This paper explores the similarities as well as differences that exist between Sartre and Beauvoir. The outline is subdivided under the following subheadings
- The existentialist theory in bringing out sanity.
- The frame work of forward freedom.
- Concept of conflict.
- Ethical issues in respect to humans as well as ways of handling people.
- Motive of transcendence.
- Unlimited freedom people have.
- The internal factors within someone and how they relate to the world.
Respect for life is a fundamental principle in every society. Life is considered precious. Any attempts to violate the rules regarding the life of humans have led to very serious penalties. Many people have tried to find out the rights and freedom. The rights and freedoms are very important in decisions people make in life. Simone and Sartre were very important in this whole process of being concerned with the welfare of the colleagues.
Simone Beauvoir in his work showed great concern for ethical responsibility. He used the framework of existentialist to approach this issue using to carry out his work (De Beuvoir 35). Though Satire had the same passion and reasoning, Simone started the work much earlier as the author has great respect for human dignity. Her slogan was that in anything one does, fellow humans were to be respected. Her work received much attention in many countries as she tried to ensure vulnerable persons got fair treatment. During the Second World War in particular, Simone’s work received much attention (De Beauvoir 89).She had great concern to the victims of war who were negatively affected. This is because most of them were being ignored. The war led to loss of life and much other destruction. People lost their body parts including legs, arms as well damage to other body parts. Thus, her existential concern was to explore why it is necessary to make some actions to stop the evils of the darkness to the people. This is a good step towards ensuring concern for the many victims that are brought about by the war. Therefore, both these personalities have good similarities of concern for others. Such motivations made them become important personalities in the world.
Even though Simone did most of the work in close consultation with Satire, they had differences in their work (De Beauvoir 45). It was not easy to recognize the differences as it was based on the approaches and framework they had. Most of the frameworks needed someone to be keen to interpret. This was similar to the way Satire interpreted the concept of conflict as respect to being there for a self as well as for itself. The analysis Simone put across regarding the subject of ethical issues concerning the world in respect to subjects that are free is similar to Satires’. Simone proposed the external part of the world could have some manifestations in ways that can be crushing. On the other hand, Satire viewed the world in terms of what we can do in order to reveal our freedom (De Beuvoir 56). It is the work of every individual to ensure that a good bond is maintained between other people. This is particularly emphasized when there is no God to ensure that the moral standards are adhered to. For such bonds to exist, one has to be oriented on the world by use of projects and one’s own freedom. Inaddition, one has to encourage other people to have freedom. That is why Sartre proposed that humans should rapture the world by transcendence that is spontaneous (Sartre 65). People should persuade their friends to do good things for the betterment of everyone in the world. This received mixed reactions from the public. Other people liked the idea with a click rejecting it .Those against it brought a different interpretation of the issue. They suggested that it was by chance that people existed. Further, status was as a result of one’s determination to excel. Persons were vulnerable because they unable to strive for excellence. This statement was very unacceptable.
The major motive of transcendence according to Sartre includes freedom. Beauvoir did bring her inquiry in a totally different direction (Sartre 23). Like Sartre, she believed that the subjectivity of humans was something that led to spontaneous rupture of projects. This rupturing movement is the spontaneous beginning of Transcendence. Both Sartre and Beauvoir believed that human beings engage themselves constantly in projects that transcend a given situation (Sartre 67). The situation could be cultural or personal. Other instances may be of historical perspectives that an individual is in. Culture and these other factors may persuade someone to make choices. In any circumstance, people should try to make good choices in any given instance. Decision making was and still is a process that entails many activities. It involves identifying the problem and coming with ways to deal with it. During such processes, people seek advice on how to finally arrive at a conclusion. This depends on an individual need as well as the surrounding atmosphere. The immediate surrounding meant influence from friends and relatives to culture. Culture is. in turn, dictated by many other many factors such as religions as well as norms.
Although Simone goals and objectives are similar to that of Sartre, her goal differed when she was writing her called Pyrrhus (Sartre 67). Sartre lays less emphasis on ethics. In that book, she constructed ethics, a project that was opposed by Sartre. Sartre compared ethics to something less serious that demands less attention. In fact, he emphasized that it was nothing. In addition, instead of observing other people in a way that could change gazes into objects as a threat to ones freedom as Sartre did, Beauvoir observed other people as the point of one’s freedom. If such people are absent, someone cannot be free. As Beauvoir explains the work further the concern is ethics that brings other different themes unlike that of Sartre. Beauvoir had great concerns regarding the issues of oppression that were not manifested in the early missions and work of Sartre (Sartre 67). The less fortunate persons were being mistreated by those in authority. This was evident in states that had great dictators. The dictators were above the law and manipulated the rules to suit them. They mismanaged the state resources with little regard to the poor. The poor lacked basic commodities and kept struggling with life in order to make ends meet. This led to stagnation in development in the regions affected. Oppression should, thus, be emphasized as it has led to under development in deprived populations.
