This link has been bookmarked by 12 people . It was first bookmarked on 10 Dec 2007, by Dan Moore.
-
01 Oct 15
-
Sartre introduces Being and Nothingness, his single greatest articulation of his existentialist philosophy, as “an essay in phenomenological ontology.”
-
Essentially, it is a study of the consciousness of being.
-
Ontology means the study of being; phenomenological means of or relating to perceptual consciousness.
-
In the introduction to Being and Nothingness, Sartre details his rejection of Kant’s concept of noumenon
-
Kant was an idealist, believing that we have no direct way of perceiving the external world and that all we have access to is our ideas of the world, including what our senses tell us.
-
Against Kant, Sartre argues that the appearance of a phenomenon is pure and absolute.
-
The noumenon is not inaccessible—it simply isn’t there
-
Appearance is the only reality. From this starting point, Sartre contends that the world can be seen as an infinite series of finite appearances.
-
After dispensing with the concept of the noumenon, Sartre outlines the binary distinction that dominates the rest of Being and Nothingness:
-
he distinction between unconscious being (en-soi, being-in-itself) and conscious being (pour-soi, being-for-itself)
-
Being-in-itself is concrete, lacks the ability to change, and is unaware of itself
-
Being-for-itself is conscious of its own consciousness but is also incomplete
-
For Sartre, this undefined, nondetermined nature is what defines man
-
Sartre next introduces the related truth that the being-for-itself possesses meaning only through its perpetual foray into the unknown future.
-
In other words, a man is not essentially what one might describe him as now
-
In truth, the man is never an essence, no matter how much he strives at self-essentialism.
-
The way he interprets his past and foresees his future is itself a series of choices.
-
The for-itself, desiring to become one within the in-itself, imposes its subjectivity on the other’s objectivity.
-
The for-itself is consciousness, yet the instance this consciousness makes its own being a question, the irreconcilable fissure between the in-itself and the for-itself is affirmed.
-
Sartre explains that as a conscious being, the for-itself recognizes what it is not: it is not a being-in-itself.
-
hrough the awareness of what it is not, the for-itself becomes what it is: a nothingness, wholly free in the world, with a blank canvas on which to create its being
-
-
04 Mar 15
-
Man, on the other hand, makes himself by acting in the world.
-
must actuate his own being.
-
hrough the awareness of what it is not, the for-itself becomes what it is: a nothingness, wholly free in the world, with a blank canvas on which to create its being.
-
The absence it signifies is the absence of the unattainable synthesis of the for-itself and the in-itself.
-
The human can never know being as it truly is, for to do that, one would have to be the thing itself. T
-
Yet, as Sartre continually emphasizes, I am free, I am transcendent, I am consciousness, and I make the world.
-
human ontology
-
Consciousness enters the world through the for-itself and with it brings nothingness, negation,
-
Consciousness is what allows the world to exist.
-
the for-itself at all times depends on the in-itself for its existence
-
-
03 Nov 14
-
Against Kant, Sartre argues that the appearance of a phenomenon is pure and absolute. The noumenon is not inaccessible—it simply isn’t there. Appearance is the only reality. From this starting point, Sartre contends that the world can be seen as an infinite series of finite appearances.
-
the distinction between unconscious being (en-soi, being-in-itself) and conscious being (pour-soi, being-for-itself). Being-in-itself is concrete, lacks the ability to change, and is unaware of itself. Being-for-itself is conscious of its own consciousness but is also incomplete.
-
To know a rock, we have to be the rock (and of course, the rock, as a being-in-itself, lacks consciousness). Yet the being-for-itself sees and intuits the world through what is not present.
-
Delving into the ways individual beings-for-itself relate to one another, Sartre argues that we, as human beings, can become aware of ourselves only when confronted with the gaze of another. Not until we are aware of being watched do we become aware of our own presence. The gaze of the other is objectifying in the sense that when one views another person building a house, he or she sees that person as simply a house builder.
-
Consciousness enters the world through the for-itself and with it brings nothingness, negation, and difference to what was once a complete whole of being. Consciousness is what allows the world to exist. Without it, there would be no objects, no trees, no rivers, and no rocks: only being
-
-
16 Dec 13
-
key concepts are “the gaze” and “the other.”
-
alienating
-
Our awareness of being perceived not only causes us to deny the consciousness and freedom inherent to us but also causes us to recognize those very qualities in our counterpart.
-
values are never objective, as they are created by the choices and actions of free individuals.
-
-
26 May 13
-
gical means of or relating to perceptual
-
phenomena, which are our perceptions of things or how things appear to us,
-
noumena, which are the things in themselves, which we have no knowledge of
-
Appearance is the only reality.
-
-
18 Dec 12
-
Being-in-itself is concrete, lacks the ability to change, and is unaware of itself. Being-for-itself is conscious of its own consciousness but is also incomplete
-
undefined, nondetermined nature is what defines man
-
forced to create itself from nothingness.
-
defining characteristic of the for-itself
-
. Instead of simply being, as the object-in-itself does, man, as an object-for-itself, must actuate his own being.
