Untimely Review of Sartre's Being and Nothingness

1966

Sartre Studies International, 2009

In Being and Nothingness, Sartre explains that being-in-itself is transphenomenal and becomes a phenomenon only through the process by which consciousness qualifies itself as its negation. Thus, there can be no phenomenon except as the object that consciousness (consciously) negates. This ontology of phenomena proves contradictory because one does not understand how consciousness can negate what does not appear to it, especially if it needs to do so as an existentialist freedom, which has to choose (in terms of phenomena) the end towards which it negates being. Sartre's theory of facticity as 'body' then comes as an alternative conception of phenomena, answering these problems by ultimately tending to present being-in-itself as a non-objective, hence non-conscious, phenomenon. Intentional consciousness thus becomes a transcendental condition for objectivity only and not for phenomenality in general.

Human Studies, vol. 39, n. 2, 2016, pp. 249–268., 2016

The question of nothingness occupies the thinking of a number of philosophers in the first half of the twentieth-century, with three of the most important responses being those of Henri Bergson, Martin Heidegger, and Jean-Paul Sartre. Surprisingly, however, there has been little discussion of their specific comments on nothingness either individually or comparatively. This paper starts to remedy this by suggesting that, while Bergson dismisses nothingness as a pseudoproblem based in a flawed metaphysical understanding, Heidegger, in What is Metaphysics?, claims that metaphysics entails a covering of being meaning that Bergson’s analysis actually depends on and so brings thinking to a questioning of being (=ontology). In turn, Heidegger’s insight acts as the transitional point for Sartre who criticizes Bergson’s description of nothingness to show that, following Heidegger, nothingness is a real ontological problem. From this insight, Sartre distinguishes between negativity, nothingness, and nihilation to show that the issue of nothingness is intimately connected to the freedom of human consciousness, which, by distinguishing between ontological and practical freedom, reveals that nothingness has ethical and political significance. By way of conclusion, a number of problems in Sartre’s account are identified.

2016

The article discusses rationalistic and existential approaches to the problem of existence. The comparison of Sartre's pre-reflective cogito and Descartes' reflective cogito makes it possible to define how Sartre’s thought moves from the thing to consciousness and from consciousness to the thing. At the same time, in Being and Nothingness Sartre does not only define the existence of the thing in its passivity—which in many respects corresponds to Descartes' philosophy, but also as an open orientation towards consciousness, the latter concept not being fully developed by him. This statement may be regarded as a hidden component of Sartre’s key thesis about the role of the Other in the verification of our existence. The most important factor in understanding this is the concept of the look. Detailed analysis of Sartre’s theses in Being and Nothingness enables us to demonstrate that the concept of the look makes it possible to consider the identity of being-in-itself and be...

Metodo. International Studies in Phenomenology and Philosophy, 2017

Being and Nothingness is extraordinarily rich and highly original. At its core, I argue, lies an insight into the aporetic character of intersubjectivity-«the scandal of the plurality of consciousnesses», as Sartre puts it-which emerges most clearly in his critique of Hegel's theory of intersubjectivity. My aim in this paper is to isolate this thesis of Sartre's and spell out his grounds for it. I argue furthermore that Hegel's conception of intersubjectivity corresponds to that of natural consciousness, such that, in rejecting Hegel, Sartre is also impugning the reality of a conception integral to ordinary thought. I suggest that Sartre's insight also holds the key to his distinctive approach to social and political theory in the Critique of Dialectical Reason.

The forgoing point looks at the background of Sartre's existentialism and what influenced him. Sartre like other existentialists reacted to the philosophical tradition of the 18 th century which stated that reason can solve all human problems. He was influenced by two main streams: the reactionary stream and the phenomenological stream. For Spade, the reactionary stream was a reaction against the philosophy of the 18 th century, with its unbounded confidence in the ability of reason to solve all human problems-philosophic, scientific as well as social problems (12). Therefore, from this reactionary stream, Sartre inherited four main ideas: the view that traditional philosophy is bankrupt, that there is no future in old-style philosophy; there is need to do something; the second is an emphasis on individual: the rational category was viewed as more interesting,

This paper critically examines Sartre's argument for the meaninglessness of life from our foundationless freedom. According to Sartre, our freedom to choose our values is completely undetermined. Hence, we cannot rely on anything when choosing and cannot justify our choices. Thus, our freedom is the foundation of our world without itself having any foundation, and this renders our lives absurd. Sartre's argument presupposes, then, that although we can freely choose all our values we have a meta-value that we cannot choose: that values are acceptable only if they are justifi ed by some independent factor rather than by one's free choice. I argue that we need not accept this presupposition: subjectivists may well choose to be 'proud subjectivists' who are pleased with, rather than ashamed by, their subjectivism. Indeed, many subjectivists, including those considering the meaning of life -for example, Harry Frankfurt and Brooke Alan Trisel -adopt this position.