Heidegger And Sartre's Arguments Against Authenticity

Now that I have shown my support for authenticity through the perspectives of Heidegger and Sartre, I’ll defend my position against possible objections. Authenticity evokes a disruptive element in humans because it can conflict with the morality that values all individuals. As for authenticity is subjective, and to embrace it, first, it must be desired. However, it poses a major conflict because in existentialism all human values are ultimately unjustifiable, including authenticity, so there is no reason to think that authenticity is better than inauthenticity. If a value cannot be implemented by rational means, it is, devoid of ethical appeal. I find this objection sound in theory but desolate in practicality because authenticity is about stepping outside one’s own bubble, engage with spontaneity and seek out an active, boundless life. The ethical appeal of authenticity is a minor hiccup; in fact, I think it suppresses the pursuit of authenticity. Since the concern is more about authenticity and society, not authenticity and the individual, it places limitations and constraints similar to those in an inauthentic life.

Of course, in existentialism a particular moral or political stance may come to fruition, nonetheless neither does it guarantee a particular position. Those who assume that there is a specific lifestyle one should act in only pointing out why the existentialist’s notion of authenticity is so necessary. As for the substance in one’s life is crucial, whereas trepidation over one’s style of life corrupts integrity and freedom. To conclude, these possible objections have some validity, yet continuously overlook the fact that the existentialist’s concept of authenticity is vital to understanding self in a meaningful and substantial