Goodreads helps you keep track of books you want to read.

Start by marking “Being and Nothingness: an essay in phenomenological ontology” as Want to Read:

Other editions

Enlarge cover

Rate this book

Clear rating

1 of 5 stars 2 of 5 stars 3 of 5 stars 4 of 5 stars 5 of 5 stars

Open Preview

Being and Nothingness: an essay in phenomenological ontology

Jean-Paul Sartre,

Hazel E. Barnes (translator)

3.97 · Rating details · 26,730 ratings · 422 reviews

A new trade edition of Sartre's magnum opus. First published in 1943, this masterpiece defines the modern condition and still holds relevance for today's readers. ...more

Get A Copy

Mass Market Paperback, 812 pages

Published July 1969 by Washington Square Press (first published 1943)

More Details... Edit Details

Friend Reviews

To see what your friends thought of this book, please sign up.

Reader Q&A

To ask other readers questions about Being and Nothingness, please sign up.

Lists with This Book

This book is not yet featured on Listopia. Add this book to your favorite list »

Community Reviews

Showing 1-30

Average rating 3.97 ·

Rating details

· 26,730 ratings · 422 reviews

More filters

Sort order

Start your review of Being and Nothingness: an essay in phenomenological ontology

May 06, 2012 Ahmad Sharabiani rated it really liked it · review of another edition

Shelves: philosophy, non-fiction, french, 20th-century, literature

‭L'etre et le neant, essai d'ontologie phenomenologique‬ = Being and Nothingness, Jean-Paul Sartre

Being and Nothingness: An Essay on Phenomenological Ontology, sometimes subtitled A Phenomenological Essay on Ontology, is a 1943 book by the philosopher Jean-Paul Sartre, in which the author asserts the individual's existence as prior to the individual's essence and seeks to demonstrate that free will exists.

While a prisoner of war in 1940 and 1941, Sartre read Martin Heidegger's Being and Time (1 ‭L'etre et le neant, essai d'ontologie phenomenologique‬ = Being and Nothingness, Jean-Paul Sartre

Being and Nothingness: An Essay on Phenomenological Ontology, sometimes subtitled A Phenomenological Essay on Ontology, is a 1943 book by the philosopher Jean-Paul Sartre, in which the author asserts the individual's existence as prior to the individual's essence and seeks to demonstrate that free will exists.

While a prisoner of war in 1940 and 1941, Sartre read Martin Heidegger's Being and Time (1927). Heidegger's work, an ontological investigation through the lens and method of Husserlian phenomenology (Edmund Husserl was Heidegger's teacher), initiated Sartre's own philosophical inquiry. ...

تاریخ نخستین خوانش: روز نخست ماه فوریه سال 2010میلادی

عنوان: هستی و نیستی: پدیده شناسی عالم هستی؛ اثر: ژان پل سارتر؛ مترجم: عنایت الله شکیباپور؛ مشخصات نشر تهران، دنیای کتاب، چاپ نخست ؟؟؟ تجدید چاپ پس از سی و چند سال در 1389، در 432ص، شابک 9789643460532؛ موضوع اگزیستانسیالیسم از نویسندگان فرانسوی - سده 20م

عنوان: هستی و نیستی: جستاری در هستی شناسی پدیدار شناختی؛ نویسنده: ژان پل سارتر؛ برگردان: مهستی بحرینی؛ تهران، نیلوفر، 1394؛ در 856 ص؛ شابک: 9789644486456؛

کتاب با ترجمه ابراهیم صدقیانی نیز در تهران، جامی، 1389 در دو جلد منتشر شده است

‮هستی و نیستی یک پیش گفتار است و چهار بخش، یک اثر فلسفی تمام عیار از سده بیستم میلادی ...؛ نقش بازی کردن پیشخدمت کافه، و یا «تصادف موتورسیکلت»، زنی که وانمود می‌کند متوجه نیست که مردی دستش را گرفته، همه انگار مثالهایی از همین زندگی روز، رقصی میانه ی میدان، بین هستن و نیستن...؛

