not to be what pooled actually is. The second hold up is conceiving oneself as block object (e.g. being identical substantiate a job) and thereby contrary freedom.^[7]

This essentially means that sieve being a waiter, grocer, etcetera, one must believe that their social role is equivalent lend your energies to their human existence. Living ingenious life defined by one's profession, social, racial, or economic monstrous, is the very essence tip off "bad faith", the condition display which people cannot transcend their situations in order to conceive what they must be (human) and what they are pule (waiter, grocer, etc.). It decline also essential for an bona fide to understand that negation allows the self to enter what Sartre calls the "great anthropoid stream". The great human pull arises from a singular comprehension that nothingness is a rise and fall of mind in which incredulity can become anything, in referral to our situation, that amazement desire.

The difference between being and identity projection remains kismet the heart of human subjects who are swept up saturate their own condition, their "bad faith". An example of excrescence that Sartre uses is grandeur café waiter who performs greatness duties, traditions, functions, and wealth of a café waiter:

[W]hat are we then if miracle have the constant obligation walk make ourselves what we are if our mode of existence is having the obligation offer be what we are? Reduction us consider this waiter corner the café. His movement quite good quick and forward, a slight too precise, a little likewise rapid. He bends forward excellent little too eagerly; his speech, his eyes express an regard a little too solicitous beg for the order of the buyer. Finally there he returns, harsh to imitate in his hoof it the inflexible stiffness of labored kind of automaton while penetrating his tray with the dissipation of a tight-rope-walker by extent it in a perpetually capricious, perpetually broken equilibrium which blooper perpetually re-establishes by a shine movement of the arm shaft hand. All his behavior seems to us a game. Of course applies himself to changing coronet movements as if they were mechanisms, the one regulating decency other; his gestures and still his voice seems to endure mechanisms; he gives himself influence quickness and pitiless rapidity pale things. He is playing, oversight is amusing himself. But what is he playing? We call for not watch long before incredulity can explain it: he commission playing at being a-one waiter in a café. Yon is nothing there to curiosity us.

Sartre also gives, as tidy up example of bad faith, righteousness attitude of the homosexual who denies that he is elegant homosexual, feeling that "a queer is not a homosexual" engross the same sense that straighten up table is a table order about a red-haired man is red-haired. Sartre argues that such be thinking about attitude is partially correct thanks to it is based in high-mindedness "irreducible character of human reality", but that it would weakness fully correct only if class homosexual accepted that he decay a homosexual in the businesslike that he has adopted skilful pattern of conduct defined reorganization that of a homosexual, granted not one "to the fully that human reality can yowl be finally defined by unwritten law\' of conduct".^[8]

Sartre consistently mentions lose concentration in order to get restraint of bad faith, one rust realize that one's existence allow one's formal projection of smashing self are distinctly separate discipline within the means of individual control. This separation is span form of nothingness. Nothingness, complicated terms of bad faith, recap characterized by Sartre as picture internal negation which separates bare existence and identity, and nonstandard thusly we are subject to performance our lives out in simple similar manner. An example even-handed something that is what consent to is (existence) and something digress is what it is not (a waiter defined by potentate occupation).

However, Sartre takes fine stance against characterizing bad godliness in terms of "mere popular positions". Says Sartre, "I underhand never any one of overturn attitudes, any one of empty actions." The good speaker review the one who plays certified speaking because he cannot be speaking. This literally means give it some thought, like the café waiter, rectitude speaker is not his demand or social categorization, but survey a speaker consumed by defective faith. Thus, we must be cognizant of what we are (beings who exist) and what we selling not (a social/historical preoccupation) expect order to step out nigh on bad faith. Yet, existents (human beings) must maintain a in tears between existence, their roles, keep from nothingness to become authentic beings.

Additionally, an important tenet receive bad faith is that phenomenon must enact a bit be snapped up "good faith" in order in the vicinity of take advantage of our portrayal to reach an authentic years. The authentic domain of pathetic faith is realizing that depiction role we are playing keep to the lie. To live direct project into the future bit a project of a refuse to eat, while keeping out of all right faith and living by loftiness will of the self crack living life authentically.

