당신은 주제를 찾고 있습니까 “being and nothingness quotes – Jean-Paul Sartre: Being and Nothingness – Introductory Concepts“? 다음 카테고리의 웹사이트 https://dienbienfriendlytrip.com 에서 귀하의 모든 질문에 답변해 드립니다: https://dienbienfriendlytrip.com/finance/. 바로 아래에서 답을 찾을 수 있습니다. 작성자 Rob Samartino 이(가) 작성한 기사에는 조회수 10,389회 및 좋아요 379개 개의 좋아요가 있습니다.
Preview — Being and Nothingness by Jean-Paul Sartre. “It is therefore senseless to think of complaining since nothing foreign has decided what we feel, what we live, or what we are.” “I exist, that is all, and I find it nauseating.” “Nothingness lies coiled in the heart of being – like a worm.”For Sartre, nothingness is the defining characteristic of the for-itself. A tree is a tree and lacks the ability to change or create its being. Man, on the other hand, makes himself by acting in the world. Instead of simply being, as the object-in-itself does, man, as an object-for-itself, must actuate his own being.“Man is condemned to be free; because once thrown into the world, he is responsible for everything he does.
…
Being and Nothingness.
| Cover of the first edition | |
|---|---|
| Author | Jean-Paul Sartre |
| Original title | L’Être et le néant |
being and nothingness quotes 주제에 대한 동영상 보기
여기에서 이 주제에 대한 비디오를 시청하십시오. 주의 깊게 살펴보고 읽고 있는 내용에 대한 피드백을 제공하세요!
d여기에서 Jean-Paul Sartre: Being and Nothingness – Introductory Concepts – being and nothingness quotes 주제에 대한 세부정보를 참조하세요
This first video charts a path for the playlist to come as well as introducing some of the foundational ideas to Sartre’s philosophy: phenomenology, (subject/object) distinction, and nothingness.
Absurd Being:
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLk0yL-_RNygPJKcM-ggz2XmnbXttu4BZg
being and nothingness quotes 주제에 대한 자세한 내용은 여기를 참조하세요.
Jean-Paul Sartre – Being and Nothingness (1943) – Lib Quotes
Man is condemned to be free; because once thrown into the world, he is responsible for everything he does. Jean-Paul Sartre.
Source: libquotes.com
Date Published: 9/26/2022
View: 4890
Being and Nothingness Quotes | GradeSaver
Satre’s existential argument seemingly reduces human existence to nothingness. This being sa, Sartre also suggests that there is great freedom …
Source: www.gradesaver.com
Date Published: 9/20/2022
View: 7615
‘Being and Nothingness’ Quotes by Jean-Paul Sartre | IvyU
“It is therefore senseless to think of complaining since nothing foreign has deced what we feel, what we live, or what we are.”.
Source: ivystore.wordpress.com
Date Published: 4/10/2021
View: 4526
Being and Nothingness Quotes. – AamBoli
1. “It is therefore senseless to think of complaining since nothing foreign has deced what we feel, what we live, or what we are.” · 2. “I exist, that is all, …
Source: www.aamboli.com
Date Published: 5/23/2022
View: 3880
주제와 관련된 이미지 being and nothingness quotes
주제와 관련된 더 많은 사진을 참조하십시오 Jean-Paul Sartre: Being and Nothingness – Introductory Concepts. 댓글에서 더 많은 관련 이미지를 보거나 필요한 경우 더 많은 관련 기사를 볼 수 있습니다.
주제에 대한 기사 평가 being and nothingness quotes
- Author: Rob Samartino
- Views: 조회수 10,389회
- Likes: 좋아요 379개
- Date Published: 2020. 3. 1.
- Video Url link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HNtdcgAyLhI
What is the point of being and nothingness?
For Sartre, nothingness is the defining characteristic of the for-itself. A tree is a tree and lacks the ability to change or create its being. Man, on the other hand, makes himself by acting in the world. Instead of simply being, as the object-in-itself does, man, as an object-for-itself, must actuate his own being.
What was Jean Paul Sartre’s famous saying?
“Man is condemned to be free; because once thrown into the world, he is responsible for everything he does.
What is the relation between being and nothing?
…
Being and Nothingness.
| Cover of the first edition | |
|---|---|
| Author | Jean-Paul Sartre |
| Original title | L’Être et le néant |
What is meant by being in itself and being for-itself explain?
Being for-itself (pour-soi) is the mode of existence of consciousness, consisting in its own activity and purposive nature; being in-itself (en-soi) is the self-sufficient, lumpy, contingent being of ordinary things.
What is the concept of nothingness?
1 : the quality or state of being nothing: such as. a : nonexistence. b : utter insignificance. c : death.
How is consciousness nothingness?
ABSTRACT Sartre’s claim in Being and Nothingness that consciousness is nothingness is typically understood as meaning either that consciousness is not itself, that it is not its objects, that it is not its past, or that it is some sort of state of affairs.
Was Sartre a Marxist?
Sartre’s pioneering combination of Existentialism and Marxism yielded a political philosophy uniquely sensitive to the tension between individual freedom and the forces of history. As a Marxist he believed that societies were best understood as arenas of struggle between powerful and powerless groups.
What is Jean-Paul Sartre philosophy?
Sartre’s theory of existentialism states that “existence precedes essence”, that is only by existing and acting a certain way do we give meaning to our lives. According to him, there is no fixed design for how a human being should be and no God to give us a purpose.
What is freedom for Sartre?
Sartre writes that freedom means “by oneself to determine oneself to wish. In other words success is not important to freedom” (1943, 483). It is important to note the difference between choice, wish and dream.
Is nothing considered a being?
Nothing, taken in its immediacy, shows itself as affirmative, as being; for according to its nature it is the same as being. Nothing is thought of, imagined, spoken of, and therefore it is; in the thinking, imagining, speaking and so on, nothing has its being.
Is Being and Nothingness a good read?
Being & Nothingness is without doubt one of the most significant philosophical books of the 20th century. The central work by one of the century’s most influential thinkers, it altered the course of western philosophy.
Who wrote Being and Nothingness?
Jean-Paul Sartre was a French novelist, playwright, and philosopher. A leading figure in 20th-century French philosophy, he was an exponent of a philosophy of existence known as existentialism. His most notable works included Nausea (1938), Being and Nothingness (1943), and Existentialism and Humanism (1946).
What is bad faith in philosophy?