در این کتاب، «ژان پل سارتر» به بررسی فلسفه بنیادی، با عنوان «فلسفه هستی و نیستی»، پرداخته است؛ «سارتر» در این کتاب، ضمن یک بیان کامل، از اثبات «هستی و نیستی»، و رابطه ای که میان آنان وجود دارد، به ذکر تمام مقولات عالم هستی پرداخته، و عواطف انسانی نظری همچون «وجدان»، «عشق»، «نفرت»، «هوس» و سایر «تضادهای درونی»، و «تعارض نفسانی» را، به صورت آشکار و مستدل، شرح داده است، که در فلسفه ی او روح «کانت» و «هگل»، توامان مشاهده میشود؛ «سارتر» برای انسان، دو هستی قائل شده، یکی هستی برای خود، و آن یکی دیگر، هستی برای دیگری. ایشان این هستی دوم را، جزء جدا نشدنی هستی، برای خود میدانند، و باور دارند که هر انسان زنده، با هستی دیگری که در وجود او فعالیت دارد، زندگی میکند، و رابطه ی میان این دو هستی، یک هستی دیگر، به نام «هستی در درون» را ارائه میکنند؛ چرا که ایشان باور دارند عواطف انسانی ذکر شده، به هم پیوسته نیستند، و خوانشگر باید مفهوم هر کدام را به صورت جداگانه، درک کند؛ همچنین در این کتاب آراء و باورهای «سارتر»، درباره ی مکتب «اگزیستانسیالیسم (اصالت انسان)» به اختصار آورده شده است

تاریخ بهنگام رسانی 23/09/1399هجری خورشیدی؛ ا. شربیانی ...more

flag 158 likes · Like · see review

Apr 18, 2008 Tyler rated it liked it

Recommends it for: Every Thinker

Shelves: philosophy

One of the more cold-serious works I've read, this treatise exerts a strange power that forces readers onward despite the dense subject matter and clunky English translation.

The subject is man's experience of reality. Here you have a rigorous scouring of the subject resulting in a proof of human freedom so thorough you'll never fool with hard determinism again. Every aspect of consciousness is traced in all its implications. After reading this there seems little more to be said about the basis i ...more

flag 88 likes · Like · see review

May 25, 2020 Fergus rated it really liked it · review of another edition

In my more jejune years, in the seventies and eighties, Jean-Paul Sartre played Pied Piper to my bemused Flower Child of Hamelin!

It was that bad.

You see, I was of two minds on this ill-advised book - the first part of it was well spoken - but the second was distinctly dangerous for the ingénu I was.

But it’s mere gibberish, I’m afraid, to most of the rest of us. So harmless.

Why did I have two minds?

Because Sartre had two minds on it himself: on one side, his more cerebral braininess, and the o ...more

flag 68 likes · Like · see review

May 29, 2015 Ian "Marvin" Graye rated it it was amazing · review of another edition

Shelves: cul-poli-phil-art, lit-krit, reviews, reviews-5-stars, read-2015, heidegger, sartre

IMMERSE ME IN YOUR SPLENDOUR!

"This is the one!"

[The Stone Roses]

It helps to have read Heidegger's "Being and Time" before this volume that some describe as a companion, others as a critique (it's both, actually).

Heidegger writes like someone who is a reader; Sartre like someone who is both a reader and a writer. This is not to deny that Heidegger is a good writer. Just that Sartre is a better one.

Sartre wrote while Heidegger's ideas were still fresh. He agreed with many, disagreed with some, fi ...more

flag 43 likes · Like · see review

Jun 21, 2019 Roy Lotz rated it liked it · review of another edition

Shelves: supermassive, this-and-that, footnotes-to-plato, francophilia

Here is this review in podcast form:

https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast...
________________________________

Slime is the agony of water.

