Final Paper
Existentialism is a Humanism
Sartre view that we have a complete moral responsibility due to our complete freedom in the world stems from his idea that our “existence precedes our essence”. To explain this idea, first we have to look at Sartre views on god, primarily on his idea that there is no God that exists. If there was a creator or a God, then humans would have to made in a certain image or having a general concept that we follow. Another way to explain this would be having to make a table, where a carpenter (God) would have created the table (humans) after he had a sort of purpose in mind or general concept of what he is making. But with Sartre’s idea that there is no god then we run into the issue that we have come to …show more content…
This would be interpreted as there would be no basis for what would be considered good like not to lie or be considered bad like robbing or killing, and with the idea that we are not defined by anything like human nature (existence precedes our essence), we are left with no limit of our action. That notion is what Sartre defines man to be condemned to be free, because we have come to exist into this world with complete freedom. This freedom leaves us without the ability to blame something else for our actions and leave us with the complete responsibility of our choices. The idea of complete moral responsibility would then be defined as when we make choices with moral consequences like stealing, it is left to the each human to determine what to do, and we have that freedom of choosing the example that we set for the human race. We are then responsible for our moral system and the burden of it since that we have created it for …show more content…
The grounds with for that idea is based around the idea that there is no creator or a God, this is where someone first has to really partially agree with before his other points start taking shape. I believe even someone that does not like the idea of there being no God, they can still agree with the notions proposed by Sartre. One way to do this would the idea of free will, the reason for this would be that if our essence of what a human is came before our existence, I believe the argument can be made that we can change we were already defined as with the tool of free will. Because of our free will, his ideas of our choices defining us humans can still be applied and reasoned with. The only place that it really runs into an issue would be the topic of a God planned destiny for us, then we get into the debacle of if this is true do we really have free will. So it is better to assume go entertain the idea of no God because Sartre’s idea brings forth an interesting idea that we are responsible for ourselves and which is a form of true freedom than being forced to accept a predefined essence that our creation was built on. (Example of this is, is a pen being forever defined as a pen never having the freedom to define itself, just being the “cookie cutter” concept of a pen, ever pen having the same end goal of writing, an restricting brand(ethic) system,
Existentialism is a Humanism
Sartre view that we have a complete moral responsibility due to our complete freedom in the world stems from his idea that our “existence precedes our essence”. To explain this idea, first we have to look at Sartre views on god, primarily on his idea that there is no God that exists. If there was a creator or a God, then humans would have to made in a certain image or having a general concept that we follow. Another way to explain this would be having to make a table, where a carpenter (God) would have created the table (humans) after he had a sort of purpose in mind or general concept of what he is making. But with Sartre’s idea that there is no god then we run into the issue that we have come to …show more content…
This would be interpreted as there would be no basis for what would be considered good like not to lie or be considered bad like robbing or killing, and with the idea that we are not defined by anything like human nature (existence precedes our essence), we are left with no limit of our action. That notion is what Sartre defines man to be condemned to be free, because we have come to exist into this world with complete freedom. This freedom leaves us without the ability to blame something else for our actions and leave us with the complete responsibility of our choices. The idea of complete moral responsibility would then be defined as when we make choices with moral consequences like stealing, it is left to the each human to determine what to do, and we have that freedom of choosing the example that we set for the human race. We are then responsible for our moral system and the burden of it since that we have created it for …show more content…
The grounds with for that idea is based around the idea that there is no creator or a God, this is where someone first has to really partially agree with before his other points start taking shape. I believe even someone that does not like the idea of there being no God, they can still agree with the notions proposed by Sartre. One way to do this would the idea of free will, the reason for this would be that if our essence of what a human is came before our existence, I believe the argument can be made that we can change we were already defined as with the tool of free will. Because of our free will, his ideas of our choices defining us humans can still be applied and reasoned with. The only place that it really runs into an issue would be the topic of a God planned destiny for us, then we get into the debacle of if this is true do we really have free will. So it is better to assume go entertain the idea of no God because Sartre’s idea brings forth an interesting idea that we are responsible for ourselves and which is a form of true freedom than being forced to accept a predefined essence that our creation was built on. (Example of this is, is a pen being forever defined as a pen never having the freedom to define itself, just being the “cookie cutter” concept of a pen, ever pen having the same end goal of writing, an restricting brand(ethic) system,