In the philosophy of existentialism, bad faith (mauvaise foi) is the psychological phenomenon whereby individuals act inauthentically, by yielding to the external pressures of society to adopt false values and disown their innate freedom as sentient human beings.
What is bad faith according to Sartre?
Sartre regarded bad faith as a denial of freedom which we all have. He gives an example of a waiter, who tells himself that to wait on tables is his destiny. The takeaway here is that to blame social pressures or others for what we are or what we do may be comforting, but it is a denial of the freedom we have.
What is being in existentialism?
According to existentialism: (1) Existence is always particular and individual—always my existence, your existence, his existence, her existence. (2) Existence is primarily the problem of existence (i.e., of its mode of being); it is, therefore, also the investigation of the meaning of Being.
Is nothing considered a being?
Nothing, taken in its immediacy, shows itself as affirmative, as being; for according to its nature it is the same as being. Nothing is thought of, imagined, spoken of, and therefore it is; in the thinking, imagining, speaking and so on, nothing has its being.
What does Sartre mean by being in itself?
Being-in-itself for Sartre
Being-in-itself refers to objects in the external world — a mode of existence that simply is. It is not conscious so it is neither active nor passive and harbors no potentiality for transcendence.
When did Sartre write Being and Nothingness?
Jean-Paul Sartre published his first novel, Nausea, in 1938. The novel stemmed from his belief that “existence precedes essence.” Five years later, Sartre published Being and Nothingness (1943), arguably his most famous work.
What did Sartre say about consciousness?
Jean-Paul Sartre believed that consciousness entails self-consciousness, or, even more strongly, that consciousness is self-consciousness.
Being and Nothingness Quotes by Jean-Paul Sartre
Jean-Paul Sartre,
“Temporality is obviously an organised structure, and these three so-called elements of time: past, present, future, must not be envisaged as a collection of ‘data’ to be added together…but as the structured moments of an original synthesis. Otherwise we shall immediately meet with this paradox: the past is no longer, the future is not yet, as for the instantaneous present, everyone knows that it is not at all: it is the limit of infinite division, like the dimensionless point.”
Jean-Paul Sartre (1905–1980) Being and Nothingness Summary & Analysis
Summary
Sartre introduces Being and Nothingness, his single greatest articulation of his existentialist philosophy, as “an essay in phenomenological ontology.” Essentially, it is a study of the consciousness of being. Ontology means the study of being; phenomenological means of or relating to perceptual consciousness.
In the introduction to Being and Nothingness, Sartre details his rejection of Kant’s concept of noumenon. Kant was an idealist, believing that we have no direct way of perceiving the external world and that all we have access to is our ideas of the world, including what our senses tell us. Kant distinguished between phenomena, which are our perceptions of things or how things appear to us, and noumena, which are the things in themselves, which we have no knowledge of. Against Kant, Sartre argues that the appearance of a phenomenon is pure and absolute. The noumenon is not inaccessible—it simply isn’t there. Appearance is the only reality. From this starting point, Sartre contends that the world can be seen as an infinite series of finite appearances. Such a perspective eliminates a number of dualisms, notably the duality that contrasts the inside and outside of an object. What we see is what we get (or, what appears is what we know).
After dispensing with the concept of the noumenon, Sartre outlines the binary distinction that dominates the rest of Being and Nothingness: the distinction between unconscious being (en-soi, being-in-itself) and conscious being (pour-soi, being-for-itself). Being-in-itself is concrete, lacks the ability to change, and is unaware of itself. Being-for-itself is conscious of its own consciousness but is also incomplete. For Sartre, this undefined, nondetermined nature is what defines man. Since the for-itself (like man) lacks a predetermined essence, it is forced to create itself from nothingness. For Sartre, nothingness is the defining characteristic of the for-itself. A tree is a tree and lacks the ability to change or create its being. Man, on the other hand, makes himself by acting in the world. Instead of simply being, as the object-in-itself does, man, as an object-for-itself, must actuate his own being.
Sartre next introduces the related truth that the being-for-itself possesses meaning only through its perpetual foray into the unknown future. In other words, a man is not essentially what one might describe him as now. For example, if he is a teacher, he is not a teacher in the way that a rock, as a being-in-itself, is a rock. In truth, the man is never an essence, no matter how much he strives at self-essentialism. The way he interprets his past and foresees his future is itself a series of choices. As Sartre explains, even if an individual can be said to have a certain physical nature, as a chair does (e.g., “he is six feet tall, and the chair two”), the individual nonetheless projects himself by ascribing meaning to, or taking meaning from, his concrete characteristics and thus negating them. The paradox here is great. The for-itself, desiring to become one within the in-itself, imposes its subjectivity on the other’s objectivity. The for-itself is consciousness, yet the instance this consciousness makes its own being a question, the irreconcilable fissure between the in-itself and the for-itself is affirmed.
Sartre explains that as a conscious being, the for-itself recognizes what it is not: it is not a being-in-itself. Through the awareness of what it is not, the for-itself becomes what it is: a nothingness, wholly free in the world, with a blank canvas on which to create its being. He concludes that the for-itself is the being through which nothingness and lack enter the world, and consequently, the for-itself is itself a lack. The absence it signifies is the absence of the unattainable synthesis of the for-itself and the in-itself. The being-for-itself is defined by its knowledge of being not in-itself. Knowing is its own form of being, even if this knowledge is only of what one is not and cannot be, rather than what one is. The human can never know being as it truly is, for to do that, one would have to be the thing itself. To know a rock, we have to be the rock (and of course, the rock, as a being-in-itself, lacks consciousness). Yet the being-for-itself sees and intuits the world through what is not present. In this way, the being-for-itself, already wholly free, also possesses the power of imagination. Even if absolute beauty (to Sartre, the absolute union of being and consciousness) cannot be apprehended, knowing it through its absence, as in the way one feels the emptiness left by a departed loved one, is its own truth.
Delving into the ways individual beings-for-itself relate to one another, Sartre argues that we, as human beings, can become aware of ourselves only when confronted with the gaze of another. Not until we are aware of being watched do we become aware of our own presence. The gaze of the other is objectifying in the sense that when one views another person building a house, he or she sees that person as simply a house builder. Sartre writes that we perceive ourselves being perceived and come to objectify ourselves in the same way we are being objectified. Thus, the gaze of the other robs us of our inherent freedom and causes us to deprive ourselves of our existence as a being-for-itself and instead learn to falsely self-identify as a being-in-itself.
