Jean Paul Sartre Analysis

Both Jean Paul-Sartre and Friedrich Nietzsche are considered as existentialists whose philosophies share some important characteristics. Although Sartre illustrates how to make a truly moral decision, and Nietzsche presents how to become a true individual, they both make an attempt to replace traditional morality with their belief of authenticity. “You’re free, choose, that is, invent” said Sartre, showing his idea on how he thinks we should make decisions. In this essay, I will compare the similarity of their ideas towards human morality and show how Nietzsche’s belief can be superior to Satres. Existentialism and Human Emotion by Sartre presents the idea of authenticity, showing how truly moral decision can be made. He suggests that our decision should be free from everything, since our decisions define ourselves. Sartre gives a study case in his writing by telling the story of a Frenchman. The story is about a man deciding either to join the military forces or to take care of his elderly mother. Sartre’s recommendation is not to listen to anyone but to decide on his own, so he can be truly authentic. Being a true human is to have responsibility for who we are and entirely responsible for what we do. “Hell is all the people”, mentioned Sartre, since people always use externality, which makes people not authentic. Sartre informs us not to ask …show more content…
They believe in an importance of authenticity; Sartre believes in our freedom, which is free from everything, and Nietzsche believes in our authenticity and individual will. Although Sartre and Nietzsche share the same position toward traditional morality, they have difference concepts. Lastly, I believe that Nietzsche’s concept is superior to Sartre’s, since his idea is wider, and it covers more toward our morality; furthermore, I think Satre’s concept of bad faith makes his idea getting too