Sartre’s view Concerning the Human Condition
The theological claim that the nature and purpose of humanity precedes the human creation and existence forms the basis of Sartre’s description of the human condition. However, Sartre, the famous philosopher during his time set forth to disapprove the view claiming its opposite as the case.
Therefore, according to him, the human existence precedes their purpose. In his lectures about ‘existentialism is humanism’ in 1946, he devoted himself into summarizing the mystery behind ‘the human condition’.
According to him, freedom entails or rather requires a total responsibility in the courses of people’s lives as they experience despair, forlornness among others (Sartre 12). The achievement of genuine human dignity occurs through an active acceptance of the different emotions that they face in the course of their existence.
Sartre in addition, warned about the habit of elusiveness through self-deception where people elude responsibility that they do. This, to him is one of the dangers that he calls “bad faith”. Sartre’s claim of the existence of human beings as coming before their essence means that they came into existence before they could define or understand themselves with their cause of actions (Jacobs 33). Furthermore, Sartre looked at the human condition in terms of the ‘facticity’ and ‘freedom’.
Facticity means the “being-in-itself” side of human existence implying that people cannot change facts about their existence like their family heritage, DNA, past actions and anything that is beyond human control.
On the other hand, freedom of existence implies the “being-for-itself” side of human existence, meaning that regardless of the people’s inability to change their facticity, they have the freedom to choose any actions or decision that they are capable of performing.
Furthermore, Sartre reveals facticity as the one responsible for creating people through their actions, which further defines their character and destiny, a process that continues and stops only after they die thereby stabilizing their essence and freedom (Hazel Para. 7).
Therefore, based on Sartre’s expositions concerning the human condition as afore-illustrated, I stand to agree with his view based on various reasons for instance the way he approaches the notion of facticity and freedom.
Reasons for my stand
The issue concerning human being’s facticity and freedom is true and to the point based on the way people have no control over certain issues that they encounter in their day-to-day lives. For instance, it is not possible to prevent or request to be born in a rich or a poor family, to be born a white or a black or simply to be short or tall.
These are the things and issues that human beings are unable to control and shape or make them happen, as they would wish to. In addition, regardless of changes that one may undergo, attempts to migrate to other destinations or run away from past actions or heritage because of various reasons, the reality about life will still remain and define the truth (Sartre 34).
There are some facts about people’s existence as human race that cannot change or go away from them even if they try to avoid them.
Therefore, in his argument Sartre actually draws the point that human condition is a fact. On the other hand, I also concur with Sartre on the issue of human condition based on freedom. It is true that human beings have freedom to do or partake whichever things or activities they so wish.
In existence, they choose their beliefs, actions and any other thing they wish. Nobody decides for someone, makes a choice for what one does, or what he/she does not do. When people begin finding scapegoats in whatever actions or beliefs that they have done, they are no more than deceiving themselves and therefore a bad faith as referred to as by Sartre.
This therefore seems an absolute truth and hence the reason behind my concordance that we are free to choose our actions as well as defining ourselves. Take an example of making a decision to follow a certain faith. The decision will solely remain with the individual. Therefore, whether he/she makes a good or not, it will depend on this freedom at disposal.
Therefore, it is true that besides human beings avoiding this bad faith and running away from the truth, there is need to embrace and acknowledge the freedom and the facts that they have a heritage that is part of them and one that constitutes their freedom.
Since human beings are the ones responsible for shaping their character through their actions and thoughts, which further determine their essence, it suffices to declare their existence as one that precedes their purpose in life as Sartre puts it. One’s purpose in life comes based on his/her character. Therefore, human beings must first exist before they can be in a position of defining their actions.
The claim is true because human beings are unable to tell what will affect them or how they are going to live the next ay. They only stay or exist on the prevailing conditions with hope of seeing tomorrow for them to accomplish their plans. Therefore, for them to define their actions and plans that they want, their existence must precede their actions.