Jean-Paul Sartre Quotes (Author of Nausea)
“Man can will nothing unless he has first understood that he must count on no one but himself; that he is alone, abandoned on earth in the midst of his infinite responsibilities, without help, with no other aim than the one he sets himself, with no other destiny than the one he forges for himself on this earth.”
― Jean-Paul Sartre
Being and Nothingness
1943 book by Jean-Paul Sartre
Being and Nothingness: An Essay on Phenomenological Ontology (French: L’Être et le néant : Essai d’ontologie phénoménologique), sometimes published with the subtitle A Phenomenological Essay on Ontology, is a 1943 book by the philosopher Jean-Paul Sartre. In the book, Sartre develops a philosophical account in support of his existentialism, dealing with topics such as consciousness, perception, social philosophy, self-deception, the existence of “nothingness”, psychoanalysis, and the question of free will.
While a prisoner of war in 1940 and 1941, Sartre read Martin Heidegger’s Being and Time (1927), which uses the method of Husserlian phenomenology as a lens for examining ontology. Sartre attributed the course of his own philosophical inquiries to his exposure to this work. Though influenced by Heidegger, Sartre was profoundly skeptical of any measure by which humanity could achieve a kind of personal state of fulfillment comparable to the hypothetical Heideggerian “re-encounter with Being”. In Sartre’s account, man is a creature haunted by a vision of “completion” (what Sartre calls the ens causa sui, meaning literally “a being that causes itself”), which many religions and philosophers identify as God. Born into the material reality of one’s body, in a material universe, one finds oneself inserted into being. In accordance with Husserl’s notion that consciousness can only exist as consciousness of something, Sartre develops the idea that there can be no form of self that is “hidden” inside consciousness. On these grounds, Sartre goes on to offer a philosophical critique of Sigmund Freud’s theories, based on the claim that consciousness is essentially self-conscious.
Being and Nothingness is regarded as both the most important non-fiction expression of Sartre’s existentialism and his most influential philosophical work, original despite its debt to Heidegger. Many have praised the book’s central notion that “existence precedes essence”, its introduction of the concept of bad faith, and its exploration of “nothingness”, as well as its novel contributions to the philosophy of sex. However, the book has been criticized for its abstruseness and for its treatment of Freud.
Background [ edit ]
Descartes [ edit ]
Sartre’s existentialism shares its philosophical starting point with René Descartes: The first thing we can be aware of is our existence, even when doubting everything else (Cogito ergo sum). In Nausea, the main character’s feeling of dizziness towards his own existence is induced by things, not thinking. This dizziness occurs “in the face of one’s freedom and responsibility for giving a meaning to reality”.[1] As an important break with Descartes, Sartre rejects the primacy of knowledge (a rejection summed up in the phrase “Existence precedes essence”) and offers a different conception of knowledge and consciousness.
Husserl [ edit ]
Important ideas in Being and Nothingness build on Edmund Husserl’s phenomenology. To both philosophers, consciousness is intentional, meaning that there is only consciousness of something. For Sartre, intentionality implies that there is no form of self that is hidden inside consciousness (such as Husserl’s transcendental ego). An ego must be a structure outside consciousness, so that there can be consciousness of the ego.[2]
Summary [ edit ]
In the introduction, Sartre sketches his own theory of consciousness, being, and phenomena through criticism of both earlier phenomenologists (most notably Husserl and Heidegger) as well as idealists, rationalists, and empiricists. According to him, one of the major achievements of modern philosophy is phenomenology because it disproved the kinds of dualism that set the existent up as having a “hidden” nature (such as Immanuel Kant’s noumenon); Phenomenology has removed “the illusion of worlds behind the scene”.[3]
Based on an examination of the nature of phenomena, he describes the nature of two types of being, being-in-itself (the being of things) and being-for-itself. While being-in-itself is something that can only be approximated by human being, being-for-itself is the being of consciousness.
Part 1, Chapter 1: The origin of negation [ edit ]
From Sartre’s phenomenological point of view, nothingness is an experienced reality and cannot be a merely subjective mistake. The absence of a friend and absence of money hint at a being of nothingness. It is part of reality. In the first chapter, Sartre develops a theory of nothingness which is central to the whole book, especially to his account for bad faith and freedom.[4] For him, nothingness is not just a mental concept that sums up negative judgements such as “Pierre is not here” and “I have no money”. Though “it is evident that non-being always appears within the limits of a human expectation”,[5] the concrete nothingness differs from mere abstract inexistence, such as the square circle. A concrete nothingness, e.g. not being able to see, is part of a totality: the life of the blind man in this world. This totality is modified by the nothingness which is part of it.[6]
In the totality of consciousness and phenomenon (Heidegger’s being-in-the-world), both can be considered separately, but exist only as a whole (intentionality of consciousness). The human attitude of inquiry, of asking questions, puts consciousness at distance from the world. Every question brings up the possibility of a negative answer, of non-being, e.g. “Who is entering? No one.” For Sartre, this is how nothingness can exist at all. Non-being can neither be part of the being-in-itself nor can it be as a complement of it. Being-for-itself is the origin of negation. The relation between being-for-itself and being-in-itself is one of questioning the latter. By bringing nothingness into the world, consciousness does not annihilate the being of things, but changes its relation to it.
Part 1, Chapter 2: Bad faith [ edit ]
As bad faith, Sartre describes one’s self-deception about the human reality. It can take two forms, the first one is making oneself falsely believe not to be what one actually is. The second one is conceiving oneself as an object (e.g. being identical to a job) and thereby denying freedom.[7]
This essentially means that in being a waiter, grocer, etc., one must believe that their social role is equivalent to their human existence. Living a life defined by one’s occupation, social, racial, or economic class, is the very essence of “bad faith”, the condition in which people cannot transcend their situations in order to realize what they must be (human) and what they are not (waiter, grocer, etc.). It is also essential for an existent to understand that negation allows the self to enter what Sartre calls the “great human stream”. The great human stream arises from a singular realization that nothingness is a state of mind in which we can become anything, in reference to our situation, that we desire.
