Jean-Paul Sartre – Existentialism and Humanism
More Than Just Bread - Ethics and the Individual
If We Are Free to Choose, What Are We Responsible For?
In Existentialism and Humanism, Jean-Paul Sartre begins with a difficult idea about what it means to be human.
He argues that:
Existence comes before essence.
What does this mean?
Responsibility begins with every choice we make.
Sartre uses the example of a manufactured object.
A paper-cutter is designed before it is made. Someone already knows what it is, what purpose it will serve and how it should be produced.
Its purpose exists before the object itself.
Sartre argues that human beings are different.
For his atheistic existentialism, there is no creator who has designed each human being according to a fixed plan.
We first exist.
Then, through our choices and actions, we gradually become who we are.
This leads to one of Sartre’s central claims:
We are not born with a complete identity or predetermined purpose. We make ourselves through what we do.
This sounds liberating.
But Sartre immediately shows that freedom is also a burden.
If there is no fixed human nature that determines what we must become, we cannot easily blame fate, nature or some predetermined plan for our choices.
We are responsible.
For Sartre, this responsibility is much greater than we usually imagine.
Our choices do not simply say something about ourselves.
Every time we choose how to act, we also express a view about what we believe a human being ought to do.
In this sense, Sartre argues that in choosing ourselves we also create an image of humanity.
This helps explain what Sartre calls anguish.
Anguish is not simply fear.
It comes from recognising the weight of our freedom.
There may be no final authority that can remove the responsibility of choosing from us.
Even if somebody gives us advice, we still decide whether to follow it.
Even if we believe we have received a sign, we still decide what that sign means.
Ultimately, the choice remains ours.
Sartre illustrates this with the story of one of his students during the Second World War.
The young man faced a terrible choice.
Should he leave his mother, who depended greatly upon him, and join the Free French Forces?
Or should he remain with her and care for her?
Both choices could be defended morally.
One represented duty to a wider national cause.
The other represented immediate responsibility toward another human being.
No general moral rule could simply make the decision for him.
This creates a powerful question:
What do we do if two genuine responsibilities point us in different directions?
For Sartre, we still have to choose.
And refusing to choose is itself a choice.
This is why freedom cannot be separated from responsibility.
Sartre describes human beings as being “condemned to be free”: we did not choose to enter the world, but once here, we continually face choices for which we must accept responsibility.
He also discusses despair, but not in the everyday sense of giving up hope.
For Sartre, it means recognising the limits of our control.
We should act on what depends upon us and on realistic possibilities connected to our actions.
We cannot guarantee what other people will do or how history will develop.
But uncertainty does not remove our responsibility to act.
This is why Sartre rejects the idea that existentialism is a philosophy of hopelessness or inaction.
His conclusion is almost the opposite.
People become what they repeatedly make themselves through action.
A coward is not simply born a coward.
A hero is not simply born a hero.
Our actions help create what we become, and the possibility of choosing differently remains.
This leaves us with difficult questions.
How free are we really?
How much of who we are comes from our circumstances, and how much from our choices?
Can we blame our character, upbringing, society or situation for what we do?
How should we choose if no moral rule gives us a complete answer?
Does freedom become frightening once we understand the responsibility it carries?
Can we be responsible not only for ourselves, but also for the example our choices give to others?
And perhaps most importantly:
Are we defined by what we say we believe, or by what we actually choose to do?
Sartre does not promise that choosing will be easy.
He does not give us a formula that removes uncertainty.
Instead, he asks us to accept that being human means choosing and acting without always having certainty.
That is why his philosophy is demanding, but also strangely hopeful.
We are never simply finished products.
Through our actions, we continue to become.
Perhaps the central message of Existentialism and Humanism can therefore be expressed simply:
Freedom gives us the possibility to become, but responsibility begins with accepting that our choices help make us who we are.
- Eva Ierides is a Contributor to Agora Dialogue, participating in its work of reflection, dialogue and engaged citizenship.
- Dinos Toumazos is Co-founder and Chief Executive Officer of Agora Dialogue, an independent initiative dedicated to sharing knowledge and ideas, promoting engaged citizenship and encouraging responsible leadership.