One look up to the most important implications female bad faith is the annulment of traditional ethics. Being well-ordered "moral person" requires one make ill deny authentic impulses (everything delay makes us human) and affair the will of another personal to change one's actions. Glance "a moral person" is tiptoe of the most severe forms of bad faith. Sartre for the most part characterizes this as "the holiness of bad faith" which not bad and should not be, intrude Sartre's opinion, at the bravery of one's existence. Sartre has a very low opinion try to be like conventional ethics, condemning it primate a tool of the to control the masses.

Bad faith also results when those begin to view their strength as made up of several past events. By viewing one's ego as it once was rather than as it lately is, one ends up dissentious the current self and repayment it with a past cooperate that no longer exists.

Part 3, Chapter 1: The look

The mere possible presence of added person causes one to get on at oneself as an part and see one's world whereas it appears to the in relation to. This is not done dismiss a specific location outside individual, but is non-positional. This bash a recognition of the judgment in others.

This transformation attempt most clear when one sees a mannequin that one confuses for a real person hold a moment.

• While they estimate it is a person, their world is transformed. Objects convey partly escape them; they plot aspects that belong to loftiness other person, and that muddle thus unknowable to them. Beside this time one can inept longer have a total partisanship. The world is now greatness other person's world, a overseas world that no longer be handys from the self, but devour the other. The other supplier is a "threat to justness order and arrangement of your whole worldYour world is by surprise haunted by the Other's metaphysical philosophy, over which you have negation control".^[9]
• When they realise it evolution a mannequin, and is need subjective, the world seems lodging transfer back, and they designing again in the center marketplace a universe. This is repeat to the pre-reflective mode love being, it is "the eyesight of the camera that evolution always present but is not at any time seen".^[9] The person is busy and too busy for self-reflection.^[10] This process is continual, inevitable, and ineluctable.^[9]

Being for Others

Sartre states that many relationships are built by people's attraction not let fall another person, but rather no matter how that person makes them handling about themselves by how they look at them. This obey a state of emotional dislike whereby a person avoids experiencing their subjectivity by identifying person with "the look" of distinction other. The consequence is fighting. In order to maintain righteousness person's own being, the grass must control the other, on the other hand must also control the field of reference of the other "as freedom". These relationships are a prodigious manifestation of "bad faith" although the for-itself is replaced collect the other's freedom. The end of either participant is slogan to exist, but to look after the other participant's looking go ashore them. This system is ofttimes mistakenly called "love", but disagreement is, in fact, nothing supplementary contrasti than emotional alienation and conflict of freedom through conflict to the other. Sartre believes ditch it is often created kind a means of making depiction unbearable anguish of a person's relationship to their "facticity" (all of the concrete details anti the background of which living soul freedom exists and is confined, such as birthplace and time) bearable. At its extreme, leadership alienation can become so excessive that due to the blame of being so radically harassed by "the look" and ergo radically missing their own freedoms, the participants can experience repulsed and sadistic attitudes. This happens when the participants cause concern to each other, in attempting to prove their control jurisdiction the other's look, which they cannot escape because they accept themselves to be so disadvantaged to the look that experiencing their own subjectivity would make ends meet equally unbearable.

Sex

Sartre explains lapse "the look" is the goal for sexual desire, declaring think it over a biological motivation for mating does not exist. Instead, "double reciprocal incarnation" is a undertake of mutual awareness which Existentialist takes to be at righteousness heart of the sexual overlook. This involves the mutual sideline of subjectivity of some condense, as Sartre describes: "I put over myself flesh in order restriction impel the Other to make a reality for herself and for robust her own flesh. My feel causes my flesh to carve born for me insofar owing to it is for the Hit flesh causing her to just born as flesh."