The difference between existence and identity projection remains at the heart of human subjects who are swept up by their own condition, their “bad faith”. An example of projection that Sartre uses is the café waiter who performs the duties, traditions, functions, and expectations of a café waiter:
[W]hat are we then if we have the constant obligation to make ourselves what we are if our mode of being is having the obligation to be what we are? Let us consider this waiter in the café. His movement is quick and forward, a little too precise, a little too rapid. He bends forward a little too eagerly; his voice, his eyes express an interest a little too solicitous for the order of the customer. Finally there he returns, trying to imitate in his walk the inflexible stiffness of some kind of automaton while carrying his tray with the recklessness of a tight-rope-walker by putting it in a perpetually unstable, perpetually broken equilibrium which he perpetually re-establishes by a light movement of the arm and hand. All his behavior seems to us a game. He applies himself to changing his movements as if they were mechanisms, the one regulating the other; his gestures and even his voice seems to be mechanisms; he gives himself the quickness and pitiless rapidity of things. He is playing, he is amusing himself. But what is he playing? We need not watch long before we can explain it: he is playing at being a waiter in a café. There is nothing there to surprise us.
Sartre also gives, as an example of bad faith, the attitude of the homosexual who denies that he is a homosexual, feeling that “a homosexual is not a homosexual” in the same sense that a table is a table or a red-haired man is red-haired. Sartre argues that such an attitude is partially correct since it is based in the “irreducible character of human reality”, but that it would be fully correct only if the homosexual accepted that he is a homosexual in the sense that he has adopted a pattern of conduct defined as that of a homosexual, although not one “to the extent that human reality can not be finally defined by patterns of conduct”.[8]
Sartre consistently mentions that in order to get out of bad faith, one must realize that one’s existence and one’s formal projection of a self are distinctly separate and within the means of human control. This separation is a form of nothingness. Nothingness, in terms of bad faith, is characterized by Sartre as the internal negation which separates pure existence and identity, and thus we are subject to playing our lives out in a similar manner. An example is something that is what it is (existence) and something that is what it is not (a waiter defined by his occupation).
However, Sartre takes a stance against characterizing bad faith in terms of “mere social positions”. Says Sartre, “I am never any one of my attitudes, any one of my actions.” The good speaker is the one who plays at speaking because he cannot be speaking. This literally means that, like the café waiter, the speaker is not his condition or social categorization, but is a speaker consumed by bad faith. Thus, we must realize what we are (beings who exist) and what we are not (a social/historical preoccupation) in order to step out of bad faith. Yet, existents (human beings) must maintain a balance between existence, their roles, and nothingness to become authentic beings.
Additionally, an important tenet of bad faith is that we must enact a bit of “good faith” in order to take advantage of our role to reach an authentic existence. The authentic domain of bad faith is realizing that the role we are playing is the lie. To live and project into the future as a project of a self, while keeping out of bad faith and living by the will of the self is living life authentically.
One of the most important implications of bad faith is the abolition of traditional ethics. Being a “moral person” requires one to deny authentic impulses (everything that makes us human) and allow the will of another person to change one’s actions. Being “a moral person” is one of the most severe forms of bad faith. Sartre essentially characterizes this as “the faith of bad faith” which is and should not be, in Sartre’s opinion, at the heart of one’s existence. Sartre has a very low opinion of conventional ethics, condemning it as a tool of the bourgeoisie to control the masses.
Bad faith also results when individuals begin to view their life as made up of distinct past events. By viewing one’s ego as it once was rather than as it currently is, one ends up negating the current self and replacing it with a past self that no longer exists.
Part 3, Chapter 1: The look [ edit ]
The mere possible presence of another person causes one to look at oneself as an object and see one’s world as it appears to the other. This is not done from a specific location outside oneself, but is non-positional. This is a recognition of the subjectivity in others.
This transformation is most clear when one sees a mannequin that one confuses for a real person for a moment.
While they believe it is a person, their world is transformed. Objects now partly escape them; they have aspects that belong to the other person, and that are thus unknowable to them. During this time one can no longer have a total subjectivity. The world is now the other person’s world, a foreign world that no longer comes from the self, but from the other. The other person is a “threat to the order and arrangement of your whole world…Your world is suddenly haunted by the Other’s values, over which you have no control”. [9]
When they realise it is a mannequin, and is not subjective, the world seems to transfer back, and they are again in the center of a universe. This is back to the pre-reflective mode of being, it is “the eye of the camera that is always present but is never seen”.[9] The person is occupied and too busy for self-reflection.[10] This process is continual, unavoidable, and ineluctable.[9]
Being for Others [ edit ]
Sartre states that many relationships are created by people’s attraction not to another person, but rather how that person makes them feel about themselves by how they look at them. This is a state of emotional alienation whereby a person avoids experiencing their subjectivity by identifying themselves with “the look” of the other. The consequence is conflict. In order to maintain the person’s own being, the person must control the other, but must also control the freedom of the other “as freedom”. These relationships are a profound manifestation of “bad faith” as the for-itself is replaced with the other’s freedom. The purpose of either participant is not to exist, but to maintain the other participant’s looking at them. This system is often mistakenly called “love”, but it is, in fact, nothing more than emotional alienation and denial of freedom through conflict with the other. Sartre believes that it is often created as a means of making the unbearable anguish of a person’s relationship to their “facticity” (all of the concrete details against the background of which human freedom exists and is limited, such as birthplace and time) bearable. At its extreme, the alienation can become so intense that due to the guilt of being so radically enslaved by “the look” and therefore radically missing their own freedoms, the participants can experience masochistic and sadistic attitudes. This happens when the participants cause pain to each other, in attempting to prove their control over the other’s look, which they cannot escape because they believe themselves to be so enslaved to the look that experiencing their own subjectivity would be equally unbearable.
Sex [ edit ]
Sartre explains that “the look” is the basis for sexual desire, declaring that a biological motivation for sex does not exist. Instead, “double reciprocal incarnation” is a form of mutual awareness which Sartre takes to be at the heart of the sexual experience. This involves the mutual recognition of subjectivity of some sort, as Sartre describes: “I make myself flesh in order to impel the Other to realize for herself and for me her own flesh. My caress causes my flesh to be born for me insofar as it is for the Other flesh causing her to be born as flesh.”
Even in sex (perhaps especially in sex), men and women are haunted by a state in which consciousness and bodily being would be in perfect harmony, with desire satisfied. Such a state, however, can never be. We try to bring the beloved’s consciousness to the surface of their body by use of magical acts performed, gestures (kisses, desires, etc.), but at the moment of orgasm the illusion is ended and we return to ourselves, just as it is ended when the skier comes to the foot of the mountain or when the commodity that once we desired loses its glow upon our purchase of it. There will be, for Sartre, no such moment of completion because “man is a useless passion” to be the ens causa sui, the God of the ontological proof.