-
related truth that the being-for-itself possesses meaning only through its perpetual foray into the unknown future
-
The way he interprets his past and foresees his future is itself a series of choices
-
individual can be said to have a certain physical nature, as a chair doe
-
the individual nonetheless projects himself by ascribing meaning to, or taking meaning from, his concrete characteristics and thus negating them
-
, desiring to become one within the in-itself, imposes its subjectivity on the other’s objectivity
-
the for-itself recognizes what it is not: it is not a being-in-itself.
-
Through the awareness of what it is not, the for-itself becomes what it is: a nothingness, wholly free in the world, with a blank canvas on which to create its being
-
for-itself is the being through which nothingness and lack enter the world, and consequently, the for-itself is itself a lack.
-
-
05 Jan 12
-
01 Jun 10
-
Kant distinguished between phenomena, which are our perceptions of things or how things appear to us, and noumena, which are the things in themselves, which we have no knowledge of.
-
The noumenon is not inaccessible—it simply isn’t there
-
Sartre contends that the world can be seen as an infinite series of finite appearances
-
Being-in-itself is concrete, lacks the ability to change, and is unaware of itself
-
Being-for-itself is conscious of its own consciousness but is also incomplete
-
for-itself (like man) lacks a predetermined essence, it is forced to create itself from nothingness.
-
Man, on the other hand, makes himself by acting in the world. Instead of simply being, as the object-in-itself does, man, as an object-for-itself, must actuate his own being.
-
a man is not essentially what one might describe him as now
-
he is not a teacher in the way that a rock, as a being-in-itself, is a rock
-
In truth, the man is never an essence, no matter how much he strives at self-essentialism
-
he interprets his past and foresees his future is itself a series of choices
-
The for-itself is consciousness, yet the instance this consciousness makes its own being a question, the irreconcilable fissure between the in-itself and the for-itself is affirmed.
-
the for-itself recognizes what it is not: it is not a being-in-itself. Through the awareness of what it is not, the for-itself becomes what it is: a nothingness, wholly free in the world, with a blank canvas on which to create its being.
-
Not until we are aware of being watched do we become aware of our own presence. The gaze of the other is objectifying in the sense that when one views another person building a house, he or she sees that person as simply a house builder.
-
we perceive ourselves being perceived and come to objectify ourselves in the same way we are being objectified. Thus, the gaze of the other robs us of our inherent freedom and causes us to deprive ourselves of our existence as a being-for-itself and instead learn to falsely self-identify as a being-in-itself.
-
-
27 Oct 09
-
Ontology means the study of being; phenomenological means of or relating to perceptual consciousness.
-
Kant distinguished between phenomena, which are our perceptions of things or how things appear to us, and noumena, which are the things in themselves, which we have no knowledge of. Against Kant, Sartre argues that the appearance of a phenomenon is pure and absolute. The noumenon is not inaccessible—it simply isn’t there. Appearance is the only reality. From this starting point, Sartre contends that the world can be seen as an infinite series of finite appearances. Such a perspective eliminates a number of dualisms, notably the duality that contrasts the inside and outside of an object. What we see is what we get (or, what appears is what we know).
-
the distinction between unconscious being (en-soi, being-in-itself) and conscious being (pour-soi, being-for-itself). Being-in-itself is concrete, lacks the ability to change, and is unaware of itself. Being-for-itself is conscious of its own consciousness but is also incomplete. For Sartre, this undefined, nondetermined nature is what defines man. Since the for-itself (like man) lacks a predetermined essence, it is forced to create itself from nothingness. For Sartre, nothingness is the defining characteristic of the for-itself. A tree is a tree and lacks the ability to change or create its being. Man, on the other hand, makes himself by acting in the world. Instead of simply being, as the object-in-itself does, man, as an object-for-itself, must actuate his own being.
-
-
28 Sep 09
-
10 Dec 07
-
Being-in-itself
-
being-for-itself
-
Being-in-itself is concrete, lacks the ability to change, and is unaware of itself
-
Being-for-itself is conscious of its own consciousness but is also incomplete.
-
this undefined, nondetermined nature is what defines man
-
Since the for-itself (like man) lacks a predetermined essence, it is forced to create itself from nothingness
-
nothingness is the defining characteristic of the for-itself
-
Sartre next introduces the related truth that the being-for-itself possesses meaning only through its perpetual foray into the unknown future.
-
In other words, a man is not essentially what one might describe him as now.
-
the individual nonetheless projects himself by ascribing meaning to, or taking meaning from, his concrete characteristics and thus negating them
-
In truth, the man is never an essence, no matter how much he strives at self-essentialism.
-
The for-itself is consciousness, yet the instance this consciousness makes its own being a question, the irreconcilable fissure between the in-itself and the for-itself is affirmed.
-
For example, if he is a teacher, he is not a teacher in the way that a rock, as a being-in-itself, is a rock.
-
Would you like to comment?
Join Diigo for a free account, or sign in if you are already a member.