Jean-Paul Sartre (1905-1980) was a French existentialist philosopher who defined the existentialist movement in the 20th century. Considered the consummate intellectual, he was not only the author of philosophical works but also a biographer, playwright, and novelist. In 1964, he received the Nobel Prize for Literature but declined.
The themes Sartre explored in his writings are those typically seen as existentialist: "the primacy of the individual's existence, human freedom, and the lack of objective values" (Stangroom, 144). Sartre's philosophy "possesses a clarity and force that captures the spirit of the times in a more powerful way than that of any of his predecessors or his existentialist contemporaries" (Stokes, 235), and "his ideas can be translated into values which can be appropriated for everyday life" (Oliver, 128).
Early Life
Born into a comfortable, middle-class family in Paris in 1905, Jean-Paul Sartre was forced to live with his maternal grandfather, Karl Schweitzer after the death of his father – Sartre was only one at the time. His was not a happy childhood; his grandfather was strict and domineering. With few close friends and an eye condition that affected his appearance, Sartre spent most of his time in his grandfather's library, reading and writing. Stangroom wrote that "whatever his childhood difficulties, it was clear from very early on that Sartre was extremely smart … he was a child prodigy" (144). He not only graduated from the prestigious École Normale Supérieure in 1927 but also studied philosophy in Fribourg, Switzerland, and Berlin. It was while he was still in Paris studying that he met his future life partner Simone de Beauvoir (1908-1986), a student at the Sorbonne, and future founder of philosophical feminism and author of The Second Sex. After graduating from the École, Sartre worked as a secondary school teacher. In 1939, at the onset of the Second World War (1939-45), he entered the military service only to be captured the following year.
While in prison, he read the philosophy of Martin Heidegger (1889-1976), another existentialist and the author of Being and Time. Released in 1941, he returned to occupied Paris and started to teach again. By this time, he had already published two books: The Transcendence of the Ego (1936) and the novel Nausea (1938). As the war progressed, he became involved with the French Resistance. Following the war, Sartre left his teaching position, and from then on, until his death in 1980, he became a political activist, declaring himself a Marxist. However, he became disillusioned with the Communist Party after the Soviet Union suppressed the Hungarian Revolt of 1956. During the Cold War between the United States and the Soviet Union, he both criticized and praised the Soviets' activities. Among his closest friends were Albert Camus (1913-1960) and Maurice Merleau-Ponty (1908-1961). The latter, Beauvoir, and Sartre founded the journal Les Temps modernes. Camus and Sartre had a falling out in 1951 due to Sartre's Marxist views, and they never spoke again.
Phases
Sartre's life as a philosopher falls into three stages or phases, each coming under the influence of a particular philosopher. In the first phase, he was influenced by Edmund Husserl (1859-1938) and wrote Nausea and The Imaginary. In the second phase, he was affected by Heidegger. During this phase, Sartre wrote Being and Nothingness and Existentialism is a Humanism. Lastly, the third and longest phase found Sartre dominated by Karl Marx (1818-1883) and Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel (1770-1831). Many dissidents as well as young people who longed to opt out of society for whatever reason were drawn to Sartre. Later, near the end of this phase, Sartre admitted that he may have exaggerated the extent to which an individual can free himself from the pressures of society.
Existentialism
By definition, existentialism is concerned with an individual possessing free will while "standing in an absurd and meaningless world" (Stokes, Glossary). In his Existentialism is a Humanism, Sartre defined existentialism as a "doctrine that makes human life possible and also affirms that every truth and every action imply an environment and a human subjectivity" (18). An existentialist speaks of the individual and one's need to assume responsibility in all small matters.
From the time of Søren Kierkegaard (1813-1855), existentialists have placed freedom at the center of their philosophy. Sartre expressed this concept in the phrase "existence precedes essence." It means that humanity existed first without purpose or definition. This idea is in sharp contrast with earlier philosophers such as Aristotle (384-322 BCE). In his Ethics, Aristotle claimed that humanity was created to fulfill a purpose and that fulfillment consists of striving toward a goal. Like Aristotle, Thomas Aquinas, the 13th-century church philosopher, believed that all things aim towards some ultimate goal; therefore, in his belief, essence preceded existence. An object, such as an egg-timer, has a purpose (its essence), and that is to time eggs. The egg-timer's purpose came before it was manufactured, but an individual differs from an egg-timer or any other object.