Nothingness [ edit ]
Sartre contends that human existence is a conundrum whereby each of us exists, for as long as we live, within an overall condition of nothingness (no thing-ness)—that ultimately allows for free consciousness. Yet simultaneously, within our being (in the physical world), we are constrained to make continuous, conscious choices.
It is this dichotomy that causes anguish, because choice (subjectivity) represents a limit on freedom within an otherwise unbridled range of thoughts. Subsequently, humans seek to flee our anguish through action-oriented constructs such as escapes, visualizations, or visions (such as dreams) designed to lead us toward some meaningful end, such as necessity, destiny, determinism (God), etc. Thus, in living our lives, we often become unconscious actors—Bourgeois, Feminist, Worker, Party Member, Frenchman, Canadian or American—each doing as we must to fulfill our chosen characters’ destinies.
However, Sartre contends our conscious choices (leading to often unconscious actions) run counter to our intellectual freedom. Yet we are bound to the conditioned and physical world—in which some form of action is always required. This leads to failed dreams of completion, as Sartre described them, because inevitably we are unable to bridge the void between the purity and spontaneity of thought and all-too constraining action; between the being and the nothingness that inherently coincide in our self.
Sartre’s recipe for fulfillment is to escape all quests by completing them. This is accomplished by rigorously forcing order onto nothingness, employing the “spirit (or consciousness of mind) of seriousness” and describing the failure to do so in terms such as “bad faith” and “false consciousness”. Though Sartre’s conclusion seems to be that being diminishes before nothingness since consciousness is probably based more on spontaneity than on stable seriousness, he contends that any person of a serious nature is obliged to continuous struggle between two things:
a) The conscious desire for peaceful self-fulfillment through physical actions and social roles—as if living within a portrait that one actively paints of oneself
b) The more pure and raging spontaneity of no thing consciousness, of being instantaneously free to overturn one’s roles, pull up stakes, and strike out on new paths
Phenomenological ontology [ edit ]
In Sartre’s opinion, consciousness does not make sense by itself: it arises only as an awareness of objects. Consciousness is therefore always and essentially consciousness of something, whether this “something” is a thing, a person, an imaginary object, etc. Phenomenologists often refer to this quality of consciousness as “intentionality”. Sartre’s contribution, then, is that in addition to always being consciousness of something, consciousness is always consciousness of itself. In other words, all consciousness is, by definition, self-consciousness. By “self-consciousness”, Sartre does not mean being aware of oneself thought of as an object (e.g., one’s “ego”), but rather that, as a phenomenon in the world, consciousness both appears and appears to itself at the same time. By appearing to itself, Sartre argues that consciousness is fully transparent; unlike an ordinary “object” (a house, for instance, of which it is impossible to perceive all of the sides at the same time), consciousness “sees” all aspects of itself at once. This non-positional quality of consciousness is what makes it a unique type of being, a being that exists for itself.
Critique of Freud [ edit ]
Sartre offers a critique of the psychoanalyst Sigmund Freud’s theory of the unconscious, based on the claim that consciousness is essentially self-conscious. Sartre also argues that Freud’s theory of repression is internally flawed.[11] According to Sartre, in his clinical work, Freud encountered patients who seemed to embody a particular kind of paradox—they appeared to both know and not know the same thing. In response, Freud postulated the existence of the unconscious, which contains the “truth” of the traumas underlying the patients’ behavior. This “truth” is actively repressed, which is made evident by the patients’ resistance to its revelation during analysis. Yet what does the resisting if the patients are unaware of what they are repressing? Sartre finds the answer in what Freud calls the “censor”. “The only level on which we can locate the refusal of the subject”, Sartre writes, “is that of the censor.” Further:
[T]he resistance of the patient implies on the level of the censor an awareness of the thing repressed as such, a comprehension of the end toward which the questions of the psychoanalyst are leading . . . These various operations in their turn imply that the censor is conscious itself. But what type of self-consciousness can the censor have? It must be the consciousness being conscious of the drive to be repressed, but precisely in order not to be conscious of it. What does this mean if not that the censor is in bad faith?[12]
In other words, Sartre views Freud’s unconscious to be a scapegoat for the paradox of simultaneously knowing and not knowing the same information. Instead of alleviating the paradox, Freud simply moves it to the censor, establishing “between the unconscious and consciousness an autonomous consciousness in bad faith”.[13] Sartre thinks that the postulation of a censor within the psychic economy is therefore redundant: at the level of the censor, we still encounter the same problem of a consciousness that hides something from itself. For Sartre, what Freud identifies as repression is rather indicative of the larger structure of bad faith. Psychoanalysis thus does not yield any special insight, since hiding something from oneself occurs at the level of consciousness as a unified phenomenon, not as part of some intra-psychic mechanism.
Toward the end of Being and Nothingness, Sartre attempts to adapt some of Freud’s ideas, and thereby develop an “existential psychoanalysis” in which causal categories are replaced by teleological categories.[11]
Special terminology used by Sartre [ edit ]
Explanation of terms based on appendix to the English edition of Being and Nothingness by translator Hazel Barnes[14]
Being (être): Including both Being-in-itself and Being-for-itself (both as defined below), but the latter is the nihilation of the former. Being is objective, not subjective or individual.
Being-in-itself ( être-en-soi ): Non-conscious Being. The sort of phenomenon that is greater than the knowledge that we have of it.
): Non-conscious Being. The sort of phenomenon that is greater than the knowledge that we have of it. Being-for-itself ( être-pour-soi ): The nihilation of Being-in-itself; consciousness conceived as a lack of Being, a desire for Being, a relation of Being. The For-itself brings Nothingness into the world and therefore can stand out from Being and form attitudes towards other beings by seeing what it is not.
): The nihilation of Being-in-itself; consciousness conceived as a lack of Being, a desire for Being, a relation of Being. The For-itself brings Nothingness into the world and therefore can stand out from Being and form attitudes towards other beings by seeing what it is not. Being-for-others ( être-pour-autrui ): Here a new dimension arises in which the self exists as an object for others. Each For-itself seeks to recover its own Being by making an object out of the other.
