In the essay "Existentialism Is a Humanism," Jean-Paul Sartre puts forth his Existentialist view of the human condition - that is, existence precedes essence. With this enigmatic phrase, Sartre argues that humans first exist and then are fully responsible for defining their own essence or nature.
The Theological View of the Human Condition
In order to explain how humans come to define themselves, Sartre first illustrates the opposite view of his own - a theological view. According to the theological description of the human condition, essence of humanity is first conceived in the mind of God. Only after this conception does God come to create humans. Thus, in the theological view according to Sartre, human essence precedes existence.
Sartre's View of the Human Condition
Since Sartre describes his version of Existentialism as atheistic, he reverses the theological description that holds that humanity's essence precedes existence. In presenting his own view of the human condition, he argues that human beings first exist and then have the complete responsibility for defining themselves (i.e., their essence or who they are). Thus, according to Sartre's view, humanity's existence precedes its essence. This essence, however, is not fixed and eternal like a theological version of the human soul. Humans are in a continual process of individually defining themselves until they can no longer create a definition - that is, at death. After death, the essence of each individual, for Sartre, is the sum total of his or her actions and obviously can no longer be changed.
Facticity, Freedom, and Bad Faith
Each individual's past actions and other facts about his or her existence that cannot be changed (family ancestry, DNA, etc.) Sartre calls "facticity." Unless someone is held captive, each individual is always free to continue to define him or herself. Following a long tradition in Western thinking, Sartre calls this "freedom." Both aspects of the human condition (facticity and freedom) must be recognized for Sartre or the truth of our condition is being denied.
There are two ways to deny the dual aspect of the human condition. First, someone can deny one's own facticity by escaping into complete freedom. An individual could do this by attempting to hide past actions that are now regretted, by concealing one's family heritage, or by lying to oneself about a physical ailment. In this way, one would attempt to be free of the facts about existence that cannot be changed.
Second, a person can deny his or her freedom of choice by escaping into complete facticity. An individual may attempt to defend a point of view, for example, through excuses such as "that's how I was raised" or "that's just who I am." These excuses, for Sartre, are an attempt to cover over the fact that humans individually choose their own actions and that humans create, or come to affirm, a point of view. Moreover, these excuses are an attempt to claim that a person has a predefined essence or is complete facticity, and they are a denial of the fact that humans create their own definition individually. Humans are fully responsible for an adopted point of view and any actions that are performed.
For Sartre, to deny one's facticity or freedom is to be in bad faith. Legally, "bad faith" is the intentional fraudulent act of not fulfilling one's obligations in a contract or to enter into a contract when one does not intend to fulfill one's obligations. For Sartre, the intentional fraudulent act by a person is to deny to him or herself either side of the human condition - denying one's facticity or denying one's freedom. Either denial is an act of bad faith.
Resources:
- "Bad Faith." Nolo's Plain-English Law Dictionary. Accessed 25 September 2009.
- Sartre, Jean-Paul. "Existentialism Is a Humanism." Existentialism from Dostoevsky to Sartre. Ed. Walter Kaufman. Cleveland and New York: Meridian Books, 1966. 287-311.
- Sartre, Jean-Paul. Being and Nothingness. Trans. Hazel Barnes. New York: Philosophical Library, 1956.
