Sartre`s Existentialism Essays (1569 words) - Modernism,

Sartre`s Existentialism The word philosophy comes from Greek and literally means "love of wisdom." The Merriam- Webster dictionary defines philosophy as "a critical study of fundamental beliefs and the grounds for them." Because of the diversity of positions associated with existentialism, the term is impossible to define precisely. However, existentialism is a philosophical movement of the 19th and 20th century that centers on the analysis of individual existence and the given situation of the individual who must assume complete responsibility for his acts of free will without any certain knowledge of what is right or wrong or good or bad. Existentialism was started in the late 19th century by philosophers who called themselves existentialists. These existentialists, such as Pascal, Kierekegaard, and Heidegger, gave existentialism its foundation. Jean-Paul Sartre first gave the term existentialism general currency by using it for his own philosophy. He also became the leading figure of the existentialist movement in France that became internationally influential after World War II. Sartre insisted that his existentialism is a form of Humanism, and he strongly emphasized human freedom, choice, and responsibility. Sartre was born in 1905 in Paris and died in 1980. He expressed his dedication to his philosophy in both what he wrote and in the way he lived his life. During the 1930s he began to develop his existentialist philosophy. In 1938 he published his first major work, the novel ?Nausea', which set forth his existentialist ideas. He was very active politically and founded a monthly magazine which dealt with politics, philosophy, and art. He wrote well-known plays and won the Nobel prize for literature. Existentialism is a philosophy which deals with man; it states that man is that which he makes of himself, that he has to make his own choices in a state of anguish. Man chooses in anguish, because he has no external guidelines to help him and must rely on his own morals and beliefs. Choice is a very large theme in the philosophy of existentialism. One chooses completely want he wants to do; one's existence depends on this. Sartre even says that "man is freedom." Sartre and the modern existentialists contrast their position on morality to that of the secular moralists of the end of the 18th century. They said that although there is no God, that there are moral values that one should take seriously, such as not lying, not beating one's wife, bringing up children properly, and so forth. The existentialist finds it extremely troubling that God does not exist because "with Him disappear all possibility of finding values in an intelligible heaven." As Dostoevsky once said, "If God did not exist, then everything would be permitted." Sartre says that this is the existentialist starting point. This is the reason that Sartre speaks of anguish, because "one cannot find anything to depend upon either within or outside himself." It must necessarily follow that man is to be forlorn; he can't find anything to depend upon either internally or externally. He therefore lacks excuses. We cannot explain our actions in terms of or in reference to..."given and specific human nature." This rules out of the possibility of predetermination -- ..."man is free, man is freedom." For non-existentialists, passion and fate may be an excuse for their actions; whereas for existentialists, responsibility for one's passion is a central belief. Fate is overruled, there is no power of passion. An existentialist will never regard a great passion..."as a destructive torrent, upon which a man is swept into certain actions as by fate." Since existence precedes essence, an existentialist will also deny the aid of a spiritual compass. As a result there is an absence of an enlightened domain of values. The existentialist world is by nature, one of being forsaken and abandoned. In this sense, abandonment can mean that we ourselves decide our being. Part and parcel with abandonment comes anguish. As an example of abandonment, one may consider the case of the Frenchman who was considered a collaborator and his eldest son, who were both killed in the German offense of 1940. The young man's younger brother had two choices: to take care of his mother (a concrete mode of action, immediate, but directed to only one individual), or to go to England to join the free French forces (an action addressed to an infinitely greater end). The Kantian ethic warns not to regard another person as a means, but rather as an end. In this case, for the young son to remain with his mother, he would be treating her as the end and the