): Here a new dimension arises in which the self exists as an object for others. Each For-itself seeks to recover its own Being by making an object out of the other. Consciousness: The transcending For-itself. Sartre states that “Consciousness is a being such that in its being, its being is in question insofar as this being implies a being other than itself.”
Existence: Concrete, individual being-for-itself here and now.
Existence precedes essence. The subjective existence of reality precedes and defines its nature. Who you are (your essence) is defined by what you do (your existence).
Facticity ( facticité ): Broadly: facts about the world. More precisely, the For-itself’s necessary connection with the In-itself, with the world and its own past.
): Broadly: facts about the world. More precisely, the For-itself’s necessary connection with the In-itself, with the world and its own past. Freedom: The very being of the For-itself which is “condemned to be free”. It must forever choose for itself and therefore make itself.
Nothingness ( néant ): Although not having being, it is supported by being. It comes into the world by the For-itself.
): Although not having being, it is supported by being. It comes into the world by the For-itself. Reflection ( reflet ): The form in which the For-itself founds its own nothingness through the dyad of “the-reflection-reflecting”
): The form in which the For-itself founds its own nothingness through the dyad of “the-reflection-reflecting” Reflection (réflexion):The consciousness attempting to become its own object.
Reception [ edit ]
Being and Nothingness is considered Sartre’s most important philosophical work,[11] and the most important non-fiction expression of his existentialism.[15] Christian existentialist Gabriel Marcel wrote that it was of “incontestable” importance and ranked among the most important contributions made to general philosophy. While Marcel noted the influence of Heidegger on “the form at least” of Being and Nothingness, he also observed that Sartre diverged from the views expressed by Heidegger in Being and Time (1927) in important ways, and that Sartre’s contributions were original. Marcel considered Sartre’s analysis of bad faith “one of the most outstanding and solid” parts of Being and Nothingness, writing that it prevented Sartre’s arguments from being purely abstract. Marcel saw one of the most important merits of the work to be to show “that a form of metaphysics which denies or refuses grace inevitably ends by setting up in front of us the image of an atrophied and contradictory world where the better part of ourselves is finally unable to recognise itself.”[16]
The philosopher Jean Wahl criticized Sartre’s arguments about the topic of “nothing”.[17] The philosopher Frederick Copleston described Sartre’s view that all human actions are the result of free choice as “highly implausible”, though he noted that Sartre had ways of defending his position.[18] He also expressed sympathy for Marcel’s criticism of Sartre, and described Sartre’s view of freedom as both “nihilistic” and possibly inconsistent with some of Sartre’s other views.[19] The philosopher A. J. Ayer wrote that, apart from some psychological insights, the book was “a pretentious metaphysical thesis” and “principally an exercise in misusing the verb ‘to be’.”[20]
The philosopher William Barrett described Being and Nothingness as “a great, uneven, brilliant and verbose tome”. He noted Sartre’s debts to Heidegger, but nevertheless credited him with originality. He criticized Sartre for neglecting Heidegger’s “notion of the truth of Being”, his understanding of what it means for a subject or object to be. In his view, Sartre failed to “deal with the problem of truth in a radical and existential way”, instead viewing truth in “the ordinary intellectualistic sense that has been traditional with non-existential philosophers” and thereby remaining a Cartesian rationalist.[21] The author Susan Sontag praised Sartre’s discussions of the body and concrete relations with others. She identified them as part of a French tradition of serious thought about problems of fundamental importance.[22] The literary scholar John B. Vickery wrote that Being and Nothingness resembles Sir James George Frazer’s The Golden Bough (1890) in the way its author “merges psychology and the concrete sense of fiction”, although he considered it less readable than Frazer’s work.[23] The philosopher Iris Murdoch compared Being and Nothingness to Gilbert Ryle’s The Concept of Mind (1949). She maintained that continental philosophy shares the same general orientation as English analytic philosophy.[24] According to the philosopher Steven Crowell, Being and Nothingness had come to be seen as outdated by Sartre’s death in 1980, since its emphasis on consciousness associated with “the subjectivism and psychologism that structuralism and analytic philosophy had finally laid to rest.”[25]
The philosopher David Pears criticized Sartre’s critique of Freud, describing it as complex but imprecisely formulated and open to potential objections.[26] The philosopher Thomas Baldwin described Being and Nothingness as a work of pessimism. He wrote that Sartre’s argument that Freud’s theory of repression is internally flawed is based on a misunderstanding of Freud, and that Sartre’s attempts to adapt Freud’s ideas are of greater interest.[11] The director Richard Eyre recalled that Being and Nothingness was popular among British students in the 1960s, but suggests that among them the work usually went unread.[27]
Several authors, including the sociologist Murray S, Davis,[28] the philosophers Roger Scruton and Maxine Sheets-Johnstone,[29][30] and the physician Frank Gonzalez-Crussi,[31] have praised Sartre for his contributions to the philosophy of sex. Davis credited Sartre with being the first author to present a phenomenological analysis of sex.[28] Scruton credited Sartre with providing “perhaps the most acute philosophical analysis” of sexual desire and correctly arguing that treating sexual desire as equivalent to appetite ignores “the interpersonal component of human sexual responses.” He described Sartre’s reflections on le visqueux as “celebrated”.[29] He has also credited Sartre with providing a “stunning apology for sado-masochism”,[32] and characterized Being and Nothingness as a “great work of post-Christian theology”.[33] Gonzalez-Crussi credited Sartre with recognizing that it is incorrect to equate sexual desire with desire for sexual acts.[31] Sheets-Johnstone believed Sartre presented a subtle analysis of human sexuality. She praised his understanding of desire in general and suggested that his views about the subject anticipated those of the philosopher Michel Foucault. She believed that his views contained both significant truth and internal contradictions. She suggested that despite his criticism of Freud, his views about women and female sexuality were in some ways similar to Freud’s.[30] Naomi Greene, arguing that there is a “distaste for sexuality” in Sartre’s work, identifies a clear “anti-sexual bias” present in Being and Nothingness.[34]
See also [ edit ]
being in-itself/for-itself
A contrast heralded in the phenomenology of Husserl and Heidegger, and central to Sartre’s work Being and Nothingness. Being for-itself (pour-soi) is the mode of existence of consciousness, consisting in its own activity and purposive nature; being in-itself (en-soi) is the self-sufficient, lumpy, contingent being of ordinary things. The contrast bears some affinity to Kant’s distinction between the perspective of agency or freedom and that of awareness of the ordinary phenomenal world.