It is true that human beings must be born first, brought into the existence whereby they develop systematically afterwards based on their purpose. The development stage is what defines them as they make choices and decisions on which principal values, beliefs, and faith they wish to follow. This freedom helps them in choosing their destiny in life, as some decide to become Muslims, Christians as others specialize in various professional fields in order to achieve their set goals and targets.
These actions can only happen to those in existence and continues, not forever as claimed by the theological view, but until one dies since a dead person cannot perform any action and neither, can he/she modify or define his/her purpose. Therefore, people’s existence is fact that they cannot change or decide and is the one responsible for the purpose of people.
Therefore, just as God existed prior to His creation of people, so should the people exist prior to the creation of their purpose in life and hence the reason for my agreement with Sartre’s expositions.
Third, there are facts in life that people cannot alter. I agree with the philosopher Sartre on this. As suggested by Sartre, it is beyond people’s knowledge concerning how life came about and how certain events or activities happen. For instance, issues like DNA and different skin colors of people are some of the things that human being cannot change as they are beyond their thinking and control. Therefore, such happenings are there to stay even if people’s self-egos undergo transformation.
In addition, death is another example of fact that cannot change. Hence, there are certain issues in life that people need to accept to avoid bad faith, as they are part of their conditions. Therefore, human condition, as postulated by facts in life that cannot change, stands out from the illustrations given.
People can judge their colleagues based on their beliefs and actions by relying on the truth of the human condition. Judgment will only be authentic if based on the truth that human conditions uphold or work on.
According to Sartre, the truth is that existence of human being precedes their definition. I am in support of this stance since a true management should be in tandem with the facticity of existence and the freedom that human being are supposed to enjoy.
One can illustrate of how this is true using an individual who undergoes a surgery of skin in order to change his/her skin pigment. Even if the surgery manages to achieve the intention of changing the skin color, the truth is that it has not changed the faces or the reality of the matter; the person will still have the same DNA composition and his/her family background and roots will not change.
Therefore, the generations to come from this kind of family will still posses some attributes from the person, which will manifest in their true colors. Human beings have the freedom to choose what they want to do and be ready to bear the responsibility of what they do and accept.
Therefore, human beings by accepting responsibility means at some level the alterations of attitudes towards life, which results to anguish, abandonment as well as despair. People achieve their value to life, justice and fundamental dignity when they follow this to the latter as every one shares in the same situation thereby arousing the need to embrace freedom but out rightly rejecting any promises that seem false and of moral determination.
People should always have a sense of responsibility by accepting the actions they decide to do even if they seek or accept the advice. Therefore, it does not mean that one can do whatever he/she feels since free choice does not happen capriciously based on the idea of decision-making as a moral act that requires careful thinking as there is nothing that is predetermined.
Fidelity to oneself is a key to value of human life. In relationships, people are who they are and should not try to be whatever other people expect them to be. They will therefore develop faith in themselves; nurture their relationships, as they will gain courage to utilize the freedom at their disposal appropriately.
Conclusion
In conclusion, Sartre’s view and arguments to a broader perspective hold true. His view about human condition, which he zeroed to facticity and freedom, declares existence as one that precedes essence and not the vice versa as maintained theologically.
The views concerning human conditions are applausive and provable in the day-to-day life situation. Regardless of these conflicting views, I am in agreement with Sartre in that human beings live on cases which are unchangeable and are given freedom to chose what they want provided they abide by the truth of this human condition since there judgment is based on the truth. I therefore concur with Sartre’s claim that “existence precedes essence.”
Work Cited
Hazel, Barnes. Jean-Paul Sartre: Being and Nothingness, A Phenomenological Essay on Ontology, 1993. Web. http://www.philosophypages.com/hy/7e.htm#free
Jacobs, David. Existence Precedes Essence: Sartre’s Description of the Human Condition. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1998.
Sartre, Jean. Existentialism Is Humanism, translated by Bernard Frechtman, in Existentialism and Human Emotions. New York: Philosophical Library, 1990