Beauvoir’s bad faith is social and structural, unlike Sartre’s individual account.

Evidence

Reading Th e Second Sex, we see that though for Sartre bad faith is merely a matter of individual modes of consciousness and behavior, for Beauvoir it is more complicated; for the individual who engages in bad faith is both the product of anonymous social forces and the creator of the meaning of the world. — Christine Daigle, Jacob Golomb (eds.), Beauvoir and Sartre, 72

Categorization

• XREF: This is the core historiographical divergence claim driving the whole book — Beauvoir transforms Sartre’s individual bad faith into a socially embedded concept. — connects to: Beauvoir diverges from Sartre by excusing the oppressed from willing freedom — Christine Daigle, Jacob Golomb (eds.), Beauvoir and Sartre: The Riddle of…, 650; Beauvoir shifted bad faith from individual psychoanalysis to collective politics — Christine Daigle, Jacob Golomb (eds.), Beauvoir and Sartre: The Riddle of…, 64
• DEEPTHINKING: This single move — bad faith as both product of anonymous forces and creator of meaning — is the hinge differentiating Beauvoir’s social philosophy from Sartre’s consciousness-centered existentialism.

Broader Connections

• Beauvoir shifted bad faith from individual psychoanalysis to collective politics #corroborates (0.95) — Christine Daigle, Jacob Golomb (eds.), Beauvoir and Sartre, 64
• Beauvoir diverges from Sartre by excusing the oppressed from willing freedom #expands (0.75) — Christine Daigle, Jacob Golomb (eds.), Beauvoir and Sartre, 650