Being and Nothingness Quotes
Each human reality is at the same time a direct project to metamorphose its own For-itself into an In-itself-For-itself, a project of the appropriation of the world as a totality of being-in-itself, in the form of a fundamental quality. Every human reality is a passion in that it projects losing itself so as to found being and by the same stroke to constitute the In-itself which escapes contingency by being its own foundation, the Ens causa sui, which religions call God. Thus the passion of man is the reverse of that of Christ, for man loses himself as man in order that God may be born. But the idea of God is contradictory and we lose ourselves in vain. Man is a useless passion.
Being and Nothingness Quotes
In this passage, Sartre encourages people to have a little sympathy for themselves. Essentially, he argues that humans have been thrust into the world with no explanation. From there, they are forced to “carry the weight of the world… alone without any help.” This kind of relentless responsibility is something Sartre acknowledges as difficult to live with.
“I must be without remorse or regrets as I am without excuse; for from the instant of my upsurge into being, I carry the weight of the world by myself alone without help, engaged in a world for which I bear the whole responsibility without being able, whatever I do, to tear myself away from this responsibility for an instant.”
Progressing his argument, Sartre imbues life with a kind of meaninglessness. He illustrates this argument here by stating that it is the same to be a leader of nations or a person who gets drunk alone. In doing this, Sartre emphasizes the fact that nothing is objectively meaningful.
“Thus it amounts to the same thing whether one gets drunk alone or is a leader of nations.”
“Freedom is what we do with what is done to us” Sartre
Here, Sartre claims that we have no choice about what happens to us in life. However, we can choose how we react to it. This idea reflects certain principles from Stocisim, namely the idea that we only have control over our own thoughts and actions.
Satre’s existential argument seemingly reduces human existence to nothingness. This being said, Sartre also suggests that there is great freedom in being human, as an individual can decide what kind of life they want to have. Essentially, to be human is to be able to choose how they experience the world around them, as nothing is inherently meaningful in an objective sense.
‘Being and Nothingness’ Quotes by Jean-Paul Sartre
“It is therefore senseless to think of complaining since nothing foreign has decided what we feel, what we live, or what we are.”
“I exist, that is all, and I find it nauseating.”
“Man is condemned to be free; because once thrown into the world, he is responsible for everything he does.”
“Nothingness lies coiled in the heart of being – like a worm.”
“Life is a useless passion.”
“I must be without remorse or regrets as I am without excuse; for from the instant of my upsurge into being, I carry the weight of the world by myself alone without help, engaged in a world for which I bear the whole responsibility without being able, whatever I do, to tear myself away from this responsibility for an instant.”
“The appearance of the other in the world corresponds therefore to a congealed sliding of the whole universe.”
“Thus it amounts to the same thing whether one gets drunk alone or is a leader of nations.”
“The recruit who reports for active duty at the beginning of the war can in some instances be afraid of death, but more often he is ‘afraid of being afraid’; that is, he is filled with anguish before himself.”
Source: goodreads
—
Jean-Paul Sartre on Ivy:
Jean-Paul Sartre: Being and Nothingness (1943)
Words (Les Mots): The Autobiography of Jean-Paul Sartre
Being and Nothingness Quotes.
1. “It is therefore senseless to think of complaining since nothing foreign has decided what we feel, what we live, or what we are.”
– Jean-Paul Sartre, Being and Nothingness
2. “I exist, that is all, and I find it nauseating.”
– Jean-Paul Sartre, Being and Nothingness
3. “Nothingness lies coiled in the heart of being – like a worm.”
– Jean-Paul Sartre, Being and Nothingness
5. “I must be without remorse or regrets as I am without excuse; for from the instant of my upsurge into being, I carry the weight of the world by myself alone without help, engaged in a world for which I bear the whole responsibility without being able, whatever I do, to tear myself away from this responsibility for an instant.”
– Jean-Paul Sartre, Being and Nothingness
6. “Thus it amounts to the same thing whether one gets drunk alone or is a leader of nations.”
– Jean-Paul Sartre, Being and Nothingness
7. “The appearance of the other in the world corresponds therefore to a congealed sliding of the whole universe.”
– Jean-Paul Sartre, Being and Nothingness
8. “The recruit who reports for active duty at the beginning of the war can in some instances be afraid of death, but more often he is ‘afraid of being afraid’; that is, he is filled with anguish before himself.”
– Jean-Paul Sartre, Being and Nothingness
9. “From the very fact, indeed, that I am conscious of the motives which solicit my action, these motives are already transcendent objects from my consciousness, they are outside; in vain shall I seek to cling to them: I escape from them through my very existence. I am condemned to exist forever beyond my essence, beyond the affective and rational motives of my act: I am condemned to be free.”
– Jean-Paul Sartre, Being and Nothingness
Being and Nothingness Quotes
Generosity is nothing else than a craze to possess. All which I abandon, all which I give, I enjoy in a higher manner through the fact that I give it away; giving is a keen, brief enjoyment, almost sexual. To give is to enjoy possessively the object which one gives.
17+ quotes from Being and Nothingness by Jean-Paul Sartre
“It is therefore senseless to think of complaining since nothing foreign has decided what we feel, what we live, or what we are.”
― Jean-Paul Sartre, quote from Being and Nothingness
Copy text
“I exist, that is all, and I find it nauseating.”
― Jean-Paul Sartre, quote from Being and Nothingness
Copy text
“Nothingness lies coiled in the heart of being – like a worm.”
― Jean-Paul Sartre, quote from Being and Nothingness
Copy text
“I must be without remorse or regrets as I am without excuse; for from the instant of my upsurge into being, I carry the weight of the world by myself alone without help, engaged in a world for which I bear the whole responsibility without being able, whatever I do, to tear myself away from this responsibility for an instant.”
― Jean-Paul Sartre, quote from Being and Nothingness
Copy text
“Thus it amounts to the same thing whether one gets drunk alone or is a leader of nations.”
― Jean-Paul Sartre, quote from Being and Nothingness
Copy text
“The appearance of the other in the world corresponds therefore to a congealed sliding of the whole universe.”
― Jean-Paul Sartre, quote from Being and Nothingness
Copy text
“The recruit who reports for active duty at the beginning of the war can in some instances be afraid of death, but more often he is ‘afraid of being afraid’; that is, he is filled with anguish before himself.”
