Being and Nothingness: An Essay on Phenomenological Ontology by Jean-Paul Sartre (review)

BOOK REVIEWS Being and Nothingness: An Essay on Phenomenological Ontology. By JEAN-PAUL SARTRE. Translated with an introduction by Hazel E. Barnes. New York: Philosophical Library, 1956. Pp. 657. $10.00. Sartre's major philosophical work, L'Etre et le Neant, appeared in French in 1943. Until now, the American image of Sartre has been based largely on his literary, rather than his philosophical, output. It is a matter of some importance that his major philosophical work should now be available in English. Catholic theologians and philosophers will recall the injunction of Pope Pius XII in Humani Generis that the works of the atheistic existentialists , among others, should be mastered by competent Catholic scholars, with a view to criticism of errors, appropriation of such truth as they may contain, and a deepening of one's own hold on truth. This English translation opens with an analytical and reasonably detached " Translator's Introduction." Prof. Barnes, while sympathetic to Sartre, is no mere worshiper. The author's "Introduction " follows, and in it Sartre raises gradually the dominating questions of this book: What is the relation of the For-itself to the In-itself? And how are both related to being? The body of the book is divided into four parts. The first, " The Problem of Nothingness," deals with "The Origin of Negation" and "Bad Faith." Part Two, entitled " Being For-Itself," analyzes first " Immediate Structures of the For-Itself," then "Temporality," and finally "Transcendence." Part Three," Being-For-Others," takes up three problems: "The Existence of Others," " The Body " and " Concrete Relations with Others." Part Four analyzes " Having, Doing and Being." It is here that the well-known Sartrian exploration of " Freedom " is found. The " Conclusion " reverts to the questions raised in the author's " Introduction " and answers them succinctly in the light of the intervening analyses. Sartre concludes with a promise of a further volume devoted to the ethical implications of his conclusions in ontology, but this promise has not been kept in the intervening thirteen years. Prof. Barnes has done a very competent translation. There are a few typographical errors, most of which can be corrected from the context; there are probably fewer errors in the English than in the French. In addition to her translation and her introduction, she has drawn up a " Key to Special Terminology " (pp. 6~9-635) in which the definitions of Sartre's key terms are drawn from Sartre, and usually from this very book. There is also an index of proper names. 97 98 BOOK REVIEWS It would be a duplication of effort to summarize Sartre's teaching in this review. This has been splendidly done in James Collins' The Existentialists (Regnery, 195~) and in Kurt Reinhardt's The Existentialist Revolt (Bruce, 195~), as well as in numerous studies by non-Catholics, and in the " Translator's Introduction " to this volume. But the most efficient way to get an introductory understanding of Sartre, if that is still needed, would be to read his "Introduction" and "Conclusion" to Being and Nothingness. Neither do I intend to attempt a Thomistic critique of Sartre, nor the construction of Thomistic answers to his problems. Both of these tasks were magnificently achieved in Maritain's Existence and the Existent (Pantheon , 1948) . Instead, I shall list six lines of study which might profitably be applied to this book. The first method of study might well be that of the logical analysts. It will be recalled that in 1903 G. E. Moore published a famous study of Idealism, the point of which was to determine what meaning, or meanings, if any, the sentence Esse est percipi may have. Moore's own philosophical position was weak, to say the least; but his criticism of Idealism was so devastating that Idealism has been a dead issue in England and America for fifty years. Sartre's key terms all need that kind of attention. His use of the words " being," " is," " distance," but above all " not," " nothing " and every form of the negative, is highly ambiguous. My suspicion is that the terms " nothing " and " distance," at least, are devoid of meaning in Sartre; or are used so equivocally as to invalidate all of...