Humanism, Sartre

PHL221

21 January 2014

Jean-Paul Sartre, “The Humanism of Existentialism”

What does Sartre mean by saying that human beings are "condemned to be free"? What are we free to do, exactly? To what degree are we free? Why are we condemned to possess this freedom?

The phrase, “man is condemned to be free,” is puzzling; growing up as an American I have always been taught that I was “privileged” or “blessed” to be free. I can remember a poster in my 5th grade classroom that read, “Freedom does not come free.” Beginning at a very young age, we are taught that our freedom is the result of Americans sacrificing their lives all around the world. Sartre isn’t necessarily talking about this political freedom but he is touching on the fact that freedom does not come freely. With freedom comes sacrifices and responsibility. I think because of this “freedom” has lost its true meaning. I completely agree with Sartre’s idea that freedom can be condemning. I think Sartre is saying that we have no choice except to choose, which his what he calls the “human condition.” Our thoughts are constantly, “What do I do next?” fearing that the choices we make are “wrong” or might hurt our future. We may try to justify our actions by thinking or saying things like, “You made me do it” or “I couldn’t help myself.” I think we have all said that at some point in our lives but those are not excuses, we just cannot justify our choices, to be free means that we make choices “because we choose them.” There is just simply no other justification, “we are left alone, without excuse.” When typing this response I can’t help but think of all the times someone asked why I did something and I responded, “I don’t know, because I wanted to.” I chose to and there was no further justification. I am free because there is no justification to my choices. Sartre is describing humans when he says, “man is freedom.” If we had a “principle” or “nature” then we wouldn’t necessarily be free. So in reverse, if we...