COMPLETE LECTURE NOTES

Jean-Paul Sartre

Existentialism Is a Humanism
1945 · A University-Level Deep Reading

Chapter I: Bad Faith · Good Faith · Authenticity · Inauthenticity

Chapter II: Existence Precedes Essence · Radical Freedom · Anguish · Abandonment · Despair ·
Humanism

TABLE OF CONTENTS

CHAPTER I · Bad Faith, Good Faith, Authenticity & Inauthenticity

Part 1 · Foundation: Freedom & the Structure of Human Existence

Part 2 · Bad Faith — What It Is & How It Works

Part 3 · The Two Classic Examples (Waiter & Woman on a Date)

Part 4 · Facticity vs. Transcendence — The Two Forms of Bad Faith

Part 5 · Good Faith

Part 6 · Authenticity & Inauthenticity

Part 7 · Can We Ever Fully Escape Bad Faith?

Summary Table — Chapter I

CHAPTER II · Existentialism Is a Humanism — Deep Reading

Part 1 · The Charges Against Existentialism

Part 2 · Existence Precedes Essence

Part 3 · Responsibility — Choosing for All Mankind

Part 4 · Anguish, Abandonment & Despair

Part 5 · Man Is Nothing But His Actions

Part 6 · Why Existentialism Is a Humanism

Master Concept Table & Examination Questions
 CHAPTER I

Bad Faith · Good Faith · Authenticity · Inauthenticity

These are among the most profound and personally relevant concepts in all of philosophy. Unlike many
abstract philosophical ideas, these concepts have immediate application to everyday life — to the choices
you make, the stories you tell yourself, and the way you construct your identity. Everything in this chapter
flows from one foundational premise: that human beings are radically, inescapably free.

PART 1

The Foundation: Freedom & the Structure of Human

Existence

Why Bad Faith Is Even Possible

Before we can understand bad faith, we need to understand what makes it necessary — and what
makes it so tempting. Sartre's starting point is that human beings are radically free. Not free in a casual,
everyday sense, but free in a deep, structural, inescapable sense.

You cannot not choose. Even refusing to decide is a decision. Even saying 'I had no option' is a choice
— the choice to frame your situation that way. Every moment of your waking life involves choosing,
whether you are conscious of it or not. And with that freedom comes an equally inescapable
responsibility: you are fully the author of who you are. No excuses. No hiding behind God, nature,
society, or upbringing.

■ KEY INSIGHT: Bad faith is not simply lying to others. It is a very specific philosophical
phenomenon — lying to YOURSELF about the nature of your own freedom. It is an internal
self-deception that operates below the level of ordinary dishonesty.

PART 2

Bad Faith — What It Is and How It Works

The Definition
Bad faith (mauvaise foi) is, in its simplest formulation, the attempt to escape the anxiety of freedom
by pretending you are not free. It is the self-deception by which a person convinces themselves that they
are fixed, determined, or defined by something outside their own choosing — their role, their personality,
their past, their biology, their social class.

The person in bad faith treats themselves as if they were a thing — an object with a fixed nature —
rather than a consciousness — a being who is always beyond what it currently is, always projecting itself
forward into new possibilities.

"Bad faith seeks to flee what it cannot flee, to flee what it is."

— Sartre, Being and Nothingness

PART 3

The Two Classic Examples

Example One: The Waiter

Sartre asks us to observe a waiter in a café. But not an ordinary waiter — this one performs his role
with exaggerated, almost theatrical precision. His movements are too crisp. His posture is too straight. His
tone is too formal. His expressions are perfectly calibrated. He is performing 'being a waiter' as if it were
his entire identity — as if he is a waiter the way a stone is a stone or a table is a table.

SARTRE'S CRUCIAL POINT: He is not a waiter the way a table is a table. He PLAYS at being
a waiter. He chose this job this morning. He can quit tomorrow. His identity is not fixed. But
by performing his role as his total identity, he is fleeing from the uncomfortable truth of his
freedom. That performance of completeness is bad faith.

