“Existentialism is Humanism” is a philosophical essay written by Jean-Paul Sartre, a prominent French existentialist philosopher, and playwright. It was originally presented as a lecture in 1945 to address the criticisms and misunderstandings surrounding existentialism as a philosophy. The essay seeks to explain the core ideas of existentialism and clarify its humanistic implications.
Existentialism is Humanism | Summary
In the essay, Sartre begins by addressing the accusation that existentialism is a pessimistic philosophy. He argues that existentialism is, in fact, optimistic because it emphasizes the freedom and responsibility of individuals to create meaning in their own lives. Existentialism rejects any predetermined essence or purpose in human existence and asserts that existence precedes essence, meaning that individuals first exist and then define their essence through their actions and choices. Sartre emphasizes the concept of radical freedom, stating that human beings are condemned to be free. He argues that we are not only free to choose our actions but also responsible for the consequences of those choices. This freedom can be daunting and anxiety-inducing, as it forces individuals to confront the weight of their decisions and the possibility of making mistakes. However, Sartre argues that this anxiety is an essential aspect of human existence and should be embraced rather than avoided.
Another important concept in “Existentialism is Humanism” is the idea of subjectivity. Sartre claims that human beings are essentially free subjects who are responsible for creating their values and meaning in a world devoid of inherent purpose. Unlike objects, which are defined by their fixed properties, human beings have the power to define themselves through their choices and actions. Sartre also addresses the criticism that existentialism leads to individualism and a disregard for others. He argues that existentialism is inherently humanistic because it acknowledges the interconnectedness of human beings. While individuals have the freedom to choose, they must also recognize that their choices have consequences for others. Sartre emphasizes the importance of empathy and ethical responsibility in creating a humanistic society.
Existentialism is Humanism | Analysis
“My purpose here is to offer a defense of existentialism against several reproaches that have been laid against it.”
Thus begins Sartre’s extensive, instructive, and enlightening monologue in which he explains the principles of existentialism, directed toward its primary detractors—the Communists and the Christians.
As an atheist, Sartre intends to correct the misconceptions some Christians have regarding existentialism. His religious critics argue that existentialism excessively focuses on the base aspects of humanity, completely disregarding the better side of human nature. They also question the philosophy’s morality, asserting that by denying the existence of God and disregarding His teachings, man is free to act as he pleases.
Regarding the Communists, Sartre had hoped for a possible reconciliation with the movement. While unwavering in his views, he believed that by providing a thorough explanation of existentialism’s principles, his Communist critics would realize that their beliefs were not so different after all. However, the Communists perceived existentialism as a bourgeois philosophy, a contemplative doctrine that promoted passivity, inaction, and despair.
The core belief shared by Christian and atheistic existentialists is the notion that existence comes before essence. Sartre employs the analogy of a paper knife to illustrate this concept. When creating a knife, the artisan must have a clear idea of its purpose and design, envisioning a blade for cutting and a handle for holding. The maker possesses a concept of the knife’s essence even before the physical knife exists.
Sartre explains that most previous philosophers regarded God as the ultimate craftsman, believing that He created humans with a predetermined essence called human nature. He states,:
“Thus, the idea of man in the mind of God is comparable to the idea of the paper-knife in the mind of the artisan”.
Even atheistic philosophers of the 18th century, who rejected the idea of God, could not fully abandon the notion that a definite idea of human essence precedes human existence.
However, if God does not exist, human beings exist before they can be defined:
“Man first exists: he materializes…, encounters himself, and only afterward defines himself.”
Consequently, there is no inherent human nature because there is no supreme being to dictate how humans should behave or act. The fundamental principle of existentialism is that “man is nothing other than what he makes of himself.”
Sartre argues that individuals consciously project themselves into the future, and by acting per their self-conception (their essence), they take responsibility for their lives. Responsibility is a crucial aspect of existentialism. Simply contemplating actions is insufficient; individuals must follow through and assume accountability for their existence. Moreover, Sartre believes that each person bears responsibility not only for themselves but also for society as a whole. As every individual’s choices impact the entire community, conscious decision-making becomes inevitable—an endeavor aimed at the improvement of society as a whole.
Both groups accused existentialism of excessively focusing on subjectivity, thereby neglecting the potential for and necessity of human solidarity. In response, Sartre defines existentialism as a
“doctrine that enables human life and asserts that every truth and every action imply a context of human subjectivity.”
He argues that the allegations made by both Communists and Christians stem from a profound misunderstanding. Over time, ‘existentialism’ had become a catchphrase, applied so loosely that it had lost all meaning. Through his discourse, Sartre aims to debunk these accusations and assert that existentialism is, in fact, a form of humanism.
Existentialism encompasses two distinct philosophical movements: Christian Existentialism and Atheist Existentialism. Although both movements agree that existence precedes essence and emphasize subjectivity as a starting point, they differ significantly in their treatment of these concepts.
To understand the notion of existence preceding essence, it is important to note that Christian Existentialists attribute it to God’s intelligence, considering man as the product of divine creation. In contrast, Atheist Existentialists, including Sartre, who belong to this movement, do not believe in God’s existence. Therefore, for them, the only being whose existence precedes essence is man, who exists before developing his essence and morality.
