Existentialism and the dilemma of radical freedom

by Will Grimes

---

---

You might have heard people use the terms “existential crisis” or “existential questions” when they are trying to talk about something that is important to them. But what is Existentialism, and how does it apply to people today, including Nobles students? This article will clear up some of the confusion surrounding the topic and show where this point of view comes from.

Existentialism is a school of thought most famously associated with French philosopher Jean-Peal Sartre. It is the study of the human condition through ontology, which examines the existence of everything—or more specifically, what it means to exist. Sartre’s take on this concept is unique. His core belief is that each person acts of their own volition, and that each of the choices that we make determine both who we are and what our view of what others should be.

Some of the significant influences on Sartre’s existentialism include works from Nietzsche and Kierkegaard. Friedrich Nietzsche, a 19th-century German philosopher, was deeply interested in human individuality and fought fiercely against organizations that he believed weakened the individual, such as the Christian Church. Meanwhile, Søren Kierkegaard was a 19th-century Danish philosopher who, in contrast to Nietzsche, was a devout Christian. He studied both the motivations of people and how society is affected by the authority of God. Existentialists were especially influenced by his notion of “subjectivity,” which emphasizes personal experience in assigning meaning to objective reality. A common theme between these two philosophers’ theories or writings is the focus on the interrelations among individuality, authority, and society.

Sartre took these concepts and morphed them into one school of thought. He believed that each human had a kind of “radical freedom,” which means that every action one takes is solely self-decided. Sartre viewed this as more of a curse than a blessing, however. While people can act any way they choose, the fear of consequences prevents them from doing so. The curse is the knowledge that humans have an infinite range of possible actions, but that they choose to restrain themselves by accepting the expectations of society or religion. This leads to one of the central questions of existentialism: why do humans act the way that they do?

While the idea of freedom was not new, the idea that humans have complete freedom but are unable to exercise it was and is a disturbing one. Sartre himself was unique; he was a nonconformist who wanted to go against the grain. He was not afraid of disrupting the status quo to follow the path that he believed was right. But that is not a choice that everyone is willing to make, because facing the consequences of radical freedom can be frightening.

Sartre speaks to Nobles students, whether we realize it or not. We have so much more freedom of action than we actually use, because we believe that we need to do what our families and teachers tell us. To do otherwise would require enormous courage and might well lead to severe consequences, and so we choose not to exercise that freedom. But even within the rules that we have chosen to follow, our choices still have meaning and it is our responsibility to make them in a way that consciously shapes ourselves, our community, and our future.