Jean-Paul Sartre's Argument Analysis

Jean-Paul Sartre is a strong proponent of Existentialism which asserts that “existence precedes essence” (682). To expand upon this, Sartre believes in absolute free will where our essence, which can be defined as our human character, is created by the actions our lifetime. To defend this claim, Sartre provides three key arguments to show that “man…[is] the ensemble of his acts” (690). Sartre’s first argument is that there is no determined human nature to make us do what we do, or to excuse what we do. This simply means that a preexisting human nature, which is another term for essence, doesn’t exist and can’t control what a person will do or become. Sartre explains this from his perspective of atheistic existentialism, where god is assumed to not exist, by saying that “if god does not exist, there is at least one being in whom existence precedes essence” (683). To understand this concept, we must first consider the opposite in the way Sartre did. For man-made objects, it is said that “essence precedes existence” (682) because the purpose of an object is known before creating it. For example, on page 682 Sartre examines how that when an artisan is building a paper-cutter “he referred to the concept of what a …show more content…
I contend that a part of our essence is an innate rationality and understanding of the basic tenets of human nature which we choose to either follow or disobey (thus the creation of good and evil). This idea isn’t new, John Locke coined it as the Law of Nature which dictates all rational men. Building off Locke, our innate understanding of the laws of nature create a perfect freedom which enables us to determine and create our character within the limits of said law. To borrow and modify Sartre’s phrase, “some essence precedes our existence and the rest is up to