Example Two: The Woman on a Date

A woman is on a first date. A man reaches across the table and takes her hand. She is in a difficult
situation — she must either accept it (which implies a certain encouragement) or withdraw it (which implies
rejection). The moment of decision is uncomfortable.

So she does neither. She simply leaves her hand there, but talks as if she hasn't noticed — treating her
own hand as if it were an inert object, a thing lying on the table rather than a part of her body that she is
actively choosing to leave or withdraw. She is performing passivity. She is pretending to herself that the
decision doesn't have to be made.

"She has disarmed the actions of her companion by reducing them to being only
what they are — that is, to existing in the mode of the in-itself."

— Sartre, Being and Nothingness

■ THE ANALYSIS: The woman is pretending to be passive — like an object without agency.
She is denying her own freedom in order to avoid the discomfort of choosing. She is
treating herself as a thing (in-itself) rather than as a free consciousness (for-itself). That
self-objectification is bad faith.
 PART 4

Facticity vs. Transcendence — The Two Forms of Bad

Faith

To understand bad faith deeply, we need to grasp a key distinction Sartre draws about the structure of
human existence. Every human being is simultaneously two things:

FACTICITY TRANSCENDENCE

What facticity IS: What transcendence IS:

• The brute, given facts about you • Your freedom to go beyond the facts
• Your past actions and choices • Your capacity to choose and project
• Your body and its characteristics forward

• Your social situation and role • Your ability to become something new

• Your historical and cultural context • The fact that your past does not determine
your future
Example: 'I grew up in poverty.'
Example: 'But I can choose differently
'I have been shy in social situations.'
tomorrow.'

'I am always more than my history.'

The Two Directions of Bad Faith

Bad faith occurs when you collapse one of these into the other — when you refuse to hold the tension
between them honestly.

TYPE OF BAD DESCRIPTION EXAMPLE PSYCHOLOGICAL

FAITH APPEAL

Denying Treating yourself as a fixed The Waiter — performing Gives a false sense of
Transcendence object. 'I can't help it — his role as if it were his total stability and certainty about
that's just who I am.' 'I was being, with no freedom to identity.
born this way.' 'My nature step outside it.
doesn't allow it.' You pretend
you are your facticity
entirely.

Denying Facticity Pretending you have no Someone who ignores their Gives a false sense of
constraints at all. Imagining responsibilities, history, or lightness and escape from
yourself as pure, unlimited the reality of their situation consequences.
freedom with no history, no by claiming complete
body, no situation. Pure detachment from it.
fantasy of unconditioned
choice.
■ THE AUTHENTIC TENSION: Sartre says the honest human being must hold BOTH
simultaneously — acknowledging both facticity ('yes, this is my situation and my history')
AND transcendence ('and I am always free to choose how I respond to it'). This is deeply
uncomfortable. It removes all excuses. That is why bad faith is so tempting.
 PART 5

Good Faith

What Good Faith Actually Means

Good faith is often misunderstood as simply 'not lying to yourself' — a kind of moral hygiene. But
Sartre's concept is more precise and more demanding than that.

Good faith means holding the tension between facticity and transcendence honestly. It means
saying to yourself: 'Yes, I am in this situation. Yes, I have this history. Yes, these facts about me are real.
AND — I am always free to choose how I respond to them. I cannot use them as excuses.'

"To be in good faith is to acknowledge what one is, while at the same time
recognising that one is always beyond what one is."

— Sartre (paraphrased from Being and Nothingness)

This sounds straightforward, but it is in practice one of the most difficult things a person can do —
because it removes all the comfortable exits. You cannot say 'I had no choice.' You cannot say 'that's just
my personality.' You cannot say 'circumstances made me do it.' In good faith, you acknowledge that you
are always, in some sense, choosing who you are.

IMPORTANT NUANCE: Good faith is NOT the same as authenticity. Good faith is a single
honest acknowledgement — a moment of clarity about your freedom and situation.
Authenticity is a sustained WAY OF LIVING that builds on good faith across an entire life.
 PART 6

Authenticity & Inauthenticity

Authenticity — Living in Full Ownership of Your Freedom

Authenticity is the positive, fully developed counterpart to bad faith. It is not merely the absence of
self-deception — it is an active, ongoing way of inhabiting your freedom. Sartre describes it as a life in
which you fully own the fact that you are the author of your existence.

