atheism for lent, day 24: covid edition, pt. 9: snoozing through Sartre

I am on Day 9 of covid and the brainfog has finally mostly cleared — mostly — so I think yesterday will have been my final “covid edition” of Afl’23. Thank Ipthar. Considering what a hard time I’ve had getting through today’s reading, I’ve decided the brainfog is still present, so I’ve made this a “covid edition” after all. *SIGH*

Aujourd’hui we’re back among the French — Jean-Paul Sartre, to be exact. Either I never realized, or I had forgotten (because I did study him in college) that Sartre was still alive when I was born. It makes me wonder what current philosophers will still be making waves when I am very old, maybe philosophers I haven’t heard of yet. Things that make ya go hmmmm….

Jean-Paul Sartre was a playwright, literary critic, activist, and, of course, philosopher. He was also the lifelong partner of Simone de Beauvoir in a nonmonogamous relationship. His central concern was what he called humanity’s being “condemned to be free.” (I hear something Pauline in that.) No external force is guiding or directing us; instead, we each enjoy the freedom to direct our own lives as we see fit, and we alone are responsible for our choices. Sartre was an existential philosopher, delving into and discussing the meaning, purpose, and value of human existence (which includes our aforementioned choices). His lecture “L’existentialisme est un humanisme” (“Existentialism Is a Humanism”) helped popularize existentialist thought from 1945 on.

(Note: both existential humanism and humanism emphasize investigating the meaning of life and purpose within life. Humanism assumes people are basically good, while existential humanism takes a neutral view [humans as neither good nor bad]. Humanism says that humans are trying to be the best version of themselves, while existential humanism emphasizes humanity’s search for meaning. Both “flavors” of humanism, though, assume that we pursue these goals using free will and personal responsibility.)

In his “Existentialism Is a Humanism” lecture, Sartre dives deep into the idea that, when we each exercise our free will to make choices within our own lives, we are at the same time making a choice for all of humanity. If I have a monogamous relationship, he says, that means I am creating a concept (these are my words now) of “humans are monogamous”:

“I am thus responsible for myself and for all men, and I am creating a certain image of man as I would have him to be. In fashioning myself I fashion man.”

–Jean-Paul Sartre,
“L’existentialisme est un humanisme,”
Club Maintenant, Paris,
10/29/1945

Sartre also states that if we have an awareness that we are “fashioning man” in each of our free will choices, then we will be in anguish over the profound responsibility. Moreover, we are all aware that this is what we’re doing, and anyone who says that’s not what they’re doing is either lying or living in denial. The best thing I can do — the thing I am responsible for doing — is to ask myself in each choice whether or not all of humanity should live up to the standard I have set with my choice.

This makes me think of voting. When I vote, I do so knowing that I am making a decision that affects everyone; however the election turns out, I have acted to help shape the course of our collective future. The people who don’t consciously acknowledge that their votes shape the world for all of us…well, I’m kind with Sartre on that point. Either they’re lying to themselves or to me; or they’re hopelessly ignorant; or maybe they’re just selfish.

Anyway, Sartre also digs into the question of the existence or non-existence of God. Existentialists of his camp don’t believe that God exists and, according to Sartre, are embarrassed and forlorn by God’s non-existence — because it means there are no a priori morals or values. “We are left alone, without excuse.” Oh dear oh dear *hand-wringing* we’re responsible for creating our own morals and values! That is embarrassing!

Sartre then goes into a long discussion of freedom that, frankly, had me nodding off at my computer. It is so convoluted and repetitive, I wanted to take a red editing pen to it — except I was too sleepy.

I’ll end with this quote from Sartre’s lecture: “You are free therefore choose, that is to say, invent.” As an author and artist, I find this especially resonant. Our every individual choice invents and creates newness for our individual selves as well as for our fellow humans. I can get on board with that.