1. Existentialism: Ethics of Authenticity
Dr. Schmid, Ph.D. Philosophy and Religion, UNCW

2. Key Concepts: ATHEISM – AUTHENTICITY – CHOICE
BEINGS
CONSCIOUSNESS/BEING FOR ITSELF
THINGS/BEING IN ITSELF
TRUE vs. FALSE CONCEPTS OF REALITY/MORALITY
True: ATHEISM
“Existence precedes essence.”
Self-deceiving: THEISM
“Essence precedes existence.”
REASON FOR ACTION = CHOICE
AUTHENTICITY
(following ‘choice’) vs.
INAUTHENTICITY
(following ‘duty’)
EXISTENTIAL TRUTH AND MORALITY
SELF-CHOSEN vs.
BAD FAITH (OTHER-DETERMINED)
TWO FORMS OF FREEDOM
RADICAL FREEDOM:
to define good and evil
(moral subjectivity)
MORAL FREEDOM:
to act in accord with
your idea of good or evil
HUMAN CONDITION
SELF-AS-PROJECT
(man is radically free)
GUILT, CONSCIENCE
(man is subject)

3. Where does ethics come from?
Essentialists say that God created man
Thus man = an artifact, meant to perform certain functions
Morality = to do what you were made to do, e.g. procreate, worship God, obey moral rules
Sartre: this = myth and self-deception

4. Where does ethics come from?
Existentialists say:
“Existence precedes essence.”
Man = an emergent reality, free to define his own ends and rules of living
Each individual has the right to redefine morality himself; there is no ‘objective’ ethics
Sartre: this = existential truth and authenticity

5. Existentialism Provides no universal moral theory
Conscious agents both
act according to their concepts of good and evil, and
must define those concepts for themselves—have both ‘moral’ and ‘existential’ or ‘radical’ freedom
“Existentialist Imperative” = do that which you affirm as valid for all men [this is your assertion, not that of “reason”]
Values autonomy and authenticity
Rejects other theories:
Theories that are based on authority
Theories that are theistic/essentialist
Theories that are “objective” or universalist or “rationalist”

6. “Existentialist Imperative”?
When we say man chooses himself, we mean every one of us must choose himself; but we also mean that in choosing for himself he chooses for all men. Our responsibility thus concerns mankind as a whole. I am responsible for myself and for all men, for in choosing what I value, I am creating a certain image of man as I would have him to be.

7. The Gauguin Dilemma In 1885, the French artist, Paul Gauguin, made the existential choice to abandon his wife and family to go to the South Seas and paint. His family was left destitute, but he created some of the greatest art in the Western tradition Was this a morally indefensible choice? What would Kant say? Sartre? Bentham or Mill? Does it matter than he did become great? Where do we come from? What are we? Where are we going?

8. Radical Choice?
Sartre argues ethics is founded on ultimate values which cannot be rationally justified.
As a result, our most basic choice is not (a) between good and evil, but (b) how we will define good and evil.
His example: a young man in France in 1940, who must choose between (i) staying at home and caring for his mother, or (ii) joining the Free French forces in England.
Does this example prove his claim—that our most basic ethical decisions are matters of “existential choice,” not matters of “moral reason”?

9. Kant vs. Sartre Kantian Individual Existential Individual Free will
Responsibility/”respect”
Human essence = rational animal
Morality = self-given laws of moral reason (Cat Imp)
Reason reveals
Scientific universe
Nothing about God
Universal moral law (conscience)
Existential Individual
Free will
Responsibility/”anguish”
No human essence = self-determining
Morality = self-given ‘law’ of existential responsibility
Reason reveals
Scientific universe
Nothing about God
No universal morality (anguish)