PRINCIPLE OF WHAT IT MEANS EXAMPLE

AUTHENTICITY

1. Acknowledging You do not hide behind roles, labels, Instead of 'I'm just not a people person,'
Freedom biology, or cultural norms. You recognise you say 'I choose not to engage with
that in every situation, you are always people in this way, and I could choose
choosing. differently.'

2. Making Genuinely Your choices are not merely reactions to Choosing a career because it reflects
Your Own Choices social pressure, habit, or the desire to who you genuinely are — not because
please. They emerge from your own honest your parents expect it or society
confrontation with your situation. rewards it.

3. Owning Your After choosing, you do not shift blame onto 'I chose to stay in this relationship. I
Choices Fully circumstances, others, or 'fate.' You chose this path. I can choose
acknowledge that you authored this differently.'
outcome.

4. Living With Anguish Authentic people do not escape the anxiety The military leader who feels the weight
of freedom. They feel anguish and live of his decisions but makes them
through it — without numbing, distraction, or anyway, with full consciousness of their
denial. gravity.

Inauthenticity — A Life Built on Bad Faith

Inauthenticity is not a single act of self-deception — it is a habitual, entrenched way of living in which
you have organised your entire life around the avoidance of freedom. The inauthentic person is always, in
some form, saying: 'It wasn't my choice.'

Signs of inauthenticity:
• Defining yourself entirely by your job, nationality, religion, or reputation — as if these exhaust who
you are
• Saying 'people like me don't do that' as if there is an external rule governing your choices
• Making decisions based purely on what others expect, without asking whether you genuinely endorse
the choice
• Blaming your upbringing, culture, or fate for who you are — treating your past as your jailer
• Following moral rules without ever questioning why — as if morality were a fixed system handed
down to you
• Seeking advice in order to outsource your decisions — giving someone else the responsibility for your
life

THE DEEPEST FORM OF INAUTHENTICITY: Sartre calls it the 'spirit of seriousness' — the
belief that values exist objectively, independently of human choice. The 'serious' person
believes their role, their duty, their social position actually determines who they are. They
have forgotten — or never accepted — that they chose to take these things seriously. The
choice is always theirs.
 PART 7

Can We Ever Fully Escape Bad Faith?

Here Sartre reaches one of his most sophisticated and honest insights — one that many introductions
to existentialism skip over. He suggests that bad faith is a permanent temptation — not an error we can
simply correct once and move on from.

The reason is structural. We are beings who are always becoming, never simply being. We are never
fully coincident with ourselves — we are always slightly ahead of ourselves, projecting into the future,
never completely pinned down. Yet we are also always tempted to freeze ourselves into a fixed identity —
to say 'this is what I am' and close down the openness of existence.

"Bad faith does not come from outside. It is a permanent possibility of human
consciousness — the price of being free."

— Sartre (paraphrased)

This means authenticity is not a destination you reach. You don't arrive at authenticity and then stay
there. It is a continuous practice — an ongoing, daily effort of honest self-awareness. The authentic
person is not someone who has defeated bad faith once and for all. They are someone who keeps noticing
when they are falling into it and keeps choosing to return to honesty.

CONCLUSION OF CHAPTER I: Bad faith is the refusal of freedom. Good faith is the honest
acknowledgement of it. Inauthenticity is a life organised around that refusal. Authenticity is
a life lived in ongoing, courageous acceptance of it — with all the anguish, responsibility,
and dignity that entails. The question Sartre leaves us with is not philosophical — it is
personal: In what areas of YOUR life are you currently in bad faith?
 SUMMARY

Chapter I — Concept Reference Table

CONCEPT SARTRE'S DEFINITION COMMON MISUNDERSTANDING

Bad Faith Self-deception about your freedom — NOT simple dishonesty — it is a

pretending you are fixed, determined, or structural self-deception about the
defined by your role or nature. nature of consciousness itself.

