Being and Nothingness

Nonfiction | Book | Adult | Published in 1943

A modern alternative to SparkNotes and CliffsNotes, SuperSummary offers high-quality Study Guides with detailed chapter summaries and analysis of major themes, characters, and more.

Download PDF

Summary

Background

Chapter Summaries & Analyses

Introduction

Part 1

Part 2

Part 3

Part 4

Key Figures

Themes

Index of Terms

Important Quotes

Essay Topics

Tools

Beta

Discussion Questions

Themes

The Importance of Authenticity

Sartre’s existentialist philosophy addresses absurdism—the attempt and need to create meaning in a meaningless existence. Sartre views the struggle to create meaning as a mode of the condemnation of freedom. Sartre’s theory stands in contrast to the existentialist philosophies that preceded him; he believes that humans have free will, meaning they can make whatever choices they like based upon their own justifications. However, this presents them with a unique problem: They have all the opportunities in the world, but that world has no intrinsic meaning. This is the paradox of human freedom: Humans are free to make choices, but those decisions do not matter. Sartre suggests that the existence of the Other and the relational cycle between the Other and the being-for-itself creates freedom. Too often, however, humans make choices utilizing their free will that are based upon a false sense of meaning found within the Other. He illustrates this falsity by drawing a comparison between love and tyranny, arguing that both are forms of possession and that neither can ever fully satisfy.

All around him, Sartre saw leaders and individuals justifying their actions and modes of oppression using moral codes and values determined by false ideas of meaning and purpose. Temporality contributes to domination and the limitation of freedom. Social and political organizations project a linear structure of time. They place great importance on the future, contextualizing it with specific goals that have objective and collectivistic aims. Sartre asserted that the Nazis believed strongly in their cause; they were not engaged in actively selling a lie to one another or to the world. Instead, they acted upon faith—what Sartre would call “bad faith.” Sartre saw bad faith as the antithesis to sincerity. For the philosopher, bad faith was a waste of a life.

Sartre determines that the only way to counteract absurdism and falsity is through authenticity. He argues that humans must make decisions that are based upon their own minds and their personal values, which are independent of higher authority or divine power. Sartre illustrated this idea in his own life; he devoted himself to political causes and was highly involved in the French Communist movement. When asked later in life if he regretted any of the choices he made in life, he claimed that he only wished he had lived more radically—suggesting that he wished he had lived with even more authenticity and had stayed true to the essences he created for himself.

The Myth of Essence and Identity

For centuries, philosophers accepted the idea of essences established by early thinkers in the fourth century B.C. Essences were viewed as the innate qualities and characteristics that endowed being with its nature. For example, a knife was regarded as a knife because of its essential characteristic of a blade. Essences were especially important in understanding human existence. Philosophers proposed that essences came before existence—they represented the meaning and purpose of human life set forth by a divine force.

Then, in the 19th and 20th centuries, scholars began to think differently about essences. Enlightenment and rationalism shifted the way people thought about religion and secularism. In Being and Nothingness—the foundational text for existentialism—Sartre vehemently rejects the idea that essences come before existence. His theory is a response to many philosophers who paved the way for existentialism, including Nietzsche and Kierkegaard. However, his theory goes beyond merely responding to other philosophers; it is a theory that responds to the historical context within which it was formed.

Although Sartre’s time as a prisoner of war was far less gruesome than the experiences of those in concentration camps during the same time (Sartre described the time as a good opportunity to read, write, and drink coffee), he was not immune to the atrocities and brutality around him. He knew that existentialism needed to be able to confront the human-reality and the phenomenon of the modern age. For Sartre and many other philosophers of his time, World War II was a lesson in godlessness. It was difficult, perhaps even impossible, to live a life of meaning and purpose when everything seemed glaringly meaningless. Many scholars argue that this is why Sartre and his colleagues embraced existentialism and nihilism.

Rather than a human purpose that is defined by essence, Sartre proposed that humans could create their own meaning by living an authentic life. This meant recognizing, acknowledging, and embracing the absurdity of the world. Sartre argued that essences followed existence as humans made authentic choices based upon their own values and morality, rather than those prescribed to them. Those who chose to adhere to accepted and traditional ideologies about the world were in bad faith. The Myth of Essence and Identity is that there is a purpose for each human life that is outlined by an external force—whether that is faith, truth, justice, fairness, or morality. Instead, identity is manifested by a person’s choices and actions; it is their own invention.

Ways of Being

When Shakespeare’s Hamlet ponders the question, “To be, or not to be” in the play named after the protagonist, he is questioning whether he should live or die. For Sartre, the question of being is about consciousness. Sartre outlines two ways of being, being-in-itself and being-for-itself, although he devotes the thesis of his work to the latter. Being-in-itself is used to describe creatures and things other than humans. These beings do have essences that emerge at the same time as their existence. Beings-for-themselves are humans—they live for their own selves. Sartre proposes that consciousness is synonymous with existence, but essence, or purpose, does not emerge until later when the being-for-itself has made authentic choices and actions.

Another important concept in Sartre’s understanding of being is nothingness. For the philosopher, the concepts of being and nothingness are synonymous: One cannot exist without the other. Sartre proposes that being is born from nothingness—the very fact that humans can be described with a negation (“no one” or “nobody”) reveals this fact. Philosophers find language extremely useful in thinking about and understanding ontology. Language provides insight into how humans think about themselves and the world around them. Later philosophers like Derrida and Lacan utilize language in this way, while Sartre’s use of language to justify his theories on negation represents a rich history of the use of words to understand and flesh out philosophical concepts.

In addition to the ideas of nothingness, being-in-itself, and being-for-itself is the idea of other-for-itself. In Part III, Sartre establishes the role of the Other in consciousness. Sartre claims that the Other plays an important part in solidifying the concept of the self. First, one looks at the Other and understands one’s own consciousness through negation: A person understands that they are their own being because they are not the Other. Second, the Other perceives the self and casts an evaluative judgment. This observation causes the self to become self-aware. Sartre’s use of shame to explain this idea is apt: One does not feel shame until one encounters the Other. One feels shame because one perceives that the Other is making a negative evaluation. Third, the Other constitutes consciousness by examining a third point—an object that is within the line of sight of both the self and the Other.

All these ways of being illustrate Sartre’s continued denial of dualities. For the philosopher, consciousness is all-encompassing; it throws a blanket over the external and internal, light and shadow, Other and self. Sartre believes that the being-for-itself can never be fully separated from the being-in-itself, and that humans can never be distinguished completely from objects. The object, the Other, and the external worlds constitute the self; they help to define consciousness.