The In-itself’s full being makes the emergence of consciousness inexplicable

Evidence

Sartre’s view of the relation between the In-itself and the For-itself presents, as it seems to me, an old theological problem in new dress, though Sartre in this instance does not point up the connection. The For-itself, as I have repeatedly said, is absolutely dependent on the In-itself and is a mere abstraction without it. Yet the In-itself, since it is a plenitude, has no need of the For-itself. It is this lack of reciprocity which prevents our seeing in Being a perfect synthesis of two moments. If one likes, one may see here the old difficulty encountered by theology. If God is perfect, full Being, why did he feel the need to create men? Sartre is up against the same problem. If the In-itself is absolute fullness, why should it ever, or how could it ever have effected the “hole of Being” which we know as consciousness? — Jean-Paul Sartre, Being and Nothingness, 70

Categorization

  • XREF: Mirrors the theological question of why a perfect God creates — parallels the reader’s foundational interest in Sartre-Beauvoir relation and the doctrine of divine aseity. — connects to: Conceiving consciousness as in-itself makes past and present unreconnectable — Jean-Paul Sartre, Being and Nothingness: An Essay on…, 415; Consciousness is a duality that is unity, irreducible to the in-itself; Sartre grounds consciousness emergence in an unfounded as-if founding act (+6 more)
  • QUESTION: Whether Sartre ever resolves this asymmetry or simply rests on an as-if ground of Being is worth chasing through later sections.
  • yield-rescued: below the book’s yield-target cutoff, included anyway for connecting to: Conceiving consciousness as in-itself makes past and present unreconnectable — Jean-Paul Sartre, Being and Nothingness: An Essay on…, 415; Consciousness is a duality that is unity, irreducible to the in-itself; Sartre grounds consciousness emergence in an unfounded as-if founding act (+6 more)

Broader Connections