Good Faith Honest acknowledgement of both your facticity NOT the same as authenticity — it is a
(situation) and your transcendence (freedom single honest moment, not a sustained
to go beyond it). way of life.

Facticity The brute given facts about you — your past, NOT your destiny — these facts do not
body, social situation, history. determine your future choices.

Transcendence Your freedom to project beyond your facticity NOT unlimited — you are always free
and become something new through choice. but always in a situation.

Inauthenticity A habitual way of life built on bad faith — NOT the same as simply making
organised around avoiding the full weight of mistakes — it is an ongoing denial of
freedom. one's own freedom.

Authenticity A sustained way of living in full ownership of NOT a permanent destination — it is a

freedom — with anguish, responsibility, and continuous practice, always under
dignity. threat from bad faith.

Anguish The feeling that arises when you fully NOT paralysis — authentic people feel
acknowledge your freedom and its universal anguish and act anyway; it is the
weight. condition of serious action.
 CHAPTER II

Existentialism Is a Humanism — Deep Reading of the

1945 Lecture

This chapter provides a close reading of Sartre's 1945 public lecture, in which he defends existentialism
against its critics and lays out its core philosophical claims in accessible language. We read it as a
complete argument, tracking each move Sartre makes.

PART 1

The Charges Against Existentialism

Sartre opens by listing his accusers — a deliberate rhetorical strategy that places existentialism in the
position of the defendant before a court of public opinion, then systematically dismantles every charge.

The Communist Critique

The Communists level two connected attacks. First, they argue that existentialism leads to quietism —
a passive, contemplative withdrawal from the world. Their logic: if all moral solutions are barred and values
are subjective, action becomes pointless. Second, they call it a bourgeois philosophy — a luxury of
intellectuals who can afford to sit and reflect, while the working class needs collective solidarity.

The Christian Critique

Christians accuse existentialism of fixating on humanity's dark and sordid side while ignoring beauty,
innocence, and the divine spark within man. A Catholic critic, Miss Mercier, complained that existentialists
have forgotten 'the innocence of a child's smile.' For Christians, who believe man is made in God's image,
existentialism's portrait of radical freedom seems to strip man of his dignity and divine purpose.

Sartre's Counterattack
Sartre observes that the very people calling existentialism gloomy are the same people who repeat
cynical popular proverbs — 'charity begins at home,' 'appoint a rogue and he'll do you damage.' These
proverbs accept human wickedness as permanent and fixed.

"What frightens people about the doctrine that I shall try to present is not its
pessimism, but rather its optimism — that it offers man the possibility of individual
choice."

— Jean-Paul Sartre
■ KEY INSIGHT: Existentialism is actually MORE optimistic than its critics — because it
refuses to surrender human beings to fixed natures, heredity, or divine blueprints. It says:
you can always change, because you are always choosing.
 PART 2

The Core Doctrine — Existence Precedes Essence

"Existence precedes essence" is the single most important idea in all of existentialism.
Everything else — freedom, responsibility, anguish, bad faith — flows from this one claim.

The Paper Knife Analogy

When a craftsman makes a paper knife, he first has a concept — a design, a purpose. The knife's
essence exists in the craftsman's mind before the object exists. Essence precedes existence. The same
logic applies if you believe in God: He designs humanity according to a blueprint — a fixed human nature
— before creating each person.

Sartre's radical move: if God does not exist, there is no blueprint and no predetermined human
nature. Humans begin as nothing and define themselves through their choices. This is the inversion at the
heart of existentialism.

"Man first exists: he materialises in the world, encounters himself, and only
afterward defines himself. Man is nothing other than what he makes of himself."

— Jean-Paul Sartre

For OBJECTS: Essence → Existence (concept comes first) For HUMANS: Existence →
Essence (you exist first, then define yourself)

"Man is condemned to be free: condemned, because he did not create himself, yet
nonetheless free, because once cast into the world, he is responsible for
everything he does."

