Similarities Between Heidegger And Sartre

The idea of what is authentic in the world still pervades our minds and how it tends to confuse our day-to-day existence, which allows for a lack of discipline and consistency in our social world. I will argue that even if it may conflict with the moral values of all persons, authenticity in existentialism is, nevertheless, sound in its approach to understanding the world and being. I will show that authenticity, especially from the perspective of Heidegger and Sartre, attempts to come to terms with the conscious self in the material world and confronting the external pressures, influences, and forces that differ from oneself, thus being an influential concept in existential thinking. Lastly, I will defend this philosophical concept against

By the way, of contrast to Heidegger, Sartre sees authenticity in connection the structure of human existence, a combination of facticity and freedom resulting in what he calls bad faith. Bad faith is when a conscious being denies their own freedom to choose from among an array of possibilities or denying an aspect of their own facticity, thus acting inauthentic. The two types of bad faith are, being-for-itself, and being-in-itself, both unavoidable, Sartre remarks, as the structure of human consciousness are a ubiquitous feature. For example, a murderer who refuses to acknowledge that they are a murderer, when his mother visits his holding cell and asks, with all sincerity, if he did murder people. When he refuses to answer the question, the sincere mother becomes annoyed in his refusal. As a result, the mother is performing an act of bad faith because, Sartre claims, that the murderer’s refusal may hold some truth since no person is a murderer in a being-in-itself sense. Rather, no one is anything in simple terms and being a something is a matter of taking on a particular identity and sustaining its existence. This result in a gap between our for-itself and what we are as in-itself, ultimately leaving individual 's with a new awareness. In Sartre’s mind, sincerity will always trap a person in the inescapable realm of bad

Providing authenticity is in its reverse form, inauthenticity. In Being and Nothingness, Sartre recognizes in his version of authenticity known as bad faith, that the basic concept uses the double property of human beings called facticity and transcendence. He finds that bad faith, rather than submerging these two properties into one mixture, seeks to affirm their identity while preserving their differences. Simply, bad faith wants to affirm facticity as being transcendence and transcendence as being facticity, in such a manner that at the instant when a person apprehends the one, faith can find itself faced with the other. Facing this other is a constant game of mirror and reflection, revealing the contrast between I am not what I am and I am what I am. The concept of transcendence-facticity is the basic makeup of bad faith according to Sartre. To sum up, the unique duplicity within human reality expresses a reciprocal relationship to being-for-itself and being–for-others. Thus showing that authenticity in many ways can be difficult to attain since humans use bad faith (inauthenticity) to put oneself out of grasp, creating an