EXISTENCE = ESSENCE
“L'existence précède l'essence.”
The philosopher Jean-Paul Sartre coined the famous phrase “Existence precedes essence” in his essay “Existentialism is a Humanism.” Before providing my own interpretation and reformulation of this idea, I will briefly explain what Sartre meant. Broadly, this statement is the culmination of the view that each human exists as a physical being before the concept of that human exists; therefore, every person has the power and responsibility to determine what it means to be human.
To clarify this idea, Sartre explains the opposite: essence preceding existence. A concrete way of understanding this is thinking about the process of creating a tool. A person has the idea of a hammer in mind before creating it; the concept, or essence, of the hammer exists before the thing itself. Some posit that this applies to humans because there is a Creator who made humans with a specific plan. Sartre, on the other hand, views the notion of God and an ultimate Good as irrelevant to how humans live their lives, stating that “Reality alone is what counts.”
Sartre views this relationship linearly; existence comes first, then essence follows. The linear relationship that Sartre and other philosophers relied upon sets up a false dichotomy. The relationship between existence and essence is much more complex than it seems. I am going to explain why Sartre was partially correct since there are aspects of our existence that do precede our essence; however, there are also certain aspects of our essence that precede our existence.
Before moving forward, it seems important to clarify what my own understanding is of the separate notions “existence” and “essence.” Existence refers to something’s physicality, its material being. For a human, our existence is the atoms that make up our corporeal selves. The idea of essence is somewhat more nebulous. It describes how something exists, or what a thing’s purpose is. People’s existence is confined to their bodily flesh, while their essence is defined by what they choose to do.
Sartre relies on the assumption that humans have complete control over their actions. Relatively recent scientific mindsets suggest that this is not always the case, at least not in the way “control” is traditionally viewed; there is no evidence for a “soul” outside of the body or for a “mind” defined by anything other than the emergent properties of the brain. Complex behaviors can be explained by the mechanistic flow of ions across membranes, which leads to the firing of neurons.
In one sense, this biological view offers a new way of looking at how exactly existence precedes essence. If peoples’ actions are fundamentally biological, as the evidence suggests, then it is true that existence, our physical being, does lead to essence, the culmination of our actions; however, this definition of “existence” lacks the implied control and free will of Sartre’s version. Sartre seems to view human decisions as separate from biological processes, occurring in the present with little connection the past.
Sartre’s isolated view of human existence is too narrow, leading him to solely claim that existence precedes essence; a biological view offers a useful way of explaining how essence precedes existence. We feel as though we have control over our decisions while failing to consider that the evolutionarily advantageous actions of our ancestors are what led us to exist as we are. In this sense, the actions, or “essence” of our ancestors has led to our own bodily reality. In turn, our existence leads us to perform similar types of actions, like experiencing certain emotions or reproducing: the types of things that shape our essence.
These ideas lead to a more holistic view of the self. We are not only individuals, but also beings that are inextricably linked to our ancestors and evolutionary histories. Sartre did say that we are all humans and that we act for all of humanity; when considering this statement from a naturalistic, evolutionary perspective, it’s true that our individual actions do influence all of humanity – especially when those actions lead us to propagate our genes.
If our essence is defined by our actions and our actions are determined by our existence which is ultimately determined by the actions of those before us which is determined by their existence…and the cycle continues. There is no way of separating existence from essence. There is no way of determining which came first. We humans are the results of our biology, and our biology is the result of us. Our existence is the same as our essence.
Read Sartre’s essay here.