— Jean-Paul Sartre
 PART 3

Responsibility — Choosing for All Mankind

One of Sartre's most surprising claims: when you choose, you are choosing for all of humanity. Every
choice is an implicit statement about how human beings ought to act.

The Logic of Universal Responsibility

Your action says: 'This is what a person should do in this situation.' If a worker chooses to join a
Christian trade union rather than become a Communist, he is not making a mere career decision — he is
affirming that resignation to earthly life is the proper attitude for mankind. His choice legislates for
everyone.

Similarly, if you decide to marry and have children, you affirm the value of monogamy and parenthood
as human institutions — not just for yourself but as a model for humanity. Trying to say 'I'm only deciding
for myself' is itself bad faith.
 PART 4

Anguish, Abandonment & Despair

Sartre acknowledges these words sound dramatic. But their actual philosophical meaning is precise —
and far from pessimistic.

1. Anguish
Anguish arises when you recognise that you are not just choosing for yourself — you are a legislator
setting a standard for all mankind. Sartre uses Kierkegaard's Abraham: commanded to sacrifice his son by
what appears to be an angel, Abraham cannot know with certainty it is truly God. He must decide alone,
without guarantee. Every person is in Abraham's position whenever they act seriously.

Anguish does NOT lead to paralysis. It is the very condition of responsible action. The
military leader who feels the weight of sending men to their deaths and acts anyway — that
is anguish in the existentialist sense. Not a screen between us and the world, but the
seriousness with which we engage it.

2. Abandonment
Abandonment means: God does not exist, and we must bear the full consequences. There are no a
priori values, no fixed moral code, no external authority to answer life's hardest questions for us.

THE STUDENT DILEMMA: A young man during WWII must choose between staying with his
ailing mother or joining the Free French Forces. No ethical theory can resolve it. Both
duties are real. Sartre's answer: "You are free, so choose; in other words, invent. No
general code of ethics can tell you what you ought to do; there are no signs in this world."

THE JESUIT STORY: A man read his life's failures — poverty, rejection, heartbreak, military
dismissal — as a divine sign to join religious life. But Sartre asks: who decided the
meaning of those signs? The man himself did. He could have read the same events as a
call to revolution. We always interpret the signs. There are no signs that carry their own
meaning.

3. Despair
Despair means: act without counting on what you cannot control. Limit your expectations to what
actually depends on your will and direct action. You can count on committed colleagues but not on
abstract human goodness or historical inevitability. This is not pessimism — it is honest, rigorous action
without comforting illusions.
 PART 5

Man Is Nothing But His Actions

The Rejection of Hidden Potential

Man is nothing but the sum of his actions. We resist this deeply. We prefer to believe in unexpressed
potential — that we are more than what we have done, that circumstances prevented our true self from
emerging.

Sartre calls this a comfortable illusion. There is no genius outside the work actually produced. The
genius of Proust is his novels. The genius of Racine is his tragedies. Outside those works, nothing exists.

"The coward makes himself cowardly and the hero makes himself heroic; there is
always the possibility that one day the coward may no longer be cowardly and the
hero may cease to be a hero."

— Jean-Paul Sartre

■ WHAT HORRIFIES PEOPLE: The coward is GUILTY of his cowardice. Not biologically
predetermined. Not victimised by circumstance. Guilty. Responsible. Free. People would
prefer to be BORN a coward — because then it is not their fault. Existentialism refuses that
escape.
 PART 6

The Defence — Why Existentialism Is a Humanism

Intersubjectivity — Escaping Solipsism

Critics charged that existentialism traps man in his own subjectivity. Sartre responds by extending
Descartes' cogito: when I become aware of myself as a thinking subject, I simultaneously become aware
of others. I cannot define myself except in relation to others.

"I cannot discover any truth whatsoever about myself except through the mediation
of another. The other is essential to my existence, as well as to the knowledge I
have of myself."

— Jean-Paul Sartre

This leads to intersubjectivity — a world shared between subjects. We exist in a world where we
immediately encounter others, and it is in that shared world that man decides what he is and what others
are.

