JeanPaul_Sartre_JeanPaul_Sartre_Basic_Writing

Responsibility193prima facie, if it is right for one person to do something then it is right for anysimilar and similarly placed person to do the same. Being just one personrather than another can not make a moral difference.The causal and the logical interpretations are mutually consistent. Forany action, say joining the French resistance, it may both be causallyefficacious in encouraging others to join, and exhibit the rule that if I join thenI do not judge similarly placed others to be under no obligation to join, onpain of inconsistency.Consistency is a condition for ethics according to Sartre. Acting immorally,that is, in a way that can not be universalised, results in incoherence.Following Kant, Sartre says the act of lying implies the universal value whichit denies. Not only is there no lying without truth-telling but lying can not beuniversalised. The implicit recommendation to everyone to lie could neverbe adopted. If there was no truth-telling the distinction between lies andtruth would break down and there could be no lying either. Becauseconsistency is a constraint on morality what can not be universalised isimmoral. In fashioning myself I fashion humanity as a whole.Universalisability provides us with a test to distinguish between therightness and the wrongness of our actions. If an action cannot beconsistently universalised then it is immoral. If the action can be consistentlyuniversalised it is not immoral. In trying to resolve a moral dilemma, wehave to ask what the consequences would be of everyone adopting ouraction as a rule.Realising the full burden of our responsibility to humanity provokes in usthe deepest sense of dread and anxiety. This discomfort is why we plungeourselves into bad faith. Facing our freedom requires facing our responsibility.We can hardly bear to face our responsibility so we deny our freedom.We are free and responsible despite our refusal to accept these objectivefacts about us. They endure through our pretence so we are in anguish.In this way, Sartre emerges as a moral objectivist despite his rejection oftheological premises for ethics. His moral philosophy is in many ways ahumanistic transformation of Christian ethics. To take one conspicuousexample, instead of being responsible before God a person is responsiblebefore humanity. Instead of God watching our every action everything happensto each person as though the whole human race was watching what theyare doing. Sartre’s humanity, like Christian humanity, is a fallen humanity,but Sartre’s Fall is a secular Fall. We are not fallen from any perfect natural