Sartre believed individuals exist, not for any particular purpose, writing:
Atheistic existentialism … is more consistent. It states that if God does not exist, there is at least one being in whom existence precedes essence — a being whose existence comes before its essence, a being who exists before he can be defined by any concept of it. ... man first exists: he materializes in the world, encounters himself, and only afterwards defines himself.
(Existentialism is a Humanism, 22)
In the concept of existence precedes essence, the individual exists first and then becomes a "construct" to be built and rebuilt from his experiences and behavior.
Freedom & Bad Faith
According to Sartre, individuals are free, but this freedom brings the individual an enormous burden and responsibility; something one does not always want to acknowledge. One is the only judge of one's own actions, and there is no one or nothing to help one decide. This freedom could cause a person to wonder what is right and what is wrong behavior: a question of morality.
Sartre believed that, in a godless world, individuals have no alternative but to choose and, in that sense, create their own values. He believed that people are condemned to be free. One escapes this freedom of choice and its responsibility by claiming that one's actions are governed by some strict moral code. Sartre considered this excuse as rationalization. One is purposely explaining or justifying one's behavior with what one believes to be logical reasons. These excuses bring into the equation the existence of a higher power. And, the existence of a higher power or God is one aspect of existentialism. Most existentialists are atheists – Kierkegaard was a rare exception. As an atheist, Sartre believed that since there is no God or designer to give an individual purpose or provide an excuse, one is free to choose the life one wants. Interestingly, a person is not free to do absolutely everything he wants; there are limits, but Sartre did not want people to think that they are condemned to live their lives by the events that occurred in the past. However, a belief in God, like every other choice, is personal. It is both a life and purpose chosen.
While the individual has the freedom to choose, one sometimes finds this difficult to accept. Individuals are responsible for everything they do without making excuses; there is no one else to blame such as a higher power or human nature. Stokes wrote that they make their choices amid three types of burden: anguish, abandonment, and despair. Anguish comes from the awareness of their responsibility. Everything a person does affects others. When an individual makes a choice, it is not only a personal choice but also a statement to others. In abandonment, a person is left alone; there is no God or anyone else to help or give guidance. Lastly, in despair, a person must act without hope, foregoing the instinct that things will turn out for the best. Individuals must rely on what they can do on their own and not fall into the trappings of bad faith.
Sartre confronts humanity with the unavoidable responsibility to choose, but this radical freedom has its consequences. One may not realize that one has a choice to make and falls into bad faith where he may end up deceiving oneself. One believes that, like an object (the egg-timer), one is predetermined to be who one is and act the way one does. Stephen Law in his The Great Philosophers gives an example of bad faith: a waiter is free to either continue to wait tables or leave to travel or choose another career. The choice is his to make, but he deceives himself by acting as if he was made to be a waiter and it is not a choice he faces.
Confusion arose in the manner that Sartre defined consciousness. In his Being and Nothingness, he divided "being" into two realms: "being for itself", which was defined simply as consciousness, and "being in itself", which is everything else. "For itself" is characterized by the term "nothingness" or emptiness, which lies at the heart of being. This indicates that there is no human essence. Sartre believed that consciousness implies possibility, and therein lies its freedom. The choices that people make are theirs and theirs alone, but a person must realize one does not make a decision in a vacuum and must face the specifics of the situation, for there are some things that cannot be changed: a person's age and genetics. A person must choose authentically, recognizing that he is choosing freely.
Conclusion
Sartre died in 1980. Stangroom pointed out that throughout his life, Sartre was concerned with a number of issues. He lived at a time of political and social unrest, and from the days following the war, he remained a political activist. Being an existentialist, Sartre was not without his critics. Although not a defense of his beliefs, at the end of Existentialism is a Humanism, he answered some of his critics and summarized existentialism:
Existentialism is not so much an atheism in the sense it would exhaust itself attempting to demonstrate the nonexistence of God, rather, it affirms that even if God were to exist, it would make no difference — that is our point of view. (53)
He concluded that "what man needs is to rediscover himself and to comprehend that nothing can save him from himself, not even valid proof of the existence of God." (53)
