Sartres Existentialism And Human Emotions Essay Example

Sartre hated the term existentialism as applied to his ideas. He felt that the term encompassed and entirely different focus from his own. He believed the term existential was applied to his theory simply due to the fact he focused on the critical nature of existence itself and how existence precedes and molds the ability to exercise formative actions based on individual choices. Yet whereas the term existential is often used to reflect the nature or subjective experience in other’s theories, for Sartre existence was the predefining determinant which shaped man’s choices and intentional behavior.
Much of existential theory in Sartre’s time included metaphysical aspects and focused on an assumed universal human experience. It is argued that most people do not live genuine lives, instead constantly responding to external expectations of culture, society and class. This prevents them from ever being able to experience the true nature of authentic human existence. Sartre presented an entirely different approach to man’s existence and search to live a meaningful life. Sartre stated that objects are created for a specific purpose. Shovels are used to dig, knives are used to cut and pens are used to write. The design of the object precedes its existence and once it comes into existence, it already has its purpose defined for it. A pen with no nub is simply a stick. Human kind, Sartre argues, have a different path. For us, existence is the key starting point. He did not believe in a divine creator and did not spend much time discussing what happens before birth or even before humans become self-aware. Sartre focuses on the idea that first we exist, since prior to our existence there is nothing. It is only once we exist that we can exercise choice and free will to determine the course of our life. Instead of having our purpose defined for us, we exists then explore our options, then choose our life’s purpose for ourselves.
Sartre viewed responsibility as a requirement of freedom. It is not just that we have the freedom to choose and pursue a life course, and choose our own identity and act accordingly, we have the responsibility to do these things. When others speak of ethics and morals in how we treat others, Sartre’s view is that if we have taken complete responsibility for fulfilling our self-determined purpose, taking advantage of the freedom which allows us to do so, then there should be no conflict with others who have done likewise. Only when people have not exercised responsible choices and actions to remain true to who they are and their accepted purpose, will the need arise to act against others or develop a belief system which consists of negative views and judgment about others. This is only necessary, according to Sartre, when a person has not accepted the responsibility to actively create their self-view, purpose and objectives, and is dedicated to instituting changes in their beliefs, thoughts and behaviors based on fulfilling their ultimate purpose that they defined.
This viewpoint can be a problem seen in another light. When discussing ethics and morality, it is not only defined based on an objective set of criteria. There is also how others views, behaviors and actions affect people. While the state of being happy and satisfied in your own self can relate to the ability to treat other positively there is also objective perceptions. Just because you have lived up to your responsibility regarding freedom to choose doesn’t mean that nothing you do or say will be perceived by others as unfair or hurtful. It is not just where we are at that defines what is moral or ethical. It is how others experience our actions or viewpoints such that sometimes we may need to change how we think and act even when they have resulted from our choices and self-constructions.