Human Condition vs. Human Nature

There is no fixed human nature — but there is a universal human condition. All humans share the
necessity of being in the world, living among others, facing death, and bearing the burden of freedom.
Every human project — however culturally specific — can therefore be understood by any other human
being.

"In choosing myself, I construct universality; I construct it by understanding every

other man's project, regardless of the era in which he lives."

— Jean-Paul Sartre

Moral Choice as a Work of Art

If there are no pre-existing values, does moral choice become arbitrary? Sartre says no — using the
analogy of a painter. There is no pre-defined picture to be made. No rule says which painting ought to be
painted. The artist commits herself in the act of painting, and the values emerge in and through the
creative act itself. Moral choice works the same way.
 MASTER SUMMARY

Complete Concept Reference Table — Both Chapters

All Key Concepts at a Glance

CONCEPT SARTRE'S DEFINITION COMMON MISUNDERSTANDING

Existence Precedes Man has no predetermined nature; he first Does NOT mean there are no values
Essence exists, then defines himself through choices. — values are created through
committed choice.

Radical Freedom You are always choosing, inescapably. Even Does NOT mean you can do anything
inaction is a choice. — you are fully responsible for all
choices.

Bad Faith Self-deception about your freedom — denying NOT simple dishonesty — it is a
you are always the author of your choices. structural feature of consciousness,
always possible.

Good Faith Honest acknowledgement of both facticity NOT the same as authenticity — it is a
(your situation) and transcendence (your moment of clarity, not a sustained way
freedom). of life.

Facticity The given facts about you — past, body, NOT your destiny — these facts do not
situation, history. determine your future choices.

Transcendence Your freedom to project beyond your facticity NOT unlimited — freedom is always
and become something new. situated within facticity.

Inauthenticity A life organised around avoiding the full weight NOT simply making mistakes — it is an
of freedom — chronic bad faith. ongoing, habitual denial of one's own
freedom.

Authenticity A sustained life in full ownership of freedom — NOT a destination — it is a continuous

with anguish, responsibility, dignity. practice, always under threat from bad
faith.

Anguish Awareness that your choices legislate for all Does NOT lead to paralysis — it is the
mankind; the weight of universal responsibility. condition of serious, responsible action.

Abandonment No God, no external moral authority — we Does NOT mean nihilism — it means
must invent values ourselves. full responsibility for the values we
create.

Despair Act without relying on what you cannot control. Does NOT mean hopelessness — it
means honest action without
comforting illusions.
 CONCEPT SARTRE'S DEFINITION COMMON MISUNDERSTANDING

Humanism Man is the source of all values; human dignity NOT optimism about human goodness
lies in freedom and self-creation. — it places the burden squarely on
each person.

Intersubjectivity Self-knowledge and identity are constituted Does NOT collapse freedom — the
through relation with others. other is a condition of, not a
replacement for, self-knowledge.

Examination Questions for Reflection

1. Sartre says we are 'condemned to be free.' In what sense is this a condemnation rather than a gift? What
burden does radical freedom place on the individual?

2. The waiter and the woman on a date are both in bad faith, but in different ways. Explain the structural
difference between their self-deceptions.

3. Can a person be in bad faith without knowing it? What does this imply about the relationship between
consciousness and self-knowledge?

4. If there are no a priori values, does moral choice become arbitrary? How does Sartre's analogy with artistic
creation help answer this charge?

5. The student torn between his mother and the war has no rational way to choose. What does this reveal about
the limits of ethical theory in concrete situations?

6. Sartre says 'man is nothing but his actions.' Is this liberating or crushing — or both? How does it change the
way you think about your own identity?

7. How does the concept of intersubjectivity rescue existentialism from the charge of solipsism and radical
individualism?

8. Sartre claims that authenticity is not a destination but a continuous practice. What does this mean, and why
does bad faith remain a permanent temptation?

Jean-Paul Sartre · Existentialism Is a Humanism (1945) & Being and Nothingness (1943) · Complete University Lecture Notes · For
Academic Study Purposes