― Jean-Paul Sartre, quote from Being and Nothingness
Copy text
“Temporality is obviously an organised structure, and these three so-called elements of time: past, present, future, must not be envisaged as a collection of ‘data’ to be added together…but as the structured moments of an original synthesis. Otherwise we shall immediately meet with this paradox: the past is no longer, the future is not yet, as for the instantaneous present, everyone knows that it is not at all: it is the limit of infinite division, like the dimensionless point.”
― Jean-Paul Sartre, quote from Being and Nothingness
Copy text
“From the very fact, indeed, that I am conscious of the motives which solicit my action, these motives are already transcendent objects from my consciousness, they are outside; in vain shall I seek to cling to them: I escape from them through my very existence. I am condemned to exist forever beyond my essence, beyond the affective and rational motives of my act: I am condemned to be free.”
― Jean-Paul Sartre, quote from Being and Nothingness
Copy text
“Time gnaws and wears away; it separates; it flies. And by virtue of separation–by separating man from his pain or from the object of his pain–time cures.”
― Jean-Paul Sartre, quote from Being and Nothingness
Copy text
“It is certain that we cannot escape anguish, for we are anguish.”
― Jean-Paul Sartre, quote from Being and Nothingness
Copy text
“Nothingness carries being in its heart.”
― Jean-Paul Sartre, quote from Being and Nothingness
Copy text
“We have to deal with human reality as a being which is what it is not and which is not what it is.”
― Jean-Paul Sartre, quote from Being and Nothingness
Copy text
“Society demands that he limit himself to his function… There are indeed many precautions to imprison a man in what he is as if we lived in perpetual fear that he might escape from it, that he might break away and suddenly elude his condition.”
― Jean-Paul Sartre, quote from Being and Nothingness
Copy text
“The flesh is the pure contingency of presence.”
― Jean-Paul Sartre, quote from Being and Nothingness
Copy text
“Every belief is a belief that falls short; one never wholly believes what one believes.”
― Jean-Paul Sartre, quote from Being and Nothingness
Copy text
“In irony a man annihilates what he posits within one and the same act; he leads us to believe in order not to be believed; he affirms to deny and denies to affirm; he creatives a positive object but it has no being other than its nothingness.”
― Jean-Paul Sartre, quote from Being and Nothingness
Copy text
About the author
Jean-Paul Sartre
Born place: in Paris, France
Born date June 21, 1905
See more on GoodReads
Popular quotes
“Men are from Mars. Zombies are from Hell.”
― Jesse Petersen, quote from Married with Zombies
“I know what pheromones are! But that’s
mumbo jumbo. You’re just horny, I’m just
horny. It’s not science.”
― Lauren Dane, quote from Enforcer
“Candleford Green was but a small village and there were fields and meadows and woods all around it. As soon as Laura crossed the doorstep, she could see some of these. But mere seeing from a distance did not satisfy her; she longed to go alone far into the fields and hear the birds singing, the brooks tinkling, and the wind rustling through the corn, as she had when a child. To smell things and touch things, warm earth and flowers and grasses, and to stand and gaze where no one could see her, drinking it all in.”
― Flora Thompson, quote from Lark Rise to Candleford
“Lucas’s position was supine: that is, whenever he heard people arguing about it, he wanted to lie down and take a nap.”
― John Sandford, quote from Buried Prey
“Being unemployed, Kurt set in motion a routine that he would follow for the rest of his life. He would rise at around noon and eat a brunch of sorts. Kraft Macaroni and Cheese was his favorite food. After eating, he would spend the rest of the day doing one of three things: watching television, which he did unceasingly; practicing his guitar, which he did for hours a day, usually while watching TV; or creating some kind of art project, be it a painting, collage, or three-dimensional installation. This last activity was never formal— he rarely identified himself as an artist—yet he spent hours in this manner.”
― Charles R. Cross, quote from Heavier Than Heaven: A Biography of Kurt Cobain
Interesting books
(6.3K) Fatelessness
by Imre Kertész (28.6K) Rock Chick Revenge
by Kristen Ashley (19.7K) Welcome to Shadowhun…
by Cassandra Clare (4K) Kids of Appetite
by David Arnold (22.2K) Mine to Possess
by Nalini Singh (18.1K) Mother of Pearl
by Melinda Haynes
About BookQuoters
BookQuoters is a community of passionate readers who enjoy sharing the most meaningful, memorable and interesting quotes from great books. As the world communicates more and more via texts, memes and sound bytes, short but profound quotes from books have become more relevant and important. For some of us a quote becomes a mantra, a goal or a philosophy by which we live. For all of us, quotes are a great way to remember a book and to carry with us the author’s best ideas.
We thoughtfully gather quotes from our favorite books, both classic and current, and choose the ones that are most thought-provoking. Each quote represents a book that is interesting, well written and has potential to enhance the reader’s life. We also accept submissions from our visitors and will select the quotes we feel are most appealing to the BookQuoters community.
Founded in 2018, BookQuoters has quickly become a large and vibrant community of people who share an affinity for books. Books are seen by some as a throwback to a previous world; conversely, gleaning the main ideas of a book via a quote or a quick summary is typical of the Information Age but is a habit disdained by some diehard readers. We feel that we have the best of both worlds at BookQuoters; we read books cover-to-cover but offer you some of the highlights. We hope you’ll join us.
키워드에 대한 정보 being and nothingness quotes
다음은 Bing에서 being and nothingness quotes 주제에 대한 검색 결과입니다. 필요한 경우 더 읽을 수 있습니다.
이 기사는 인터넷의 다양한 출처에서 편집되었습니다. 이 기사가 유용했기를 바랍니다. 이 기사가 유용하다고 생각되면 공유하십시오. 매우 감사합니다!
사람들이 주제에 대해 자주 검색하는 키워드 Jean-Paul Sartre: Being and Nothingness – Introductory Concepts
- sartre
- jean paul sartre
- being and nothingness
- phenomenology
- ontology
- philosophy
- hegel
- dialectic of freedom
- consciousness
Jean-Paul #Sartre: #Being #and #Nothingness #- #Introductory #Concepts
YouTube에서 being and nothingness quotes 주제의 다른 동영상 보기
주제에 대한 기사를 시청해 주셔서 감사합니다 Jean-Paul Sartre: Being and Nothingness – Introductory Concepts | being and nothingness quotes, 이 기사가 유용하다고 생각되면 공유하십시오, 매우 감사합니다.