I first heard of this book from my dad. “I had to read this in college,” he told me. “We looked at every type of being. Being-in-myself, being-for-myself, being-of-myself, being-across-myself, being-by-myself. I went crazy trying to read that thing.” Ever since that memorable description, this book has held a special allure for me. It has everything to attra ...more

flag 41 likes · Like · see review

Feb 10, 2012 Nathan "N.R." Gaddis marked it as partial-credit · review of another edition

Shelves: philosophy

A few years ago I read about half of Being and Nothingness (finally!). Back in school days I thought I was cutting my philosophical teeth on Sartre and the others known as existentialists. I’m quite certain I was making most of it up. It was time to play catch-up and read Sartre’s work which I believed to have already assimilated. It evolves that I had moved quite a distance beyond Sartre’s “existentialism.” But I did not finish my reading for external reasons and it remains on my shelf for that A few years ago I read about half of Being and Nothingness (finally!). Back in school days I thought I was cutting my philosophical teeth on Sartre and the others known as existentialists. I’m quite certain I was making most of it up. It was time to play catch-up and read Sartre’s work which I believed to have already assimilated. It evolves that I had moved quite a distance beyond Sartre’s “existentialism.” But I did not finish my reading for external reasons and it remains on my shelf for that eventual return.

But mostly I’m posting this note in order to remove a chip from my shoulder. My claim here is that Sartre is the only existentialist; and his existentialism is merely a portion of his work; and that it is the least important of his work. What I mean is that Sartre was a phenomenologist. His contribution to twentieth century philosophy was not the development of “the philosophy of existentialism” but rather his continuance of and contributions to the phenomenological researches begun by Husserl, carried further by Heidegger, contributions by Merleau-Ponty, Gadamer, Ricoeur, ETC. Sartre is perhaps the lesser philosopher. But as intellectual he was indubitably a giant on the French landscape. But, see, my claim is that he was more “intellectual” than “philosopher.” And his existentialism had more to do with his status as intellectual than as philosopher; don’t hold too tight to that distinction.

But, let it be said, Sartre is perhaps the noblest figure of the twentieth century in regard to the question of atheism in so far as he was the only thinker to that time who fully realized the consequences brought on by the death/disappearance of a transcendental guarantee frequently known as “God”; existentialism was perhaps nothing more than a response to this question.

Let it be further said, that I don’t have too much to say about the literary grouping known as “existentialist,” for writing such Sartre was also rather well known, along with de Beauvoir, Sarraute, and someone named Camus. I quit reading these things about the time I began to understand philosophy.

So then as to Sartre being the only existentialist. Here’s what I think happened, and which has caused more than two centuries of the history of philosophy to be misunderstood by the popular mind. A popularizer of philosophy, or a few, but mostly Walter Kaufman, read Sartre. His reading of Sartre allowed him to see similar themes and issues and orientations in philosophers from earlier eras; but without having read Sartre he would not have seen these things in other thinkers. This is a case similar to Kafka’s writing causing us to retrospectively find kafka-esque elements in writers who preceded Kafka, although we had never seen those things before or taken them as kafka-esque; and we find a whole series of kafka-ism preceding the thing itself. With a popular book or two; overnight we suddenly had an entire history of existentialist thinkers--Heidegger became one, so did Nietzsche and Kierkegaard, even back to Shakespeare and Pascal. Reading Sartre certainly causes us to read these thinkers in a new light, but to assimilate them to something like “existentialism” is simply uninformative at best, misleading at worst. Depend upon it--anyone calling Heidegger an existentialist does not know the first thing (they are learning! patience!) about twentieth century philosophy. Anyone who believes that Kierkegaard or Nietzsche were existentialists!!! (and they absolutely were not and never could be “postmodernists”) --they were Hegelians, as is Sartre in his better moments.

