In Sartre's efforts to redefine the blurred lines of Existentialism, I find that he also manages to discredit any excuse we've ever made for ourselves. In“Existentialism is a Humanism”, Jean-Paul Sartre argues that we as humans are radically free, and it is up to us to will ourselves to be who, and what we want to be through our actions. Though Sartre employs ideas of existentialism, anguish, and forlornness to strongly defend his view, there was one particular area of his argument that really got my wheels turning. ". . . in creating the man that we want to be, there is not a single one of our acts which does not at the same time create an image of man as we think he ought to be. . . Thus, our responsibility is much greater than we might have supposed, because it involves all mankind" (Sartre 37). This, to me, is a wild way to look at the world and our actions. Imagine that every decision, every bad decision you've made, somehow makes a statement about how you believe the world should be, and how all your fellow humans should conduct themselves. Personally, that is not quite my thought process as I often choose the less estimable of life's choices. However, i think there is some strong value in it. Sartre's call for men to take responsibility for how their actions reflect on humanity pushes one to be his/her best self. Sartre manages to discredit every excuse that might be used to circumvent our obligation to ourselves in striving for success or even just our actions on a day to day basis.

Hi Emma,
ReplyDeleteI'm glad you decided to view Sartre's work in an optimistic outlook! I agree, oftentimes existentialism can read to be quite depressing and isolating.
In regards to this quote : "...in creating the man that we want to be, there is not a single one of our acts which does not at the same time create an image of man as we think he ought to be...Thus, our responsibility is much greater than we might have supposed, because it involves all mankind" (Sartre 37) I am reminded a lot of Beauvoir's philosophy of "ethical freedom" -- in which she claims that we assume our freedom ethically by simultaneously assuming the freedom of others. What nobler thought is there than that our individual existence is just a small indication of collective freedom?