Another notable distinction between Christian and atheist existentialism lies in their understanding of the human condition. Christian existentialists believe in the concept of “human nature,” which helps explain human actions. On the other hand, atheist existentialists only acknowledge a shared “human reality,” a term derived from Heidegger. Human reality does not concern itself with prescribing human nature but rather focuses on the shared limitations and experiences of human existence. To put it simply, according to Sartre, human reality is the fact that individuals are born into the world, coexist with others, and eventually perish in the world. There is no predetermined shared nature that determines human actions.
This leads us to the primary principle of existentialism, which states that “Man is nothing other than what he makes of himself.” In simpler terms, existentialism emphasizes the significance of human subjectivity, highlighting that individuals have the freedom and responsibility to shape their own identities and determine the meaning of their existence. For Sartre, the terms “anguish” and “abandonment” hold technical meanings that differ from their standard definitions. They describe the process by which individuals come to understand their unique position in a godless world.
Anguish refers to the profound sense of responsibility individuals experience when they realize that they are not only responsible for shaping their destinies but also for influencing the fate of society as a whole. Sartre explains that while some people may try to deny or ignore the impact of their actions on others, they are merely deceiving themselves and struggling with a guilty conscience.
To illustrate this, Sartre invokes the example of Abraham from the biblical story. When an angel commands Abraham to sacrifice his son, Isaac, Abraham experiences anguish in the form of deep doubt. He questions whether the angel is truly an angel and whether he should sacrifice his son for the sake of God. This existential anguish arises when individuals contemplate their responsibility to take action and impose their conceptions of humanity. They question whether they are truly the right individuals to do so. Existential anguish does not paralyze individuals from acting, rather it is inherent in the very process of taking action.
Sartre defines anguish as the realization of one’s “full and profound responsibility.” It is the awareness that, as a human being, one cannot escape the realm of subjectivity and that one’s choices have consequences for the entire human race. Sartre emphasizes the importance of constantly asking oneself, “What would happen if everyone did what I am doing?” Ignoring or evading this question is a form of self-deception and a betrayal of one’s conscience.
To illustrate this concept of anguish, Sartre draws upon Kierkegaard’s idea of the anguish experienced by Abraham. In the biblical story, God asks Abraham to sacrifice his beloved son, and Abraham chooses to believe that it is God’s will. However, this choice is not made without pain and anguish. Sartre relates this to the experiences of generals and commanders during times of war. They may make decisions that involve sacrificing the lives of their soldiers for the greater good, causing them torment, but not preventing them from taking action.
In our daily lives, we also encounter choices that are accompanied by anguish. This is an emotion that anyone with responsibilities can understand. It is a shared experience rooted in subjectivity and leads to action. Abandonment, on the other hand, refers to the feeling of individuals when they realize that God does not exist and they must face the full consequences of this realization. Sartre disagrees with those who believe that the concept of God can be eliminated without significant consequences. Existentialists find it deeply unsettling that God no longer exists, as it implies the absence of a predefined moral framework. As Fyodor Dostoevsky famously stated, “If God does not exist, everything is permissible.” This realization of radical freedom becomes the starting point of existentialism. People are “condemned to be free” because they must navigate life without external guidance. Abandonment evokes a profound sense of loneliness as individuals are confronted with the choice of how to act in a world devoid of inherent meaning.
To illustrate the concept of abandonment, Sartre presents the example of a former student who had to choose between avenging his brother’s death by Germans in World War II or staying home to care for his dependent mother. Sartre highlights that no established moral order could dictate the right course of action, as neither choice is inherently right nor wrong. The student is forced to make his own choice based on his values. This radical freedom to live according to one’s values is the path to an authentic life, but it is accompanied by a profound sense of abandonment. Individuals act “without hope” because no external signs are pointing to the correct action. Even if individuals believe they have received an external sign, its significance is attributed by the individual, as signs have no inherent meaning and are only meaningful insofar as they guide one’s actions.
Sartre’s famous quote, “Man is condemned to be free,” reflects the idea that although humans did not create themselves, they are still responsible for their actions once they exist in the world. This existential freedom is accompanied by a sense of abandonment due to the absence of God. In the absence of a divine authority or moral code, individuals bear full responsibility for the values they choose to uphold. As Dostoevsky expressed, “If God does not exist, everything is permissible.” This assertion serves as a starting point for existentialism and is often criticized by Christians.
However, existentialists maintain that despite the apparent permissiveness of a godless world, there are no excuses for our actions. The absence of God means that we cannot attribute our choices to a predetermined “human nature.” In Sartre’s words:
“We are left alone and without an excuse.”
Feelings and emotions cannot serve as reliable guides for our actions because they are shaped by the choices we make and the actions we take. Similarly, signs or external indicators of what is right or wrong are subject to our interpretation. Ultimately, abandonment is the recognition that we alone must determine our path and identity—and this realization comes with the experience of anguish.
Despair, according to existentialism, entails the recognition that humans must confine their decisions and actions to what is within their control. Choices are made based on the probabilities that offer avenues for action. As Descartes famously stated, “Conquer yourself rather than the world.“, Existentialists embrace this perspective, emphasizing the importance of acting without hope or expectation.