Beauvoir incorporated themes from other scholars in her work (De Beauvoir 67). In order to succeed; borrowing of ideas was very instrumental in ensuring that success was achieved. This included ideas from Sartre and other philosophers. The other people that gave important information include Hegel and Spinoza. This means that both Sartre and Simone Beauvoir had common missions and goals. The mission of ensuring that all they did was accepted by all. The common goals were incorporated in the process of developing human values and respect.
Sartre proposes that everyone has unlimited freedom (De Beauvoir 89). The freedom has wide application and it can be used in any circumstance. This is a puzzling statement because of the limitations that arise from the freedom of choice one has. There are many factors according to Sartre that influence how one makes choices. These factors make people unable to understand how their colleagues make decisions. These include constraints with the physical and social contexts. Freedom is thus a result of the power of the unconsciousness and far more than that. Sartre says that his freedom is what makes him make decisions and choices, but not makes him unable to make a choice. Sartre sees life as a project that unfolds as one goes through life. It does not require knowledge for someone to execute such a project, it can be interpreted (De Beuvoir 35). Choices are part of what time brings about.
According to Simone, she was concerned too and argued that freedom made people to consciously make decisions that were related to their needs. To elaborate this, she gave instances where people made choices to meet their necessities. These included situations of slaver, devotion as well as in tyranny. These circumstances are choices as much as they are inequalities that result from relationships with others. Despite the fact that there was great inequality in such connections, people can never do things for as well as against others. This means that one can act in the position of another. This is because everyone is unique in the way he or she does things. This includes the choices we make, the way we approach problems, tastes and preferences (De Beuvoir 98). But the morals given to us by God make us endeavor to protect our neighbors’ from harm. A common theme used in existentialist is echoing. Even if one refuses to help others or becomes silent that is still a choice. Simone theorem says that one cannot escape from having freedom. Besides, when we totally desist from encouraging people to have their freedom, we fail to act for the ethical for our friends. This is because without our neighbors our actions are doomed to fail. Fellow humans act as an encouragement to others by making more rational decisions that lead to freedom (De Beuvoir 34). Our actions also make people to respond to or ignore certain situations. Simon Beauvoir suggests that we should never fear any situation. We should be able to have freedom even when there are many risks as well as uncertainty. This gives a possibility of building ethics.
Sartre proposes that being for others does not exist in many contexts (Sartre 56). This is because people have bad faith for their friends and colleagues. People cannot escape from having bad faith towards their friends. The bad faith is believed to be always present. Sartre conveys a very positive message regarding this. She says that because of our freedom that is infinite, we are able to make choices that are authentic and enable to escape from bad faith grip. Simon was partially satisfied with the issue of self-concern for others. At least she agreed to some extent that people should care for others unlike Sartre. This made Simon make a lot of dedications to ensure that people had concern for the others (Sartre 67). This would bar actions and practices such as oppression hence ensuring responsibility. Therefore, she had to look at a historical view of such perceptions. This helped her formulate ways of dealing with such negative perceptions. In an attempt to correct these actions, her work began by acknowledging the role that the world had in the conditions she described tragic. She said that the external world put people to very bad contexts with lots of suffering. She proposed that the internal factors within an individual were ambiguous and in relation to the entire world (Sartre 45). So, the best way to live, is to ignore the issues brought about by the life and make good choices. Making good choices is what made one evade problems. This would enhance the care for our friends.
In summary, existentialist according to Sartre involves great understanding of human beings. This needs an understanding of the conscious mind of the person in that particular circumstance. This is because the way one is motivated to do particular actions because of the conscious mind. This is a desire that all humans have, as they try to macro one or more decisions in everyday life. Everyone should exercise his freedoms so that they don’t lose their identity as humans besides their existence sight. As much as people consult, they should finally make their independent decisions. This calls for people to understand how life influence the choices they have in life and how they make them. This implied the values one has towards a decision they make and the overall impacts of the decision to the person. To achieve this, one has not only to live life well but also to be used to pitfalls that may deceive someone, because such pitfalls can make that particular person have bad faith. Bad faith is negative as it makes people have negative attitudes to their friends. This whole process is a good attempt to realize the importance and singularity incurred in human life regarding decision making.