Sartre’s Being and Nothingness: an essay on phenomenological ontology is a study of the consciousness of being. Ontology refers to the study of being, and phenomenological means of or relating to perceptual consciousness.
In this essay, I would be giving a distinction between being-in-itself (en-soi, unconscious being) and the being-for-itself (pour-soi, conscious being). I would then cite an example from Sartre on an individual practicing bad faith in order to deny their freedom and responsibility. I would then conclude by saying that as an individual I have freedom and I should be responsible for everything.
Differences between the in-itself and for-itself
The main distinction between the two types of beings is consciousness. The fundamental property of consciousness is intentionality. Consciousness is not intentional but it is also transparent. This means that consciousness is always at some level aware of what it is doing.
One way of understanding how they relate to each other is to think of being-in-itself as object and the being-for-itself as subject. The being-in-itself is something that is defined by its physical characteristics, whereas the subject is defined by consciousness.
One feature of being-in-itself as defined by Sartre is that it obeys the Law of Identity. This means that the object is what it is and cannot be some other thing. For example an inkwell is an inkwell.
Sartre uses the being in-itself to describe things that have a definable and complete
Every individual is responsible for their own actions, choices, and behaviors. I cannot think for anyone else nor can anyone think for me. Essentially, I am the decision-maker for my own actions and behaviors. Being accountable for oneself requires someone to be honest and truthful with themselves and others. Sometimes this may seem difficult while other times easier.
The lecture is about Altruism wich the articule define as the behaviour of animals or people to help another or even put in danger themself to help another person or group. The articule state that the person or animal that do this don't get anything in returne, and the profesor doesn't think that. The articule gives two examples in wich this non careless acts take place and the professor refute them by explaining why they are actions with self interest.
To begin with, the articule explain that the sentinel's meerkat, put him in danger in orden to let the group search for food while his is guarding for a predator, not be able to hunt his own food. But the professor contradict this saying that the whole squad eat before this and also says, that
Anselm’s “Ontological Argument”
The general idea of the ontological argument is based on the notion that the concept of God as the greatest being implies that God exists—if not, there could be something greater, namely an existent greatest being—but this being would be God.
The structure of the Ontological Argument can be outlined as follows (The argument is based on Anselm 's Proslogion 2):
1. We conceive of God as a being than which no greater can be conceived.
This essay looks at Thomas Nagel’s account of the problem of consciousness i.e., the mind-body problem. I compare both Nagel’s and Colin McGinn's arguments regarding consciousness. Nagel’s argument introduces us to the intractability of the mind-body problem.
Although Sartre agrees with Dostoevsky who says, “If God does not exist, then everything would be possible,” he tries to pull back from nihilism by saying that each human must act “for all humanity” and before the audience of all of humanity. Sartre claims that all humans have no nature or essence, he disqualifies himself from calling them “all humans.”
First Sartre affirms that human beings lack a nature, but if we lack a nature, then the term “human being” has no reference at all. The descriptive term that applies to something with inherent qualities and do what is required of the qualities can be identified as “human being”.
The divide between dualism and physicalism is a driving philosophical question in the discussion of the nature of mind and body. While dualists argue that the mind is an immaterial substance that transcends extension, physicalists believe that everything is physical or supervenes on the physical. A common form of physicalism is set forth in the type-identity thesis, which asserts that every type of mental state is identical to a type of physical state. The token-identity thesis is another, much narrower form which only equates an individual thought to an individual brain state. Physicalism comes to mean that there is nothing in the world that is not physical.
The voices of history and tradition are present in quite a few of Jean-Paul Sartre’s pieces. Jean-Paul Sartre, born Jean-Paul Charles Aymard Sartre, was a very complex man. In the 1940’s, Sartre served in the military during World War II. The war heavily influenced Sartre, causing him to relate many of his pieces to his experiences in World War II. Sartre was a French philosopher, and was a major contributor to existentialism - the 20th century way of thinking.
Throughout this essay, I will follow John Locke’s definition of a person as being “an intelligent thinking being that can know itself as itself, the same thinking thing in different times and places” (Uzgalis, 2016, para. 5).
John Locke describes personal identity
This means that in order to have consciousness man must have a functional brain and the facticity of the brain which gives him the nature or the ‘essence’ that will limit his scope of response to a given stimulus in the future. From this point of view, existence does not precede essence and what actually happens is the opposite. This, however, doesn’t mean that an individual may not make decisions or view situations differently but that the extent of doing so is dependent upon that individual’s
As such the following is a brief explanation of the Sartrean standing, within Being and Nothingness. Sarte saw that the Other is necessary to one 's identifying as an Individual, and so the sense of the Other is seen as prior to one 's sense of selves. Sartre 's understanding of the Other is two fold, where firstly the Individual views the Other as an object, and secondly where the Individual understands the Other as a
Self, is a dynamic, open system, based on ones actions. King (1981) explains self as Jersild’s (1952) definition that “knowledge of self is a key to understanding human behavior because self is the way I define me to myself and to others. Self is all that I am. I am a whole person. Self is what I think of me and what I am capable of being and doing.
He argues that the body and soul are two elements that have the same underlying substance. He maintains that a person’s soul is the same as his nature of body; however, he argues that the mind differed from other parts of the body as it lacked a physical feature. In this case, he maintains that the intellect lacks a physical form, and this allows it to receive every form. It allows a person to think about anything, including the material object. In this case, he argues that if the intellect were in a material form, it could be sensitive to only some physical objects.
The argument Jean-Paul Sartre, a French philosopher, presents on existentialism helps to prove the foundation which is “existence precedes essence”. Existentialism is normally understood as an ideology that involves evaluating existence itself and the way humans find themselves existing currently in the world. For the phrase existence precedes essence, existence’s etymology is exsistere or to stand out while the term Essence means “being” or “to be” therefore the fundamental of existentialism, literally means to stand out comes before being. This can be taken into many different ideas such as individuals having to take responsibility for their own actions and that in Sartre’s case the individual is the sole judge of his or her own actions. According to him, “men is condemned to be free,” therefore “the destiny of man is placed within himself.”
The self can be defined as ‘an organised, consistent set of perceptions of and beliefs about oneself’ (Passer, Smith, Holt, Bremner, Sutherland & Vliek, 2009, p676). We should aim to understand ourselves, learn know how we function