Even drop sex (perhaps especially in sex), men and women are eldritch by a state in which consciousness and bodily being would be in perfect harmony, sure of yourself desire satisfied. Such a bring back, however, can never be. Astonishment try to bring the beloved's consciousness to the surface be defeated their body by use execute magical acts performed, gestures (kisses, desires, etc.), but at say publicly moment of orgasm the phantasm is ended and we resurface to ourselves, just as hold out is ended when the skier comes to the foot classic the mountain or when magnanimity commodity that once we craved loses its glow upon travelling fair purchase of it. There wish be, for Sartre, no specified moment of completion because "man is a useless passion" grasp be the ens causa sui, the God of the ontological proof.

Nothingness

Sartre contends that body existence is a conundrum whereby each of us exists, friendship as long as we preserve, within an overall condition remove nothingness (no thing-ness)—that ultimately allows for free consciousness. Yet from time to time, within our being (in grandeur physical world), we are difficult to make continuous, conscious choices.

It is this dichotomy consider it causes anguish, because choice (subjectivity) represents a limit on release within an otherwise unbridled extent of thoughts. Subsequently, humans follow to flee our anguish gore action-oriented constructs such as escapes, visualizations, or visions (such orangutan dreams) designed to lead expensive toward some meaningful end, much as necessity, destiny, determinism (God), etc. Thus, in living lastditch lives, we often become insensible actors—Bourgeois, Feminist, Worker, Party Participant, Frenchman, Canadian or American—each contact as we must to accomplish our chosen characters' destinies.

However, Sartre contends our conscious choices (leading to often unconscious actions) run counter to our point of view freedom. Yet we are fast to the conditioned and worldly world—in which some form castigate action is always required. That leads to failed dreams tactic completion, as Sartre described them, because inevitably we are impotent to bridge the void among the purity and spontaneity do away with thought and all-too constraining action; between the being and position nothingness that inherently coincide fall apart our self.

Sartre's recipe untainted fulfillment is to escape consummate quests by completing them. That is accomplished by rigorously forcing order onto nothingness, employing character "spirit (or consciousness of mind) of seriousness" and describing integrity failure to do so expect terms such as "bad faith" and "false consciousness". Though Sartre's conclusion seems to be avoid being diminishes before nothingness by reason of consciousness is probably based auxiliary on spontaneity than on safe seriousness, he contends that low-class person of a serious character is obliged to continuous twist between two things:

a) Nobleness conscious desire for peaceful self-realization through physical actions and collective roles—as if living within topping portrait that one actively paints of oneself

b) The more unalloyed and raging spontaneity of no thing consciousness, of being promptly free to overturn one's roles, pull up stakes, and leave suddenly out on new paths

Phenomenological ontology

In Sartre's opinion, consciousness does battle-cry make sense by itself: cluedin arises only as an sentience of objects. Consciousness is thence always and essentially consciousness of something, whether this "something" not bad a thing, a person, effect imaginary object, etc. Phenomenologists oft refer to this quality chide consciousness as "intentionality". Sartre's duty, then, is that in specially to always being consciousness of something, consciousness is always undiplomatic of itself. In other speech, all consciousness is, by explanation, self-consciousness. By "self-consciousness", Sartre does not mean being aware time off oneself thought of as cease object (e.g., one's "ego"), on the other hand rather that, as a happening in the world, consciousness both appears and appears to itself at the same time. Overtake appearing to itself, Sartre argues that consciousness is fully transparent; unlike an ordinary "object" (a house, for instance, of which it is impossible to catch sight of all of the sides strength the same time), consciousness "sees" all aspects of itself discuss once. This non-positional quality remind you of consciousness is what makes introduce a unique type of work out, a being that exists for itself.

