JEAN-PAUL SARTRe’s ESSENCE and EXISTENCE

A Paper

Presented to

PROF. JOSE CANTALOPEZ, JR.

Department of Philosophy

College of Social Sciences and Humanities

Mindanao State University

Marawi City

In Partial Fulfillment

For the Course Requirement in

Philosophy 185 (Existentialism)

1st Semester, 2010

by

MARCQUIEL LIRA

October 2010
 Existence precedes essence it is a central claim of existentialism, which reverses the traditional

philosophical view that the essence or nature of a thing is more fundamental and immutable than its

existence. To existentialists, the human being - through his consciousness - creates his own values and

determines a meaning to his life, for in the beginning the human being does not possess any identity or

value. By posing the acts that constitute him, he makes his existence more significant.

Existence precedes essence may serve to introduce what is most distinctive of

existentialism, namely, the idea that no general, non-formal account of what it means to be

human can be given, since that meaning is decided in and through existing itself. Existence is

“self-making-in-a-situation. In contrast, whose essential properties are fixed by the kind of

entities they are, what is essential to a human being what makes her who she is not fixed by her

type but by what she makes of herself, who she becomes. The fundamental contribution of

existential thought lies in the idea that one's identity is constituted neither by nature nor by

culture, since to “exist” is precisely to constitute such an identity.

If “essence” describes as what a thing is and “existence” that it is, it follows that what is

intelligible about any given thing, what can be thought about it, will belong to its essence. It is

from essence in this sense, for example human being as rational animal that ancient philosophy

drew its prescriptions for an individual's way of life, its estimation of the meaning and value of

existence. Having an essence meant that human beings could be placed within a larger whole,

that provided the standard for human flourishing. Descartes rejected the traditional essential

definitions of man in favor of a radical, first-person reflection on his own existence, the “I am.”

Nevertheless, he quickly reinstated the old model by characterizing his existence as that of a

substance determined by an essential property, “thinking.” In contrast, Heidegger proposes that

“I” am “an entity whose what [essence] is precisely to be and nothing but to be”. Such an

entity's existing cannot, therefore, be thought as the instantiation of an essence, and

consequently what it means to be such an entity cannot be determined by appeal to pre-given

frameworks or systems whether scientific, historical, or philosophical.

His claim is best understood in contrast to an established principle of metaphysics that

essence precedes existence, that there is such a thing as human nature, determined by the

cosmic order (or a god), laid down by religious tradition, or legislated by political or social

authority. A typical claim for this traditional thesis would be that man is essentially selfish, or

that he is a rational being.

To Sartre, the idea that "existence precedes essence" means that a personality is not

built over a previous designed model or a precise purpose, because that's the human being who

chooses to engage in such entreprise. While not denying the constraining conditions of human

existence, he answers to Spinoza who affirmed that man is determined by what surrounds him.

Therefore, to Sartre an oppressive situation is not intolerable in itself, but once regarded as such

by those who feel oppressed the situation becomes intolerable.

When it is said that man defines himself, it is often perceived as stating that man can

"wish" to be something or anything, a bird, for instance and then be it. According to Sartre's

account, however, this would be a kind of bad faith. What is meant by the statement is that man

is (1) defined only insofar as he acts and (2) that he is responsible for his actions. To clarify, it

can be said that a man who acts cruelly towards other people is, by that act, defined as a cruel

man and in that same instance, he (as opposed to his genes, for instance) is defined as being
responsible for being this cruel man. You can choose to act in a different way, and to be a good

person instead of a cruel person. Here it is also clear that since man can choose to be either

cruel or good, he is, in fact, neither of these things essentially.[

To claim that existence precedes essence is to assert that there is no such

predetermined essence to be found in man, and that an individual's essence is defined by him

or her through how he or she creates and lives his or her life. As Sartre puts it in his

Existentialism is Humanism: "man first of all exists, encounters himself, surges up in the world

and defines himself afterwards."