For Sartre, freedom and responsibility are linked together in such a way that places them in a constant relatedness where one cannot be thought without the other. In Being and Nothingness, ontological freedom delivers into practical freedom to which responsibility is constantly connected.
Absolute Freedom as a Condemnation
In the existentialism of Sartre, freedom is absolute and infinite. Hence, freedom is a condemnation: “We are condemned to be free”. In Existentialism is a Humanism, Sartre explains how both “condemnation” and “freedom” could be brought together into the same place:
“Condemned, because he did not create himself, yet, in other respects is free; because, once thrown into the world, he is responsible for everything he does.”
Jean-Paul Sartre, Existentialism is a Humanism
For Sartre, the “for-itself” cannot escape freedom, for freedom is itself what lies at the heart of the being of the “for-itself”. The “for-itself” is to the extent that it is free. And since freedom and responsibility are linked together in the existentialism of Sartre, the absolute freedom of the “for-itself” should lead to absolute responsibility.
Neither God Nor the Situation Can Determine the “For-Itself”
There is nothing that can determine, decide, or govern the being of the “for-itself” for the “for-itself” in accordance with a specific determination or according to a certain story. There is no order and there is no God, and neither society nor the situation in which the “for-itself” is placed in the world could determine or decide the “for-itself”. There are neither pre-determined meanings nor eternal truths, and there is neither a true origin nor a decided path. (The article, Sartre’s “Being For-Itself”: What does it mean?, explains what Sartre means by the ”for-itself”)
In the existential thinking of Sartre, the “for-itself” is thus completely undetermined and undecided; it is absolutely free, and the only meaning that could arise in the world is the meaning that the “for-itself” can give the world.
This means that, according to Sartre, the “for-itself” constantly finds itself in an unending process of making and re-making itself regardless of the situation in which it is now placed, for this situation is itself what the “for-itself” has chosen. The situation belongs to the “for-itself”.
In Being and Nothingness, Sartre says that the situation has been always the choice of the “for-itself”; the “for-itself” has chosen its own situation as a result of freedom belonging only to the being of the “for-itself”.
“The situation is mine because it is the image of my free choice of myself, and everything which it presents to me is mine in that this represents me and symbolizes me. Is it not I who decide the coefficient of adversity in things and even their unpredictability by deciding myself? Thus there are no accidents in a life; a community event which suddenly bursts forth and involves me in it does not come from the outside. If I am mobilized in a war, this war is my war; it is in my image and I deserve it. I deserve it first because I could always get out of it by suicide or by desertion; these ultimate possibles are those which must always be present for us when there is a question of envisaging a situation. For lack of getting out of it, I have chosen it.”
Jean-Paul Sartre, Being and Nothingness
This passage shows how fundamental and absolute freedom is and how responsibility is constantly tied to this fundamental and absolute freedom. The “for-itself” is constantly responsible for its own situation, its own choices, and its own being. There is nothing that is imposed on the “for-itself”: “Man is nothing else but what he makes of himself”.
According to Sartre, we decide and determine our own way of being; we choose our situation and our choices. In Existentialism is a Humanism, Sartre emphasizes and argues for his view that we create our own situations. He says that even cowardice is not accidental, but rather a decision: “There’s no such thing as a cowardly constitution”. That is, being a coward person means deciding and determining oneself as a coward:
“What the existentialist says is that the coward makes himself cowardly, that the hero makes himself heroic. There’s always a possibility for the coward not to be cowardly anymore and for the hero to stop being heroic. What counts is total involvement; some one particular action or set of circumstances is not total involvement”
Jean-Paul Sartre, Existentialism is a Humanism
How Does Sartre Order His Notions of Nothingness, Freedom, and Anguish and Place Them Over Against Each Other?
The “for-itself” makes and re-makes itself. There is no fixed, deciding, or predetermined essence of the “for-itself” because of the nothingness pervading the being of the “for-itself”. The nothingness lying at the heart of the “for-itself” distances it from itself and hence thrusts it forward so that it is never what it is. The “for-itself” is always what it is not. That which is never itself always finds itself in a process of remaking itself anew, differently, and freely.
Sartre links together this absolute freedom with both authenticity and anguish and says that the “for-itself” must acknowledge and accept this absolute freedom. In accepting and acknowledging freedom, the “for-itself” becomes both authentic and anguished. That is, Sartre links together the absolute freedom of the “for-itself” with the nothingness lying at the heart of its being and then shows how both authenticity and anguish are linked together with the absence of being that pervades the “for-itself” and thrusts it forward as a project toward the future. This sending into the future occurs because of the distance separating the “for-itself” from itself.
But, according to Sartre, accepting this absolute freedom is something that is not easy. This is why the “for-itself” always attempts to flee from this unbearable anguish by refusing the freedom that lies at the heart of its own being. In this fleeing from anguish, bad faith takes place. (The article, Sartre on Anguish: “We are anguish”, explains what Sartre means by anguish)
This brief introduction makes clear how Sartre links together his notions of nothingness, freedom, responsibility, anguish, authenticity, and bad faith in such a way that constantly places them over against each other in a certain relatedness.
that-which contains other articles explaining and introducing Sartre’s philosophy and thought.
For an essay introducing Sartre’s whole philosophical project, read ”Jean-Paul Sartre”, published on The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.