Being and Nothingness

Jean-Paul Sartre claims that a focus on phenomenon has helped philosophy to make great strides. Phenomenon helped philosophers apply singular approaches to understanding existence rather than constantly relying on dualities. Sartre suggests that humans cannot separate their internal and external existences, and he rejects the concept of a “true nature.” The idea of a true nature, or noumenal reality, destroys the possibility of perception and implies that only man can have being. If everything about being is tied to a predetermined essence and a concrete existence, then everything else has a negative quality. Sartre suggests that embracing Nietzsche’s philosophy of letting go of “the illusion of backworlds”—referring to the belief that there is a meaning to existence outside of phenomenon—transforms everything that can be perceived into positive qualities (2). Sartre suggests that essence does not come before existence; instead, it comes afterward, revealed through phenomenon.

What Sartre is referring to here is best summarized with the Latin phrase en causa sui, which refers to being one’s own cause. Sartre’s text opens with the rejection of the long-accepted belief that humans are born with essences, or predetermined purposes in life. Pre-determined essences, paired with a philosophy that relies upon objects rather than phenomenon, dominated theories of existence for centuries. Sartre views this philosophical approach as limiting, asserting that it disables the role of experience in understanding existence. If all people contain inherent identities, then everything else that happens around them does not really matter. This is The Myth of Essence and Identity. It suggests that people have a predetermined path, and the rest is simply background noise. Sartre argues that the power of being lies in the succession of decisions made in reaction to phenomenon—it is this process that creates essence.

The text states that when a person encounters something outside of itself, it is engaging with appearance. This creates a “phenomenon of being,” which is the perception of something that is separate from the self. When a person looks at an object, its existence is defined by the fact that it is not the person. Sartre draws a distinction between the phenomenon of being and the being of the phenomenon. The first refers to the experience of the individual taking in the appearance of something outside of themself. The second refers to the existence of that thing, its essence or the sum of its experiences. He determines that the only way humans can become aware of the existence, or being, of things outside of themselves is if that existence is manifested through appearance.

Sartre argues that humans can only make sense of the world and existence through phenomenon or appearance. Therefore, he rejects the ontological principle of cogito, that something exists because it thinks. This is not something that is apparent through phenomenon. He also rejects the idea of consciousness as relational; this idea proposes that awareness is defined by what is around it and the realization that it is not what is around it. In short, consciousness is the knowledge of one’s own existence among other existences. Sartre proposes that the definition of consciousness cannot and should not rely on the primacy of knowledge. Instead, consciousness is synonymous with human existence.

Sartre believes he can derive ontological proof using phenomenon and perception. He argues that all experience is built on the “consciousness of something,” meaning that awareness must be fixated on an idea to be consciousness. This idea is that of being: Consciousness is aware of its own being as well as the being of everything around it.

This argument presents the foundation of Sartre’s theories on the Ways of Being. Here, Sartre is clearly separating his doctrinal approach from previous philosophers. Human consciousness has nothing to do with knowing, nor is it relational to other objects. It is being-for-itself, meaning that human existence is human consciousness. Being-for-itself contrasts with being-in-itself, which refers to things that exist that are supposed to lack consciousness, such as a tree or a lamppost. This is the reality of existence. Sartre wants to separate his philosophy from the accepted tradition of essences or the idea that consciousness is a gift from God that separates humans from other creatures. He calls creationism a “widespread prejudice” (26). For the philosopher, the attribution of consciousness to divine innovation is a denial of the beauty and complexity of existence. Instead, he argues that consciousness and existence arise at the same time; they are almost synonymous. Consciousness does not precede existence.