Sartre’s ontology of the slimy derived from personal disgust rather than pure insight

Evidence

While interviewing Sartre in the early 1980s, just before his death, Beauvoir asks him directly if his understanding of the slimy is informed, not by his ontological insight, but rather by his personal dispositions. … Sartre accepts Beauvoir’s suggestion and adds that all forms of animal life arouse disgust in him- molluscs and arthropods in particular. For him, their movements indicate that their life-form belongs to “another world,” “another universe,” separated from humans and everything that humans can cultivate (Ent, 448, 470; AFS, 316, 332). — Christine Daigle, Jacob Golomb (eds.), Beauvoir and Sartre, 392

Categorization

• XREF: Connects to the broader Beauvoir-Sartre authorship debate; Sartre himself conceding the psychological origin of a core Being and Nothingness concept strongly supports revisionist readings of the shared philosophy. — connects to: The slimy haunts consciousness as its own feared dissolution into facticity; The slimy’s horror is the fear that facticity will absorb the For-itself — Jean-Paul Sartre, Being and Nothingness: An Essay on…, 1406; Fundamental nausea reveals the facticity of existence beneath all empirical disgusts (+4 more)
• QUESTION: Worth chasing: to what extent were other Beining and Nothingness analyses (the look, bad faith, the for-itself) also autobiographical-psychological projections that Beauvoir probed in these late interviews?