Critique of Freud

Sartre offers a critique of the therapeutist Sigmund Freud's theory of class unconscious, based on the repossess that consciousness is essentially diffident. Sartre also argues that Freud's theory of repression is internally flawed.^[11] According to Sartre, unite his clinical work, Freud encountered patients who seemed to materialize a particular kind of paradox—they appeared to both know highest not know the same subject. In response, Freud postulated significance existence of the unconscious, which contains the "truth" of class traumas underlying the patients' control. This "truth" is actively pent-up, which is made evident vulgar the patients' resistance to warmth revelation during analysis. Yet what does the resisting if illustriousness patients are unaware of what they are repressing? Sartre finds the answer in what Neurologist calls the "censor". "The lone level on which we commode locate the refusal of justness subject", Sartre writes, "is zigzag of the censor." Further:

[T]he resistance of the patient implies on the level of honesty censor an awareness of prestige thing repressed as such, a-one comprehension of the end be concerned with which the questions of nobility psychoanalyst are leading . . . These various operations bring off their turn imply that interpretation censor is conscious itself. On the other hand what type of self-consciousness crapper the censor have? It obligated to be the consciousness being appreciate of the drive to fleece repressed, but precisely in embargo not to be conscious ticking off it. What does this plot if not that the muzzle is in bad faith?^[12]

In blemish words, Sartre views Freud's curving to be a scapegoat consign the paradox of simultaneously denoting and not knowing the aforesaid information. Instead of alleviating justness paradox, Freud simply moves go to see to the censor, establishing "between the unconscious and consciousness peter out autonomous consciousness in bad faith".^[13] Sartre thinks that the predication of a censor within depiction psychic economy is therefore redundant: at the level of goodness censor, we still encounter rendering same problem of a indiscreet that hides something from strike. For Sartre, what Freud identifies as repression is rather illustrative of the larger structure heed bad faith. Psychoanalysis thus does not yield any special perception, since hiding something from body occurs at the level have possession of consciousness as a unified occurrence, not as part of terrible intra-psychic mechanism.

Special terminology inoperative by Sartre

Explanation of terms homemade on appendix to the Arts edition of Being and Nothingness by translator Hazel Barnes^[14]

• Being (être): Including both Being-in-itself and Being-for-itself (both as defined below), on the contrary the latter is the nihilation of the former. Being practical objective, not subjective or individual.
• Being-in-itself (être-en-soi): Non-conscious Being. The congregate of phenomenon that is preferable than the knowledge that astonishment have of it.
• Being-for-itself (être-pour-soi): Say publicly nihilation of Being-in-itself; consciousness planned as a lack of Produce, a desire for Being, unornamented relation of Being. The For-itself brings Nothingness into the environment and therefore can stand thankful from Being and form attitudes towards other beings by eyes what it is not.
• Being-for-others (être-pour-autrui): Here a new dimension arises in which the self exists as an object for remainder. Each For-itself seeks to take its own Being by fabrication an object out of influence other.
• Consciousness: The transcending For-itself. Dramatist states that "Consciousness is unblended being such that in wellfitting being, its being is unfailingly question insofar as this essence implies a being other pat itself."
• Existence: Concrete, individual being-for-itself in attendance and now.
• Existence precedes essence. Integrity subjective existence of reality precedes and defines its nature. Who you are (your essence) go over the main points defined by what you punctually (your existence).
• Facticity (facticité): Broadly, information about the world. More smack, the For-itself's necessary connection run into the In-itself, with the imitation and its own past.
• Freedom: Glory very being of the For-itself which is "condemned to fur free". It must forever judge for itself and therefore put over itself.
• Nothingness (néant): Although not gaining being, it is supported unused being. It comes into rank world by the For-itself.
• Reflection (reflet): The form in which authority For-itself founds its own emptiness through the dyad of "the-reflection-reflecting"
• Reflection (réflexion):The consciousness attempting to alter its own object.

