J-P Sartre, Existentialism Is Humanism | Two Kinds of Humanism | Philosophy Core Concepts

Main ideas / concepts conveyed

• Purpose of the lecture series (by Dr. Gregory Sadler)

  • Sadler introduces a YouTube series of short videos, each focused on a core concept from an important philosophical text.
  • He frames the topic as helping learners deal with difficulty reading philosophical classics: the presentation may be hard, but the ideas are not necessarily complicated.

• Sartre’s central point: “existentialist humanism” vs. other humanisms

  • The term “humanism” has multiple senses (polysemic), so it’s important not to blur or conflate different meanings.
  • Sartre responds to critics (including those who note he previously criticized “humanists” in Nausea) by explaining how existentialist humanism differs from what others mean by humanism.

• Two kinds of humanism (as Sartre contrasts them)

  1. Humanism that treats humanity as an end / higher value
     • These theories ground value in an overarching idea of humanity as something to be valued, in a more fixed or objective way.
  2. Existentialist views on humanity (“existentialist humanism”)
     • Instead of grounding human value in an essence or external source, Sartre grounds it in human freedom, choice, and responsibility.

• Why humanism arises (historical motivation)

  • Humanism is presented as partly a reaction against views that devalue humans.
  • Sadler contrasts it with certain religious frameworks:
    • In some religious/theological views, humans are created to obey divine rules (and may even be depicted as slaves of the gods).
    • Humanism replies: “What matters is the human being.”
  • The key question becomes: What is a human being, and how should we conceive it?

• Critiqued “essentialist” humanism

  • Sadler describes a broad “essentialist humanism” (Sartre contests it):
    • It claims there is an essential human nature.
  • Example discussed (from Sartre’s argument):
    • In Around the World in 80 Days, a character claims “man is simply amazing” based on admiration for particular human deeds.
    • Sartre rejects this as absurd because it treats a small slice of humanity as representative of humanity “as such.”
    • The discussion also connects to how societies celebrate heroism during tragedies (medals, speeches), as if hero-worship captures the whole of humanity.
  • Deeper claim:
    • Humanity contains wide potentialities, including both great good and great bad.
    • Sadler uses Aristotle: humans are best when good, worst when vicious—so there’s no single fixed “essence” determining what humans are.

• Rejection of externally grounded humanism

  • Sartre criticizes attempts to ground “worship” of humanity in place of God or mythological/theological frameworks.
  • Example: Auguste Comte (positivism)
    • Comte is described as aiming to move beyond traditional myth/theology toward a scientific/positivist outlook.
    • Yet Comte still assigns humanity a kind of religious adoration, effectively replacing God with humanity as an object of cult.
  • Sartre’s judgment:
    • This “cult of mankind” is a terrible idea—it still worships something rather than preserving freedom and choice.

---

How existentialist humanism looks (Sartre’s alternative, presented step-by-step)

• Core metaphysical description of human existence

  • Human beings are characterized by being “outside themselves”:
    • People project themselves outward,
    • lose themselves in pursuits,
    • and are continually exceeding themselves rather than staying fixed.
  • Humans orient themselves by transcendent goals (not “given essences,” but aims people choose).

• Freedom and self-definition

  • There is no pre-given human nature and no fixed plan.
  • People choose for themselves and, in concrete circumstances, shape what “humanity” will be.
  • Humanism becomes an exercise of human freedom:
    • not merely swapping allegiance (God → humanity, or God → science),
    • but directing freedom toward honoring what freedom enables.

• Human universe / moral authority

  • Sartre rejects the idea that morality or norms are imported from outside:
    • There is “no universe other than a human universe,” understood as the realm of human subjectivity.
  • Human beings are the lawmakers/deciders:
    • Moral norms are not imposed by a transcendent creator.
    • They exist because humans choose, interpret, and enact them.
  • Humans are responsible in an inescapable way for decisions and their meaning.

• Why existentialist humanism is “humanism”

  • It emphasizes:
    • Responsibility,
    • the absence of a determinate essence,
    • freedom to define humanity through chosen goals,
    • and the insistence that moral normativity arises through human decision rather than being externally manufactured.

---

Additional comparative notes (limits of “existentialism” as a label)

• Not all existentialists accept Sartre’s humanistic interpretation.
  • Martin Heidegger is mentioned as willing to let Sartre take up the term “existentialism,” while not wanting Heidegger’s own philosophy to be humanistic in Sartre’s sense.
• Sadler also notes that Nietzsche and Kierkegaard are “perhaps not” humanists in this specific respect, leaving an open question about how well Sartre represents existentialism overall versus only Sartre’s brand of it.

---

Speakers / sources featured

• Dr. Gregory Sadler (narrator/presenter; professor of philosophy; president/founder of “reason IO” educational consulting company)
• Jean-Paul Sartre (Existentialism Is a Humanism; also referenced: Nausea)
• Jules Verne (indirectly, via Around the World in 80 Days—“man is simply amazing” is attributed to a character/scene)
• Aristotle
• Auguste Comte (positivism; “cult of mankind” described)
• Martin Heidegger
• Friedrich Nietzsche
• Søren Kierkegaard