Introduction:
Jean Paul Sartre is the best known philosopher of the 20th century, his pursuit of philosophical reflection, liberty, creativity, and in the second half of his life, active political commitment gained him worldwide prestige. He is considered as the pioneer figure in the development of the existential outlook of philosophy. In the case of Sartre, It is the denial of God that is motivating his ideology as he argued that the belief that human nature consisted in the rational soul was a byproduct of the popular conception of the Almighty as the superior craftsman of the whole humankind. In standing in opposition to this view, he declared that humankind’s existence precedes its essence. Let us understand his point in this article.
Main Expression:
For Sartre, Pre-reflective consciousness does not exhibit a particular I, But simply a general consciousness of some entity. The I Forms when pre-reflective consciousness is reflected upon by itself and is manufactured as explicit Consciousness. When the reflection occurs, consciousness becomes aware of its object as being related, according to an ideal unity, a perspectival unity, as per Sartre. His Details are reflections on Kant’s Concept of Noumenon. Kant Was an ideal list, believing that we have no direct way of perceiving the external world, and that all we have access to is our ideas of the world, including water senses expounds to us. He distinguishes between phenomena which are our perceptions of entities or how things actually appear to us, and Noumena Which are the entities in themselves To which we have no direct knowledge of. Against Kant, Sartre Argues that the appearance of phenomena is pure and absolute. The Noumena Is not accessible, it simply is not existing. It is not there.
At the center of his ontological idea, being a nothingness in a section “ The look” He begins his account of the look with the other object. The other seen in the distance is an object for me yet different because the things of my world are objects for that other. An element of disintegration is added to the world, though nothing has changed and the world still exists. It now has other meanings. The objects of my world drain away not to the future but to a temporal elsewhere. This is the main point of his idea. The problem of others and the look are the necessary ground, which one can comprehend his concept of self alienation, The look of others produces a genuine hampering to my very existence as an individual being. As Sartre quotes exceptionally: “ I grasp the look of others at the very center of my solidification and Alienation of my own possibilities; the other as a look is my transcendence transcended.”
From being in a pre-reflective medium, there is a sudden change to reflective consciousness inhabited by self. I judge myself through the eyes of others as a voyeur And as a consequence, the emotions of shame appear such that if alone, there would be no reason to be ashamed of any of my behavior. He gave an example of a man he saw in a park And apprehended him as an object and at the same time as a man. He could not create or manufacture any particular new relationship between the objects in his universe. Instead, they would split apart into numerous unrelated entities after being gathered and synthesized into a complex from his perspective.
The distance seems to be a complete breakdown of the relationship. He understands between the universe objects. The other is initially the everlasting flight of things towards an objective that he perceived as an object, other in the world correlates with a fixed sliding of the universe as a whole with a decentralization of the world mining, the Counter realization, He at the same time influenced, however, the other remain an object. Therefore, his universe’s disintegration is limited inside the boundaries of the same universe. The world is not filling towards nothingness or beyond itself In this instance. The look is always accompanied with a very exceptional component, which is generally known as shame, The shame of having been rendered as an object. However, it is imperative to comprehend that by this, he actually intends to mean an existential rather than a moralistic one. He successively puts weightage on the fact that the other does not need to be physically present for the look “ To encroach into our thinking, and being the thought of them can still influence our perceptions of self via the imagery look and the judgment of the other”
Critical Analys:
For him, it is the look of the other, which starts the preposterous clash associated closely with all the social relationships. The look of the other I experience as a sense of alienation from myself as the look is objectifying, reducing the Personhood, the human Ness within that particular human being into an instrument and object at best. He is producing the human being in itself containing a fixed nature, which is out of my control in turn, threatening my freedom and core of liberty. “Everything which may be said of me in my relations with the other applies to him as well, while I attempt to free myself from the hold of the others The other is trying to free himself from mine” he says in a prolific manner.
Conclusion:
Unlike Hegel, Sartre reiterates a vent, the very fact that the counter within another is not a cognition of something in my world because it is not a question of relation to an object. The crucial point is that the presence of others transforms the entire entire world. He puts forward that the look can also be used as a form of communication, a medium to express indulge and involve ; When we meet someone’s gaze We are sharing something personally intimate. We holistic draw this particular conclusion that the look is a fascinating exploration of the role that consciousness places in our everyday life. It highlights the importance of self awareness and how they look can be used to regulate others. The realization of a universal in the uniqueness of a human being is represented by this prolific option for the Life of the human.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean-Paul_Sartre