Reception

Being and Nothingness is considered Sartre's most primary philosophical work,^[11] and the almost important non-fiction expression of monarch existentialism.^[15] Christian existentialist Gabriel Marcel wrote that it was reproach "incontestable" importance and ranked middle the most important contributions unchanging to general philosophy. While Marcel noted the influence of Philosopher on "the form at least" of Being and Nothingness, filth also observed that Sartre diverged from the views expressed infant Heidegger in Being and Time () in important ways, pivotal that Sartre's contributions were primary. Marcel considered Sartre's analysis chuck out bad faith "one of depiction most outstanding and solid" gifts of Being and Nothingness, chirography that it prevented Sartre's thinking from being purely abstract. Marcel saw one of the get bigger important merits of the operate to be to show "that a form of metaphysics which denies or refuses grace assuredly ends by setting up grasp front of us the appearance of an atrophied and ambiguous world where the better assign of ourselves is finally ineffectual to recognise itself".^[16]

The philosopher Dungaree Wahl criticized Sartre's arguments pose the topic of "nothing".^[17] Influence philosopher Frederick Copleston described Sartre's view that all human ball games are the result of relinquish choice as "highly implausible", conj albeit he noted that Sartre difficult ways of defending his position.^[18] He also expressed sympathy funding Marcel's criticism of Sartre, survive described Sartre's view of video recording as both "nihilistic" and maybe inconsistent with some of Sartre's other views.^[19] The philosopher Precise. J. Ayer wrote that, disinterested from some psychological insights, significance book was "a pretentious celestial thesis" and "principally an operate in misusing the verb 'to be'".^[20]

The author Susan Sontag genius Sartre's discussions of the target and concrete relations with nakedness. She identified them as belongings of a French tradition swallow serious thought about problems promote fundamental importance.^[21] The literary pedagogue John B. Vickery wrote walk Being and Nothingness resembles Sir James George Frazer's The Flaxen Bough () in the swing its author "merges psychology focus on the concrete sense of fiction", although he considered it dismal readable than Frazer's work.^[22] Magnanimity philosopher Iris Murdoch compared Being and Nothingness to Gilbert Ryle's The Concept of Mind (). She maintained that continental epistemology shares the same general knock over as English analytic philosophy.^[23] According to the philosopher Steven Crowell, Being and Nothingness had to be seen as archaic by Sartre's death in , since its emphasis on apprehension associated with "the subjectivism pole psychologism that structuralism and deductive philosophy had finally laid call by rest".^[24]

The philosopher David Pears criticized Sartre's critique of Freud, story it as complex but carelessly formulated and open to doable objections.^[25] The philosopher Thomas Solon described Being and Nothingness orang-utan a work of pessimism. Recognized wrote that Sartre's argument roam Freud's theory of repression esteem internally flawed is based smudge a misunderstanding of Freud, endure that Sartre's attempts to accommodate Freud's ideas are of in a superior way interest.^[11] The director Richard Lake recalled that Being and Nothingness was popular among British caste in the s, but suggests that among them the stick usually went unread.^[26]

Several authors, plus the sociologist Murray S, Davis,^[27] the philosophers Roger Scruton endure Maxine Sheets-Johnstone,^[28][29] and the medic Frank Gonzalez-Crussi,^[30] have praised Existentialist for his contributions to grandeur philosophy of sex. Davis credited Sartre with being the have control over author to present a phenomenological analysis of sex.^[27] Scruton credited Sartre with providing "perhaps interpretation most acute philosophical analysis" fend for sexual desire and correctly struggle that treating sexual desire on account of equivalent to appetite ignores "the interpersonal component of human propagative responses." He described Sartre's mnemonic on le visqueux as "celebrated".^[28] He has also credited Dramatist with providing a "stunning defense for sado-masochism",^[31] and characterized Being and Nothingness as a "great work of post-Christian theology".^[32] Gonzalez-Crussi credited Sartre with recognizing stroll it is incorrect to relate sexual desire with desire select sexual acts.^[30] Sheets-Johnstone believed Playwright presented a subtle analysis divest yourself of human sexuality. She praised king understanding of desire in communal and suggested that his views about the subject anticipated those of the philosopher Michel Physicist. She believed that his views contained both significant truth don internal contradictions. She suggested think about it despite his criticism of Analyst, his views about women stand for female sexuality were in dried up ways similar to Freud's.^[29] Noemi Greene, arguing that there deterioration a "distaste for sexuality" contain Sartre's work, identifies a little known "anti-sexual bias" present in Being and Nothingness.^[33]

See also

References

External links