Satre's Conception Of Humanism: Man Is Condemned To Be Free

Improved Essays
The Merriam Webster dictionary defines condemn as a sentence to punishment or to declare to be reprehensible, wrong, or evil. Jean Paul Satre stated, “Man is condemned to be free,” the use of the phrase initiates that Satre sees freedom for man as an inconvenience rather than a blessing. His main reasoning behind his point of argument is once man is able to live in this world, he or she should be responsible for their own actions. Satre also believed humans live in anguish and existentialism is a humanism supporting his reasoning as the punishment for man is freedom. Satre did not believe in God therefore, there was no particular or certain way a human being should live. Every single individual makes their own choices and their own choices …show more content…
Satre is an atheist philosopher that agrees that humans should take the responsibility for their own actions. I assume that Satre focuses more on the negative consequences of being a free human race with reason and the choice to choose. The opportunity to choose your own actions is based on your own consciousness. The conception of humanity for myself is optimistic because I feel the human race is kind and loving. The choices I have made have not only benefited myself, but others as well. The conception of humanity is based on perspective and opinion of your own choices, life and experiences. Satre for example can see the reality for human race to be free, therefore he knows the evil and immoral than the moral. As for myself, I have chosen actions that are kind and important for my success and others as well. To be able to see the conception of humanity that emerges optimistic, it is important to be accepting of the choices you and others have made. The lack of acceptance for choices made will result in a negative approach of human race. Every single man will see the humanity differently, but it will be based on their own choices. Freedom of will is an opportunity and a blessing, in my perspective it the greatest blessing ever given to mankind. Humans have the right to change, create, destroy and destruct. Our own choices as human’s effects everything …show more content…
We were only given freedom of will. Human race made itself from the choices we have all chosen as of right now. We as humans should be responsibility for our own actions as Satre believed. We are the only living things that can choose, the power is in our hands to create, change or destroy. The conception of humanity is optimistic because our choices benefit other people and the consciousness of man is to take responsibility and notice who it

Related Documents

  • Great Essays

    It is part of the universality, impartiality, and individualism principles Cosmopolitanism is founded on. This method of perceiving the world requires individuals to look beyond their own petty self-interest, and determine that it is morally wrong for a human to suffer based on the simple fact both individuals are human. It is then morally required that the individual do something to decrease or eliminate said suffering since they would want the same aid if the roles were reversed. Now while the cost of fighting injustices and moral evils is overwhelming in the short term, it offers the world a light at the end of the tunnel. It gives humanity a goal and something to strive towards, so even if a cosmopolitan failed in eradicating all pain, they could be satisfied that they used their time “to decrease world suck” as the Vlogbrothers, John and Hank Green, would say.…

    • 1399 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Improved Essays

    129) If we look at these problems from the communitarian way, you eliminate the shortcomings of simply choosing for an individual or addressing only maximizing the welfare of a choice. That is what is taking place right now. If you have a different opinion than myself, you somehow feel you have the right to interject what I am doing instead of ignoring me, and letting me go on my way. You need to look at the community as a whole, and decide what is in their best interest, not in one individual. By doing this you provide freedom, but in a sense that is the right decision for everyone, or at least what should be best for everyone.…

    • 1287 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Finally in my view Friedrich Nietzsche’s perspective on free will is partially right. Where he is wrong is where thinks free will is an error. If we did not have free will then we are told what is best for us and we are doomed to live a life that does not fit all. We should have the right to choose our own path. However Nietzsche is right that free will was created for punishment.…

    • 1105 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Kant pronounced the need of the set of tenets of behavior and regulations which would give us the chance to settle on the right decision. This capacity to choose which looks like freedom from the first site swings to be a liability on the shoulder of the humankind as opportunity means obligation. Kant states that better or more terrible, activities can be performed to accomplish the more terrible or better result and this places us in the position of good situation where picking worse, one can hurt others and the other way around. Also, the activities we perform after these reflections and contemplations are resisted as moral activities by Kant. Moral activities for him are the activities, where reasons stay sooner than takes after and…

    • 1016 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Being free means that we have the choice to do evil things, a choice which some of us choose to exercise. This theodicy gains so many followers because it states that God does not create evil, yet evil can not be avoided without depriving us of our fundamental freedom of will. Moreover, the world without freedom would be an overall worse place. Through an examination of this explanation, it seems to preserve God 's goodness, because he created the best possible world. It also preserves his omnipotence and omniscience, because although he does know about evil and could stop it, the reason he chooses not to interfere is to ensure our freedom.…

    • 1336 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    What is it that makes a good deed inherently good? Some may say that the goodness of an action is characterized solely by ones motivation to do good, while other’s believe that the end result is all that matters. As human beings we are free to choose our path in life, as well as our beliefs and our actions. This allows us to decide whether we want to act in a way that will cause harm or good. Since we have the free will to decide our course of action to get the results we want, it also comes with the responsibility to choose whether we wish to act ethically.…

    • 1510 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Great Essays

    However God allows us as humans to act freely so we can be morally responsible since we are freely capable of doing well. On Atheism as Comforting In McCloskey’s article, he claimed that atheism is more comforting than theism. An atheist who believes that there is not a higher being is his or her choice to believe, but I feel that one who believes in atheism should consider the existence of God. I really have a hard time believing that there are individuals who have no faith or believe in…

    • 1039 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Improved Essays

    However, he believed that they could be a difficulty in using the idea of a state of nature because those who employ it project characteristics found only in society upon men in their original condition. As a result of this, the state of nature was simply a hypothesis to him. He went ahead to dismiss Hobbes idea that men were self-seeking and competitive by nature and in the absence of goodness in the state of nature men are naturally evil. Rousseau notes that one of the main problems humans face is that although they want to be free, they also want the advantages of living in society because it is only as a citizen that man can fulfil…

    • 1059 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Great Essays

    Since utilitarianism focuses on the greater good as a whole it amplifies the idea of selflessness. Mill uses the word egoism as an antonym for this theory as he attempts to stray away from self-satisfaction and lean towards influence as a duty. Although the theory promotes a great way to help others and to become benevolent, it is to unrealistic. I definitely can be taught to others and has enough influence behind to make a difference but a world of selflessness seems to only exist in a utopian society. Also, the connection between consequences and action is too strict.…

    • 1435 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Superior Essays

    Essay On Kantian Ethics

    • 1587 Words
    • 7 Pages

    This is due to the fact that it allows both logical reasoning of consequences and the flexibility to do what is required. However, there are also so major differences such as Utilitarian ethics focusing on the benefit to all people where mine is focused on the benefit of me and my close friends. This strictly violates Utilitarian ethics as it defies the greater good, which is supposed to benefit the majority of society. Social Contract theory is close to my personal ethics do to the limitations I place on myself. I limit myself to only legal actions do to not wanting people to bother me or be inconvenienced.…

    • 1587 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Superior Essays