Jean-Paul Sartre: Being and Nothingness - Essay Example

? Sartre and the concept of Anguish According to Jean Paul Sartre, Anguish is a sentimental approach; which a person entails in his subconscious that can lead to his freedom. Moreover, this anguish can lead to distrust and such distrust can lead to unreliability of oneself, as he would be unable to trust his own rational judgement. Hence, individuals need to choose between options in order to survive and set example for the others. Thus, if one chooses a ruthless course of action for the sake of integrity eventually it becomes an optional path for the civilization; conclusively, it is the consciousness of one’s liberty. Sartre’s anguish is a sub-chapter of ‘being’, which was written explicitly to represent the aspect of existential anguish. Since Sartre’s was significantly existentialist, therefore; he elaborates extensively on human nature and its personality traits (Sartre, 1984). Sartre formulated the dogma of intrinsic human trait, which meant that all the men of the world have similar nature to a large extent, though they do vary as individuals, but their built-in trait is absolutely same. Subsequently, the basic or fundamental ingredient of human beings is same, but they also have distinctiveness when they chose or whether they chose them. Furthermore, a man always chooses good over evil, as this awareness between good and evil is inherent; this is a God’s blessing for all the humans to judge among both. Hence, a child knows that it’s wrong to kill another human being whether told or not. This judgement of good and evil, right and wrong, moral and immoral leads one to understand that creator has imposed responsibility on humans to take liability of their actions. This understanding of responsibility leads one to choose, chose for him-self and for others, a path, for passive humans to follow. Via this way humans build numerous impressions of their kind and each one of them is responsible for the image they create for them and for others. As if they are followed, they would have the liability of others along with them before the creator. Simultaneously, the existential philosopher describes three stages of emotion which entail anguish, forlornness, and despair. He sheds light on the first concept of anguish. This emotion lets one be aware of his responsibility of being himself; that he understands that whatever actions he would choose wilfully or dutifully will become a set of example for others. They will always be a trade mark of his personality and people imitating him will also be considered from his clan. Hence, good or bad, moral or immoral, right or wrong, his actions will form an authentic path for other to choose the same course. Furthermore, Sartre puts forth the example of God’s Prophet, who was ordered by God to sacrifice his beloved son; this crucial and intricate submission was required from the Prophet. If one keeps rationality here, he would be cynical to submit himself on such a commandment. Thus, it was an order for superior beings, Prophets, he was told and expected to submit his beloved child to God. Here, one can assess the tussle of anguish and rationality; whilst anguish makes one conscious of his prior responsibility and keeps him apart from being an introvert or one’s benefit. Therefore, he was a path setter for the rest of the human kind to follow a certain religious course of action. Anguish or anxiety is commonly understood as pessimistic emotions which make an individual deficient to flexibility and depict his sentimental turmoil. The term is usually denoted to people who are labelled as hyper-sensitive. However, in reality it states a status of mind in which an individual is independent to take any liability from many options obtainable to him. Hence, anguish is a direct result of acute awareness of one self, this knowledge lands one in a responsible circle of his choices, and their impact on his life and on the others. Moreover, the choices before him are not obligatory to choose from nether they have any definite position. Thus, this haze of uncertainty and liability is termed as anguish. The dilemma lies in the connotation that man is free and is imprisoned in the responsibility of his own actions at the same time. Hence, this freedom provides him with an intrinsic sense of responsibility, where he takes into account his actions verses others actions. Man intrinsically likes to imitate and he cannot act, react, decide, and move solely on his own ideas, he needs to attain inspiration to decide his future actions. Similarly, his actions are taken into consideration by many other men. His actions are on display to all the other men, therefore; if he chooses a certain course of action which has negative connotation; he sets an example for the other men to imitate him. Thus, responsibility of others pessimistic action would fall into his account and he will be liable of becoming pioneer among them. In addition to the above description of anguish, men takes action not decided by him or takes the responsibility of actions not chosen by himself, but of the God’s will. Hence, his actions fit into the fate, inscribed by God himself for him. However, God has provided him with two or more options and defined a path to reach towards the right one. Ultimately, it’s the matter of choice left with the man and the emotion whilst choosing among such options is termed as anguish. Sartre elaborates his theory further by describing that anguish is not due to the chosen option it is due to the uncertainty that the option entails and the choice he made has no rational justification for it. Hence, Sartre describes anguish as constitutive for subsistence. Furthermore, he explains it as a basic mean for human creation. He emphasizes greatly upon the fact that all men should experience and analyze anguish in them self as an obligation to their objective of creation. However, there are numerous examples of individuals who do not express or display any sign of anguish via their body or facial expression. This happens only in two cases: 1. The person is deceptive to himself by ignoring anguish 2. People are escaping anguish by ditching autonomy Hence, these are the two notions of avoiding anguish, which is deep-rooted in human foundation. Thus, people tend to avoid anguish by the two above stated tactics; as they do not realize its potency unless they acutely acknowledge it. They adapt a double-dealing strategy to ignore the fact of torment within them self. Hence, in the due process they only trick them self and no one else. As deceptiveness and escaping does not relinquish the fact that the sub-part of ‘being’ has no existence. It’s a delusion which a man creates to fool himself and no one else. Sartre’s ‘being and nothingness’ sheds light on ‘bad faith’ of a person and how it effects his emotions. This bad faith leads him to ignore his anguish, which guides him in the due process to deceive his own self. Consequently, this person denies accepting the fact that his actions have wider impact on society and his actions leave pessimistic affects on the rest of the world. For instance, masturbation is a habit, which is not accepted or approved by any religion of the world. Hence, it’s forbidden and condemned by all the intellects of the world. How it impacts on others? A man is attaining pleasure by himself and with himself, but on a larger canvas he is exploiting his own right of a