To explain existentialism, Sartre states that "existence precedes essence." Unlike objects such as a paper knife, which are designed with a purpose before they are made, humans come into the world without predetermined values, goals, or characteristics. The essence of a paper knife is planned before it exists, but a person’s essence is shaped after they exist. This idea highlights human subjectivity, the freedom to define oneself through actions. Since there is no preexisting nature, divine command, or universal guideline for human behavior, individuals must create their own values.

Existence Precedes Essence

What is not possible is not to choose. I can always choose, but I must know that if I do not choose, that is still a choice.

Anguish is the awareness of the immense moral responsibility that comes with freedom of choice. Christians criticize existentialism for this anguish, seeing it as pessimistic, but Sartre argues that it is an inherent part of decision-making. People often try to deny their responsibility by convincing themselves that they are not in control of their actions, a self-deception Sartre calls "bad faith."

Anguish

Sartre explains three central and often misunderstood ideas in existentialism: anguish, abandonment, and despair.

Three Central Misunderstood Ideas

Despair, derived from the French term for "no hope," means individuals must act based on the knowledge and circumstances they have without relying on unseen forces or external guarantees of success.

Despair

Abandonment refers to the absence of a higher moral guide, as Sartre believes belief in God is no longer tenable in the modern world. This leaves people "condemned to be free," responsible for their choices without divine or external authority. Using examples like a student seeking advice and a Jesuit prisoner, Sartre illustrates how people remain responsible for their actions, even when influenced by external signs or passions.

Abandonment

Sartre introduces the concept of the "human condition," which refers to the universal circumstances of human existence. Unlike essentialist ideas of human nature, which often serve as moral substitutes for religion, the human condition is about how people universally confront their freedom and responsibility. Every individual’s actions reflect their values and contribute to a broader understanding of what is good for humanity. In this way, individuals are responsible not only for themselves but for all humanity, as their choices serve as examples of moral codes for others.

Human Condition

These include misunderstandings that lead to ridicule, accusations from communists that existentialism focuses too much on the individual at the expense of others, and claims from Christians that it is pessimistic and undermines moral standards. In response, Sartre argues that existentialism is a positive, action-oriented philosophy that emphasizes moral responsibility and human interconnectedness.

Sartre asserts that "man is nothing other than what he makes of himself," meaning people are the sum of their actions while also possessing the capacity to shape their future. Life, then, is a project in which individuals actively construct their identities and purpose.

Finally, Sartre tackles the objection that existentialist values lack seriousness because they are subjective. He counters by asserting that subjective value is the only authentic form of value.

Conclusion

He rejects the notion of innate human worth, arguing that individuals constantly shape their own significance. Existentialism is humanist because it finds moral purpose and truth not in God or preordained rules but in humanity’s capacity to define itself.

People’s commitments whether to work, hobbies, or political causes are deeply meaningful because they are freely chosen. Sartre concludes by explaining why existentialism is a form of humanism. Unlike traditional humanism, which values people based on their inherent qualities, Sartre’s existentialist humanism sees value as something people create through their actions and choices.

Sartre also addresses the Christian critique that existentialists cannot judge others’ morality. He argues that judgments should not be based on one’s own moral code but on identifying flaws in another’s system or recognizing instances of bad faith. He explains that people in bad faith deny their freedom by claiming they are bound by moral codes they have chosen themselves. Sartre provides examples of literary characters who freely choose their paths and contrasts them with those who follow social conventions or passions without question.

Sartre directly addresses criticisms of existentialism. In response to the claim that it isolates people in their own minds, he argues that recognizing one’s subjectivity inherently acknowledges the existence of others, as all individuals confront similar existential situations.To the accusation that existentialism renders values meaningless, Sartre compares human life to art. Just as art has no fixed standard yet holds value through the artist’s expression of a unique perspective, human values arise from individuals’ freedom to choose.

Addressing the Criticism

Jean-Paul Sartre's Existentialism is a Humanism serves two main purposes: First, it aims to provide a clear, though incomplete, introduction to his existentialist philosophy; Second, it addresses criticisms from other philosophers, the French public, and the media. Sartre begins by outlining the major critiques of his philosophy.

Satre's Two Main Purpose

Full summary of Existentialism is a Humanism

A fresh translation of two seminal works of existentialism &quot;To understand Jean-Paul Sartre is to understand something important about the present time.&quot;—Iris Murdoch &quot;Sartre matters because so many fundamental points of his analysis of the human reality are right and true, and because their accuracy and veracity entail real consequences for our lives as individuals and in social groups.&quot;—Benedict O'Donohoe, Philosophy Now It was to correct common misconceptions about his thought that Jean-Paul Sartre, the most dominent European intellectual of the post-World War II decades, accepted an invitation to speak on October 29, 1945, at the Club Maintenant in Paris. The unstated objective of his lecture (“Existentialism Is a Humanism”) was to expound his philosophy as a form of “existentialism,” a term much bandied about at the time. Sartre asserted that existentialism was essentially a doctrine for philosophers, though, ironically, he was about to make it accessible to a general audience. The published text of his lecture quickly became one of the bibles of existentialism and made Sartre an international celebrity. The idea of freedom occupies the center of Sartre’s doctrine. Man, born into an empty, godless universe, is nothing to begin with. He creates his essence—his self, his being—through the choices he freely makes (“existence precedes essence”). Were it not for the contingency of his death, he would never end. Choosing to be this or that is to affirm the value of what we choose. In choosing, therefore, we commit not only ourselves but all of mankind. This book presents a new English translation of Sartre’s 1945 lecture and his analysis of Camus’s The Stranger, along with a discussion of these works by acclaimed Sartre biographer Annie Cohen-Solal. This edition is a translation of the 1996 French edition, which includes Arlette Elkaïm-Sartre’s introduction and a Q&amp;A with Sartre about his lecture.