Beauvoir grounds anguish in forced choice without external justification

Evidence

In many situations, “whatever I may choose to do, I will be unfaithful to my profound desire to respect human life; and yet I am forced to choose; no reality external to myself indicates my choice [aucune réalité extérieure à moi-même ne m’indique mon choix].” Neither pre-given ethical imperatives (which the Kantian autonomous self claims freely to follow), nor claims about the necessary course of History (beloved by certain deterministic Marxists) may justify our decisions. Here, says Beauvoir, is the source of the anguish that so many fl ee in bad faith. For we are alone in our freedom and in our responsibility; we act in a world where nothing tells us what we should decide and where we cannot avoid violence. — Christine Daigle, Jacob Golomb (eds.), Beauvoir and Sartre, 480

Categorization

• DEFINE: Fixes Beauvoir’s concept of anguish as situated, unavoidable choice — distinct from Sartre’s account by its emphasis on unavoidable violence.
• XREF: Directly relevant to the Beauvoir–Sartre authorship debate: whether her ethics of situated violence complements or diverges from Sartre’s ontology. — connects to: Exceptional beauty condemns its bearers to a forced choice between dead ends.; Beauvoir rejects both Kantian duty and Marxist necessity as decision grounds — Christine Daigle, Jacob Golomb (eds.), Beauvoir and Sartre: The Riddle of…, 480; Beauvoir diverges from Sartre by excusing the oppressed from willing freedom — Christine Daigle, Jacob Golomb (eds.), Beauvoir and Sartre: The Riddle of…, 650

Broader Connections

• Beauvoir diverges from Sartre by excusing the oppressed from willing freedom #qualifies (0.78) — Christine Daigle, Jacob Golomb (eds.), Beauvoir and Sartre, 650