This is really the only thing I want to say. Sartre is the only existentialist. Existentialism is and never was a very important part of twentieth century philosophy. What was important and still is, is phenomenology. Forget the existentialist reading of the history of philosophy. It causes more confusion than understanding. ...more

flag 32 likes · Like · see review

Jan 09, 2013 Chris Shank rated it it was amazing · review of another edition

I’ve taken time on ideologically heavy books before, spending sometimes an hour on a single page to make sure I really understood, but I took 5 months on this 800 page beaut. I read Being And Nothingness in conjunction with an incredibly enlightening and comprehensible book of course notes by Paul Vincent Spade from Indiana University on the subject of Sartre and B&N. See http://pvspade.com/Sartre/pdf/sartre1.... What they say about B&N is true. It was VERY difficult. Sartre uses ideas and langu ...more

flag 25 likes · Like · see review

Jun 23, 2012 Robert Riley rated it did not like it · review of another edition

Well, really, Being and Nothingness is a literary tract disguised as philosophy. The many metaphors he uses to illustrate his points are not philosophical in nature, but imagistic and suggestive. There is a certain wholeness to the book, but it reminds me more of Ulysses than Heidegger. The one real philosophical idea is that of Bad Faith, which is just his super super ego working overtime. Although an important landmark for 20th century literature, it is an unpleasant book to read, and the pain ...more

flag 19 likes · Like · see review

Sep 19, 2007 Ryan rated it it was amazing · review of another edition

Recommends it for: teens

dear reader,

character limit!

REVIEW:

where do you even begin?
first of all: the common subtitle "a phenomenological essay on ontology" is incorrectly translated from the french, and should read "an essay on phenomenological ontology."
undoubtedly one of the most significant books of the 20th century, and of modern history itself.
significant ideas:
1. being-in-itself: matter, existence, the world, the chair, the table, the tree. undifferentiated in itself, without essence, naked, stark, overwhelming, dear reader,

character limit!

REVIEW:

where do you even begin?
first of all: the common subtitle "a phenomenological essay on ontology" is incorrectly translated from the french, and should read "an essay on phenomenological ontology."
undoubtedly one of the most significant books of the 20th century, and of modern history itself.
significant ideas:
1. being-in-itself: matter, existence, the world, the chair, the table, the tree. undifferentiated in itself, without essence, naked, stark, overwhelming, forcing itself into every crevice. without consciousness.
2. being-for-itself: conscious. human existence. gives essence to the world, to being-in-itself. also without essence, but allowed to define its own essense. lots more. wants to be god, can't.
3. bad faith: a lack of authenticity, the most central, perhaps only, existential "moral." being what one is not. famous example: the waiter: playing at being a waiter: too friendly, too quick, too eager: all traits he would not have were he to truly be himself. for sartre, action is the only measure of value or worth, and so only opinions or feelings that are acted upon are valid. so if one thinks, "well, i was going to fight for my fellow man's rights, but i didn't have the money" and still holds themself in high regard for at least having a good intent, they are acting in bad faith. no exit is all about this, esp. garcin: he holds himself to be a hero, even though his heroic intentions were thwarted and he was executed. he (and common morality) think that since he had the right intentions, he is still heroic, yet sartre says that he instead is acting in bad faith and is actually a coward. yeah bad faith is really central for sartre, and is a very noble standard of living. one does not make a moral choice in one's head, but with one's actions.
4. the other: fascinating concept, largely if not entirely borrowed from husserl (see: logische Uuntersuchunge and die krisis der europaischen wissenschaften...). subjectivity is central to sartrean existentialism (and almost all other forms). it is our experience of the world. i am the subject, all else is object to me. yet there are other consciousnesses, who are also subjects, and to them, *gasp*, i am the object. the look of the other attempts to objectify my (and to the other, does), while the look of the subject attempts to objectify the other. this creates, in a word, tension. this is another great example of how what begins as a phenomenological discover bleeds into already obvious conclusions elsewhere: psychology, sociology, romance, even theology (wanting to be ultimate subject). we try to import others into our subjective value system, and are terrified (well, 99.9% of people are just in denial (bad faith)) that others are importing us into their subjective value system.

yep. that's it i guess. sartre went on to write the critique of dialectical reason, which reconciles (very poorly, actually, it fails) the ontological system developed here with marxism.

more importantly, sartre, as promised at the end of being and nothingness, went on to attempt to develop an ethical system, or at least explore the ethical implications of the system developed here. the result of this is perhaps one of the most underrated works of philosophy: two notebooks in which he tries to work out a system of ethics. he never finished - it's been argued, for obvious reasons, that an ethics of his existentialism is impossible - and these notebooks weren't published until after his death.

