Take a photo of a barcode or cover
eloiseandromeda 's review for:
Existentialism Is a Humanism
by Jean-Paul Sartre
challenging
informative
reflective
slow-paced
My review won't make sense without these three quotes,
"Man is nothing else but that which he makes of himself. That is the first principle of existentialism"
"But the existentialist, when he portrays a coward, shows him as responsible for his cowardice. He is not like that on account of a cowardly heart or lungs or cerebrum, he has not become like that through his physiological organism; he is like that because he has made himself into a coward by actions."
"Consequently every purpose, however individual it may be, is of universal value. Every purpose, even that of a Chinese, an Indian or a Negro, can be understood by a European. To say it can be understood, means that the European of 1945 may be striving out of a certain situation towards the same limitations in the same way, and that he may reconceive in himself the purpose of the Chinese, of the Indian or the African. In every purpose there is universality, in this sense that every purpose is comprehensible to every man."
Okay, Kanye West! Saying that the role of a negro isn't limited by their experience. Where Sartre's argument goes wrong is in considering the human experience. He talks about how humans paint their future experiences through their interests and how we cannot depend on a certain priori to define morality, but what he fails to recognize is how the human experience influences our current situation. Of course, a coward chooses to become a coward and an addict chooses to become an addict, but the likelihood of those experiences being realized in our lives multiplies exponentially if they were a product of our environment. Sartre himself is the perfect example. Existentialism is a Humanism was written in 1946 France, a time when gender equality didn't exist and racism was still developing in French culture (for example, France was still neo-colonializing Haiti during this time by sucking the country dry of its economic resources). Catholicism was also the only major religion in Europe.
1) Sartre's argument is based solely on the relationship between Catholicism and Atheism. It literally does not recognize the power of Hinduism, Islam, Judaism, Buddhism, or any other major religion that many people rely on to define morality. Sartre wrote a culturally exclusionary piece because none of these religions came across in his human experience. Sartre proves that if you don't experience another way of living in your own life, you will become a product of your environment.
2) Sartre COMPLETELY dismisses how systemic discrimination limits the quality and possibility of success in life, and this is probably because he never had to think about how qualities that he couldn't change (e.g. skin color, sex) could negatively affect his life from the get-go. I do agree with Sartre that we can choose how we make up our life, but only to some degree. Speaking from a Black perspective, I am very privileged. Both of my parents are married and I go to one of the oldest Catholic high schools in the country. Objectively, it's easier for me to succeed than someone else and I have more options to choose from. Subjectively, I'm BLACK! and that doesn't even scratch the surface of other limitations in my life. You can choose how your life plays out to some degree, but you must recognize that we aren't all born with the same options. As much as I can dream about what I'll do in life, there are some things that I simply cannot do because they depend on the choices of other people.
This is a one-star book imo, but I give it extra for making me think about how my existence, rid of my choices and experiences, will impact my future and my identity.
1) Sartre's argument is based solely on the relationship between Catholicism and Atheism. It literally does not recognize the power of Hinduism, Islam, Judaism, Buddhism, or any other major religion that many people rely on to define morality. Sartre wrote a culturally exclusionary piece because none of these religions came across in his human experience. Sartre proves that if you don't experience another way of living in your own life, you will become a product of your environment.
2) Sartre COMPLETELY dismisses how systemic discrimination limits the quality and possibility of success in life, and this is probably because he never had to think about how qualities that he couldn't change (e.g. skin color, sex) could negatively affect his life from the get-go. I do agree with Sartre that we can choose how we make up our life, but only to some degree. Speaking from a Black perspective, I am very privileged. Both of my parents are married and I go to one of the oldest Catholic high schools in the country. Objectively, it's easier for me to succeed than someone else and I have more options to choose from. Subjectively, I'm BLACK! and that doesn't even scratch the surface of other limitations in my life. You can choose how your life plays out to some degree, but you must recognize that we aren't all born with the same options. As much as I can dream about what I'll do in life, there are some things that I simply cannot do because they depend on the choices of other people.
This is a one-star book imo, but I give it extra for making me think about how my existence, rid of my choices and experiences, will impact my future and my identity.