sexual companion. When he denies the right of a sexual companion via masturbation; he is at some point exploiting or withholding the right of his future partner. Moreover, he is setting a platform or a course of action, an act to intimate for the rest of the men. His actions have wider impact on his family, friends, and life partners. His denial does not omit the fact that the urge for a sexual partner is factual and his choice is uncertain and cannot be judged even by him. This anguish enables him to realize that at some point, he is negligent about the responsibility of his action and it would also entail a lasting uncertainty. As a virtual image for his sexual satisfaction is truly a delusion, explicitly a foolish way to trick him-self. Another way of analyzing the same scenario is to put the notion of ‘masturbation’ for all the men of the world, if it is justified for all the men as an independent responsible choice, only then it’s acceptable as a moral action to attain pleasure. If it’s conditional and hidden, then it’s definitely a mock towards one’s sexual sentiment. If masturbation would have been a moral conduct or allowed then the concept of marriage, companionship, love for one another would vanish eventually and the birth or children would become a foreign idea. This process would halt the growth of new generation immediately. The person in the habit of masturbation would consider that the consequences his action would only affect him and eventually no one is to object or condemn it, as if the bad habit is negatively affecting his being only and none else. He does not understand or do not want to understand that his actions and choices are bad choices, which do impact people on larger scale. If we analyze it like that, the person addicted to masturbation, browses porn, the porn provider is benefiting from each click. Simultaneously, the trend of nudity, virtual sex, and prostitution would grow. This endangers the significance, dignity, and sanctuary of the opposite sex and would be a root cause for many psychological and ethical disorders in the society. Hence, if a father, brother, husband is indulged in it, his actions have direct impact on his family, and if a bachelor is in a habit of it, he would make the life of his future spouse or companion troublesome. Hence, if one denies that anguish does not exist, he denies and questions his ultimate integrity. People refuting the concept of anguish mostly demonstrate a casual response of denial and to take the responsibility of their action. The main idea here is self-deceptive-suppression and eventually one cannot sustain it for long. Moreover, nobody likes his bad faith to become the common faith of the world. For instance, if a husband masturbates, he neglects his ultimate responsibility towards his wife and would not like to transfer this bad habit into his children, family, relatives, and friends. As the idea of passing it on to his young ones would revolt his world of wisdom and negligence. Simultaneously, it’s not even acceptable for a bachelor, who considers that he has no liability of his actions, as he is also linked to the society in some way or the other. Irrefutably, man has two choices in-front of him when it comes to anguish, accept the reality, and submit oneself to the principle of nature set by the lawmaker or he can chose his delusion and can face its consequences eventually. In the dogma of anguish, one is never certain as faith is invisible and believe in God is also on an individual’s blind faith in him. Hence, uncertainty also exists on the other side of the picture, but with this, uncertainty is associated to deep-rooted faith, which eventually soothes subconscious with its morality. However, from a pathological perspective anguish can be termed as illusion itself. Likewise, why people have uneasy conscience? Why individuals believe that their action’s intensity would not have any impact and others action would not impact on his life directly. The reason is denial of one being. Aristotle referred man as a social animal hence, if he lives in isolation like in a jungle, he can assume that he has no liability towards other humans, but living among them and considering that he is liability-free (of his actions) then it is an absurd imagination. This entails that your peculiarly declared action cannot become universal and if it cannot become universal course of action then it’s not a natural or finer choice among the rest of the options then it s a deception which one has imposed on himself. If one considers death penalty as immoral for even criminals then he needs to completely subjugate the concept of killing at all. For instance, if the USA law has proclaimed death penalty as an unjust and brutal act then its government should refrain from war as well. As wars allow killing thousands of innocent people only on the base of their nationality and if wars are allowed then convicts need to attain death penalty according to the gravity of committed crime. As crime is itself an immoral set of action a wrong choice made by the individual. Hence, if these wrong acts are not condemned forcefully; unwise people will imitate the actions of such people. Therefore, the aspect of anguish is inevitable and is intrinsic, one only needs to weigh his options rationally and chose amongst them the inspirational one to inspire the rest of the world. For instance, a father conceals his anguish when he is faced with the trauma to prevent his child from growing cancer. His choices are out in open; either let the child suffer and die or to chose a painful course of action which has at least some hope for his child’s life. Simultaneously, many a times, the extent of an action’s gravity is not understood unless, one observes it long lasting effects. Sartre has chosen the legendary religious occurring of Prophet Isaac being at verge of sacrifice by Prophet Abraham. Although, it has been an anecdote of anguish free submission to God’s will, but Prophet Abraham also faced uncertainty when he first saw the dream of his son’s sacrifice commandment by God. He pondered over the authenticity of his dream and blamed Satin for showing him such vicious vision, but with its (dream) repetition, he explicitly acted according to the instruction of God. The religious anecdote depicts that he did not face anguish as he was certain that this is what God wants him to do, but Sartre describes it otherwise. He states that when anguish is strong it’s more concealed and observers cannot witness it, but it’s an inevitable feeling which a human cannot omit. In this scenario, Abraham concealed his anguish affectively with his strong faith of goodness; he justified his action of sacrifice by associating it to the act of submission. Since Abraham was a prophet an example setter, who is chosen by the God to set examples, therefore, he had the liability to depict certain actions which would become exemplary action for the rest of the world to follow. However, the sacrifice of his son never took place and it was replaced by a sheep, but the test was only to judge submission or choice of Abraham. Therefore, anguish leaves one a little perplexed, but the choice determines how one intends to chose for personal benefit or human race to imitate him due to resoluteness and veracity of his responsibility and choice. Reference: Top of Form Sartre, J. P. (1984). Being and Nothingness. Washington Square Press. Bottom of Form Read More