Sartre’s philosophy forms a total system whose parts cannot be understood in isolation

Evidence

Clarifying Sartre’s considered view of freedom proves diffi cult, since Sartre’s analysis spreads out over several hundred pages and suff ers from various inconsistencies, some real and others only apparent. Sartre’s initial analysis of limitation occurs in Part III, chapter 1, but rather suddenly disappears for some two hundred pages until Part IV, where Sartre examines interiorization— the process of internalizing social objectifi cations into one’s projects. — Christine Daigle, Jacob Golomb (eds.), Beauvoir and Sartre, 212 (#contradicts, via linked claim)

Sartre’s methodological solipsism is explained by his employment of a Cartesian method that proceeds from the abstract and simple to the concrete and complex. For this reason, Sartre formally introduces the existence of Others only in Part III. Failure to take Sartre’s Cartesian method seriously makes accurate assessment of Being and Nothingness as a whole impossible, for the meanings of all of his basic concepts change over the course of the text. — Christine Daigle, Jacob Golomb (eds.), Beauvoir and Sartre, 212 (#contradicts, via linked claim)

Obviously the most strikingly original idea here presented as well as the unifying motif of the entire work, is the position that consciousness is a Nothingness. Yet as a Nothingness it is also a revelation of Being. Aside from the paradoxical nature of this position, we are immediately puzzled as to how to relate it to the traditional theories of idealism and realism; and I think that perhaps our best approach to the whole question of the negativity of consciousness is to observe just how Sartre himself believes that he can hold a theory not open to the objections generally directed against either of the others. His philosophy is not idealism, not even Husserl’s brand of idealism, as he points out, because Being in no way creates consciousness or is in any way dependent on consciousness for its existence. Being is already there, without reason or justification. It is not exhausted by any or by all of its appearances, though it is fully there in each one of its appearances. (That is, it does not serve as a sort of phenomenon with a noumenon behind it.) It always overflows whatever knowledge we have of it—just as it is presupposed by all our questions and by consciousness itself. — Jean-Paul Sartre, Being and Nothingness, 40 (#expands, via linked claim)

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: Sartre’s analysis of freedom is fragmented and internally inconsistent across Being and Nothingness — Christine Daigle, Jacob Golomb (eds.), Beauvoir and Sartre: The Riddle of…, 212; Sartre’s philosophy is neither idealism nor realism but a third position — Jean-Paul Sartre, Being and Nothingness: An Essay on…, 40; Sartre’s concepts change meaning across Being and Nothingness due to his Cartesian method — Christine Daigle, Jacob Golomb (eds.), Beauvoir and Sartre: The Riddle of…, 212

Broader Connections

• Sartre’s analysis of freedom is fragmented and internally inconsistent across Being and Nothingness #contradicts (0.85) — Christine Daigle, Jacob Golomb (eds.), Beauvoir and Sartre, 212
• Sartre’s concepts change meaning across Being and Nothingness due to his Cartesian method #contradicts (0.80) — Christine Daigle, Jacob Golomb (eds.), Beauvoir and Sartre, 212
• Sartre’s philosophy is neither idealism nor realism but a third position #expands (0.75) — Jean-Paul Sartre, Being and Nothingness, 40