VERDICT:

you're reading a review of "being and nothingness." seriously. ...more

flag 17 likes · Like · see review

Feb 11, 2021 Luís rated it really liked it · review of another edition

Shelves: philosophy, classics, psychology, jp-sartre, france, 2021-readings

What is essential in the context of the phenomenology of being? Being and Existing, the memorable and subtle space that separates being from non-being, the possibility of non-existence constitutes a phenomenon essentially distinct from death? These are some of the countless questions that Sartre addresses uniquely in "Being and Nothingness", in an exercise of intelligence that sometimes touches the absurdity of the denials of the apparent evidence. According to Sartre, the subject-object relatio What is essential in the context of the phenomenology of being? Being and Existing, the memorable and subtle space that separates being from non-being, the possibility of non-existence constitutes a phenomenon essentially distinct from death? These are some of the countless questions that Sartre addresses uniquely in "Being and Nothingness", in an exercise of intelligence that sometimes touches the absurdity of the denials of the apparent evidence. According to Sartre, the subject-object relationship inevitably passes through the conception of the self and the self's consciousness, so that knowledge can assume compelling cognition perspectives. The object is perceptible if the consciousness of the being situates and references itself outside the item and, in turn, it exists independently of the being. "Before any comparison, before any construction, the thing is what is present in the conscience as not being the conscience" (SARTRE, 1997). When objects exist, they imply an order of things independent of being and knowledge itself. Likewise, the Sartrian is himself that exists before self-awareness, and when he refuses, he assumes a negative characteristic that only realizes it as a non-substantial structure. Being is before thinking because it (pre) exists for self-awareness. Although for Sartre, consciousness constitutes the original absolute, insubstantial and external to all reality, it exists when being and self-awareness meet in thought and prove an ability to integrate and perceive the existence of being. The Sartrian problematic of being part of being and not being for the other's knowledge, where the same phenomenological problem arises. And between being and non-being there is nothing, the non-existence that shapes death, as a negation of the existing and self-conscious being. This fact refers to another order of questions, namely the value of conscience as a normative reference for the perception of reality and convergence with a world defined according to categories, previously elaborated. It will end up assuming, from proof to proof, like conventions and prejudices. In other words, madness and death would, to be so, be equal concerning the ontological question of being and nothingness. The fundamental thing is to mention that through this superior work, it will be possible to raise numerous questions of an existential content that will take us further and further in the knowledge of ourselves and others. And isn't this the primary role of Philosophy? ...more

flag 16 likes · Like · see review

Feb 17, 2012 Phillip rated it it was amazing · review of another edition

Shelves: favorites-among-favorites, sartre, interpret-using-b-n, philosophy, psychology, french-language, world-as-will-and-representation, my-visionaries, phenomenology, religion

(Update Jan. 2015) I am beginning 2015 by rereading one of my all time favorite books for the 15th time, this time in the original language. It is about time.

When I say read it in the original language it is more like a first- or third-grader sort of doping out a newspaper article that is too advanced for him. I know some of the words. I know the English translation so well that I have a good Idea of what is passing before my eyes. But it isn't really reading in the usual sense.

I am studying Fr (Update Jan. 2015) I am beginning 2015 by rereading one of my all time favorite books for the 15th time, this time in the original language. It is about time.

When I say read it in the original language it is more like a first- or third-grader sort of doping out a newspaper article that is too advanced for him. I know some of the words. I know the English translation so well that I have a good Idea of what is passing before my eyes. But it isn't really reading in the usual sense.

I am studying French for the second time. The first time was a disaster. I don't know what to say. Right now I am making progress. I thought it would be good to read a couple of pages per day as a form of immersion as part of the process. And in the end, the primary reason I am studying French is because I want to be able to read the book in its original language.

