Sartre And Derrida Analysis

Sartre would say, “man is condemned to be free” , he means that we are thrown in this world in our own and be responsible for everything we do. Instead of realizing our identity as free beings we often pretend as determined objects. Refusing to take the responsibility of making fully out of ourselves on what we are, we impersonate as if we are pre-determined objects of the society we are born in. People tend to uphold on the outside circumscription rather making fully out of themselves. This denial of freedom is called by Sartre “bad faith”.
One the other hand, Filipino values has an ambivalent character in the sense that they are a potential for good or evil, a help or hindrance to personal and national development, depending on how they …show more content…
The author argues that Sartre’s discussion of bad faith in Being and Nothigness is analogous to that of Derrida in “Structure, Sign, and Play in the Discourse of the Human Sciences”. To prove his claim, he presented the concept of “play” of Sartre and Derrida. First, Derrida used the term “play” to utilize those aspects of a structure that cannot be controlled, “tamed” or destroyed but which haunt the internal stability of the system itself. This does not mean the conventional meaning of “play” that is associated with joyful activity or recreation that is not serious or practical. Secondly, the author mentioned that Sartre discussed the notion of play only briefly in Being and Nothingness in the chapter of “Doing and Having”. Sartre has taken the notion of “play” in its more literal sense which means activities, such as acting or sports, that are pursued with pleasure and enjoyment but do not contain any serious or sustained deliberation. In order to elaborate Sartre’s concept of “play” , the author presented by way of contrast to “serious attitude”. When we adopt the serious attitude, then, we are ultimately hiding from ourselves: we are taking recourse in the world as containing more lasting reality than the facticity that we