What is this book about?

Those not wishing to slog through some of Sartre’s weightier work will find “Existentialism and Human Emotions” a very useful summation of Sartre’s beliefs.

“Existentialism’s first move is to make the full responsibility of his existence rest on him. And when we say that a man is responsible for himself, we do not only mean that he is responsible for his own individuality, but that he is responsible for all men.” – Jean-Paul Sartre – Existentialism and Human Emotions, Jean-Paul Sartre

The basis of this book is Sartre’s theory of existentialism, and the reflective consciousness.

Which is the belief that philosophical thinking begins with a human subject and not merely the thinking that occurs within in it, moreover the living the human endures. Meaning, the acting, feeling, living human individual.

The main study is when the individual becomes disorientated and confused when faced with an apparently meaningless or absurd world.

Why should you read this book?

Because it helps understand why we feel disorientated and confused when faced with an apparently meaningless or absurd world.

This book was tough to get through because it reads more like a text book than a casual presentation of theories he believes. I feel like this book was more for a student studying to become a psychologist who needs to understand the intricate details of Sartre’s work to diagnose a patient properly.

But just because it reads like a text book doesn’t mean I don’t want to refrain from recommending it.

Sartre’s explains that ideas that come packaged and predefined to people that requires acceptance without question, like, organized religion and totalitarian mass governments hold no interest for the existentialist.

In many ways Sartre tries to show us how to question and second guess ourselves without giving up our pride.

From this idea followed his idea on “existence precedes essence.” Which basically means our lives are shaped by choice. Which seems obvious, until he points out that even if one does nothing, that in itself is a choice. He says that people cannot escape responsibility for their actions. There is, as Sartre points out, “no exit.”

I liked that aspect of this book because it helps back up my idea, “everything we deem to complain about is the result of our doing.”

And even though that is a very devastating revelation for me, (and possibly for others), Sartre still continues to make the world make sense in a way that you don’t feel as though you have to bear the weight of the world’s problems on your shoulders by yourself. For as stated above in the first quote, if all people came to think they are responsible for themselves and the rest of mankind then the burden wouldn’t be placed solely on you, it would be evenly dispersed throughout all people.

Here are two of my favorite parts in the book:

“First, what is meant by anguish? The existentialists say at once that man is anguish. What that means is this: the man who involves himself and who realizes that he is not only the person he chooses to be, but also a lawmaker who is, at the same time, choosing all mankind as well as himself, cannot help escape the feeling of his total and deep responsibility. Of course, there are many people who are not anxious; but we claim that they are hiding their anxiety, that they are fleeing from it. Certainly, many people believe that when they do something, they themselves are the only ones involved, and when someone says to them, “what if everyone acted that way?” they shrug their shoulders and answer, “Everyone doesn’t act that way.” But really, one should always ask himself, “What would happen if everybody looked at things this way?” There is no escaping this disturbing thought except by a kind of double dealing. A man who lies and makes excuses for himself by saying “not everybody does that,” is someone with an uneasy conscience, because the act of lying implies that a universal value is conferred upon the lie.” – Jean-Paul Sartre – Existentialism and Human Emotions, Jean-Paul Sartre

“Things will be as man will have decided they are to be. Does that mean that I should abandon myself to quietism? No. First, I should involve myself; then, act on the old saw, “Nothing ventured nothing gained.” Nor does it mean that I shouldn’t belong to a party, but rather that I shall have no illusions and I shall do what I can. For example, suppose I ask myself, “Will socialization, as such, ever come about?” I know nothing about it. All I know is that I’m going to do everything in my power to bring it about. Beyond that, I can’t count on anything. Quietism is the attitude of people who say, “Let others do what I can’t do.” The doctrine I am presenting is the very opposite of quietism, since it declares, “There is no reality except in action.” Moreover, it goes further, since it adds, “Man is nothing else than his plan; he exists only to the extent that fulfills himself; he is therefore nothing else than the ensemble of his acts, nothing else than his life.”" – Jean-Paul Sartre – Existentialism and Human Emotions, Jean-Paul Sartre