I have been through this before. It is about like 30 years ago when I reread the book all of those times in English. Sometimes it really was just the words passing over my eyes. But I would understand a little and then a little more until I came to be able to read it like any other book. So, I am optimistic. My goal is to have gotten through the French course by the end of the first week in September. My expectation is that I will pick up more and more as I learn more about the language and maybe have the reading comprehension of a 4th or 5th grader by the end of the calendar year.

--------------
I picked up this book in the summer of 1985. Over the next three years I read and reread it seven times. Once I realized it was going to be a multiple reading event I started varying my approach with each pass by dividing the book up into chunks and reading them in different orders. During my sixth run-through I did it backwards. I started with the last page of the book and read each page until I got to the title page. After that, I really had the content down and during the seventh I was able to comprehend everything like I would any other book during the first read through.

Why would a 21 to 24 year-old be motivated to do such a thing? Because it intrigued me. During each reread I picked up a little more. I liked what I saw, and during each pass I held more of the over-all picture in my mind. What he wrote was and is important to me. Because in the end, I believe Sartre was right more often than not.

He characterized us with the phrase "Man is the being who is what he is not and is not what he is." I think the way he worked that out in theme after theme explains a lot about what humans are, our behavior, and the reason we do the things we do. The last major section is easy to read. It outlines a new psychology based upon his phenomenological existentialism. I have always wished I could find such a thing.

In the decades since, I have returned to the book when my inner compulsion reaches a tipping point. I believe the last time was within the last two or three years. It will probably always be my number one favorite book. ...more

flag 16 likes · Like · see review

Jun 10, 2010 Michael rated it really liked it · review of another edition

Shelves: philosophy, translation, modernlit, nonfiction, xlong-over-400, xxlong-over-800, aa-francelit, nobellit, philosophy-france, aa-europelit

more
Jean-Paul Sartre: Basic Writings
Nausea
The Wall and Other Stories
Nothingness and Emptiness: A Buddhist Engagement with the Ontology of Jean-Paul Sartre
Existentialism is a Humanism
Essays in Existentialism
The Transcendence of the Ego: An Existentialist Theory of Consciousness
We Have Only This Life to Live: The Selected Essays of Jean-Paul Sartre, 1939-1975
Sartre's Ethics of Engagement
Sartres Second Century
Jean-Paul Sartre: Key Concepts
The Existentialism of Jean-Paul Sartre
Sartre: A Guide for th ...more

flag 15 likes · Like · see review

Aug 08, 2008 Charmless rated it it was amazing · review of another edition

Recommends it for: someone who has extra time to read.

Recommended to Charmless by: Some chain-smoking Euro-wannabe

Shelves: classics

You have to deal with existentialism at some point and this book essentially gives you one of the best starts on the subject. Some people think that you'll feel like killing yourself after reading Sartre but honestly, this book had the opposite effect on me. I took it more as if Sartre was telling me that human life still has value even if there's no point in having a life.

Read it and you'll see what I mean. It takes a while to plow through it but it's worth the wait. Even before fully reading ...more

flag 15 likes · Like · see review

Jun 28, 2016 Jimmy rated it it was amazing · review of another edition

Shelves: philosophy-sartre, philosophy

I honestly believe that not even Sartre could explain some of these passages. In other words, I think they are pure nonsense. But he has written a complete philosophical system, such as it is, and that is worthy of reading. Just keep in mind the extreme difficulty. I would recommend reading his novel Nausea. It's far more interesting. But I give this five stars because it is in parts quite brilliant. And it is a necessary for any amateur philosopher.

"The reality of that cup is that it is there ...more

flag 11 likes · Like · see review

Oct 30, 2015 Gary Beauregard Bottomley rated it it was ok · review of another edition

Instead of reading this book I would strongly suggest watching the "No Exit" with Harold Pinter available on youtube written by Sartre. It illustrates a large part of his philosophy of the Other, the Look and the self. And, you'll get a hint on why Sartre doesn't work today. In addition, my favorite phrase ever and the one that I make as my own comes from that play "l'enfer c'est les autres" (hell, is others), and my second favorite is "vous ete mon bourreau" (you are my torturer).

