Jean-Paul Sartre was a renowned French philosopher who wrote several books and inspired people through his brilliant ideas. In writing “Existentialism is a Humanism,” originally published in 1946, Jean-Paul Sartre tries to persuade an audience comprising of other philosophers and the publics about the nature of people living as isolated beings. Sartre starts his lecture by introducing his goal “to offer a defense of existentialism against several reproaches that have been laid against it (1).” Satre proceeds to mention certain charges, the first charges from Communists while the others from Christians.
The initial Communist accusation is that existentialism alludes to an action-averse, which implies it is a thoughtful philosophy. The second Communist accusation is the realism that existentialism remains trapped in subjectivity. He quotes that “and this, say the Communists, is because we base our doctrine upon pure subjectivity – upon the Cartesian (12).” This implies that existentialism’s concentrate on the importance of the person self leads to overlooking the relationships among human beings and their efforts. As he proceeds to the Christian accusation, Sartre affirms that “we are reproached as people who deny the reality and seriousness of human affairs (36)”. This brings the idea existentialism concentrates excessively on the negative side of life and that the aspect of individualism would terminate any ways through which individuals condemn the actions of others. Therefore, every person has the right to do whatever pleases them if they do not condemn others.
Sartre draws from the above charges made to the Communists and Christians and uses them as the rationale for giving his work the title “Existentialism is a Humanism (26).” It is worth noting that Sartre acknowledges that the audience might be astonished to view existentialism as a type of humanism. This is well supported because the majority of people wrongly consider existentialism as pessimistic. He hints that existentialism criticizers are accurate pessimists and further provides relevant arguments to back up the idea. For instance, “that is why some people say we are “naturalistic,” and if we are, it is strange to see how much we scandalize and horrify them.” He adds that the majority of people, including some philosophers fear his loathing to traditional views of morality (49). This is a fact since the public sees that they quit themselves to the oppressive status quo and are even afraid of individual choice based on what is offered by existentialism.
Sartre then provides an in-depth description of existentialism by affirming that most people use the phrase as a fashionable offence instead of trying to understand it real mean. He warns the audience that the term existentialism is austerely made for both philosophers and specialists and not for people who do not understand its meaning in life (51). “The Existentialist,” and, indeed, the word is now so loosely applied to so many things that it no longer means anything at all (Satre 1).” To make the lecture more interesting, Sartre differentiates Christian existentialists from atheist by declaring that he is an atheist existentialist. However, he announces that the common thing between Christian and atheist existentialists is the idea that existence herald essence (68). This statement implies that individual existence is the reverse of the presence of a produced good because the developer of the product manufactures it to satisfy a given purpose.
According to Sartre, anytime we consider God as the creator, we acknowledge in most cases as the supernatural artist (73). Despite the doctrine that one considers, such as those by Leibnitz or Descartes, people always infer that the will follows to bring the idea that he understands his creation whenever God creates. Hence, the beginning of man in the awareness of God is equally compared to the example of paper and knife in the awareness of the artisan. Hence, God creates things based on a conception and procedure, similarly to the manner manufacturers create a paper and knife while adhering to a certain formula. Therefore, every person is the realization of a given conception that lives in the divine understanding. “If God does not exist, there is at least one being whose existence comes before its essence, a being which exists before it can be defined by any conception of it (Macomber 49).” Based on historical philosophic atheism, the conception of God is repressed, although not due to the above reasons. However, this is due to the notion that essence is in advance of existence, which is a common viewpoint everywhere.
There is no doubt that Sartre uses different examples and concepts to expound his segments about “Existentialism is a Humanism.” In addition, he believes that his detractors will understand his concept to avoid challenging the conclusion of existentialists that they are ethically accountable for their beliefs and actions. Indeed, Sartre declares that “nothing could be more unjust that the objections people raise against us (94).” This implies that existentialism is not a complex term but an effort to come to a conclusion drawing on an atheistic position. The purpose of existentialists is not to draw men into despair but to serve as an awareness concept that should be used to avoid putting the blame on external factors.
Works Cited
Macomber, Carol. (Ed). Existentialism is a Humanism. Yale University Press, 2007.
Sartre, Jean Paul. Existentialism is a Humanism. World Publishing Company, 1956.