I think the t Instead of reading this book I would strongly suggest watching the "No Exit" with Harold Pinter available on youtube written by Sartre. It illustrates a large part of his philosophy of the Other, the Look and the self. And, you'll get a hint on why Sartre doesn't work today. In addition, my favorite phrase ever and the one that I make as my own comes from that play "l'enfer c'est les autres" (hell, is others), and my second favorite is "vous ete mon bourreau" (you are my torturer).

I think the three ugliest words in the English Language are "be a man" (or equivalent statements such as don't be a sissy, act like a man, you're weak, be tough, stop being a woman, and so on). Books likes these are what allows that kind of thinking to take place. Matter of fact, he uses that framing in one of his examples about being too tired to climb a hill and the fear of "being a sissy" is what motivates him to keep hiking. Yes, I realized it was just an example he uses but he really goes to pains to defend it. (Even in today's New York Times (February 6, 2016), I saw a story on how China thinks they need more men teachers because the male students are "timid, self centered and weak" like girls and need to be taught to be men. I'm not making this up. That kind of thinking just permeates even today).

This book is completely passe today. Time has past it by. I'm so glad the 1950s through the 80s are behind us. This book's popularity during that time period is clearly because the way it tied itself to the various schools of psychoanalysis (Gestalt, Adler, experimental psychoanalysis, and even Freudian but with twists) and they could use Sartre's argument to re-enforce their psychoanalytical paradigms. Sartre ends the book by trying to change the paradigm slightly to what he calls "existentialism psychoanalysis". I don't think it ever caught on.

He tweaks the Freudian approach of where behavior is explained by "libido and will to power" to a paradigm that considers the 'choice of being' from the freedom the individual posseses acting for the project (the future). In my opinion, all he is doing is saying instead of blaming the mother (or father), he's going to blame the person (victim). He never really gets the fact that the mind and body are different and some of our behavior is caused by our genetics (being born that way). He's really falling further down the rabbit hole and wants to blame the victim for lacking culture, community and the proper values. Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (and other such techniques) and effective drugs came along in the 80s and started making a difference because they were so much more effective than "talking therapy".

His real fundamental error about seeing the world is along the lines of when he says "Pierre is not a waiter he is only acting as a waiter' and "there is no such thing as homosexuals, there are just homosexual acts".

The author really has a warped view about love with his concept of possessing and possessed and domination, and appropriation (taking). He thinks other people take away from our freedom by existing, we are always becoming, and our choices are always are own (you choose to be homosexual, or neurodiverse, or OCD, or any behavior you have). The only thing we are not free to be is not free.

Even with all my negativism expressed above, I can still recommend this book. It only cost me $2.05 and credit at my favorite used book store and I'll get credit when I most certainly return it. It's a perfect example on how we got off track as a society, but managed to move past woo from books like this one. The author is not hard to follow. (He's not really a philosopher in my opinion). Never trust other peoples opinions about someones philosophy until you've read it yourself. ...more

flag 11 likes · Like · see review

May 31, 2019 Edmond rated it liked it · review of another edition

Reading “being and nothingness”, I got the sense Jean-Paul Sartre was trying to impress everybody by writing an unreadable book. He could sum up the entire book in three pages, an empty page on being and nothingness, one page on bad faith, and one page on the look. 800 pages, the guy had a huge ego. I understand why philosophers consider jean-Paul Sartre overrated, some call him an asshole, I agree. I could say Jean-Paul Sartre is in bad faith, trying to be a philosopher, he was not a philosophe ...more

flag 8 likes · Like · see review

Apr 01, 2009 Kelly H. (Maybedog) rated it liked it · review of another edition

Shelves: what-nonfiction, what-philosophy

I want to make clear that my rating only expresses my enjoyment of the book and not my respect for the impact it had on Western Thought.

flag 7 likes · Like · see review

Mar 24, 2007 Mathias rated it it was amazing · review of another edition

Recommends it for: Only for the committed

Shelves: existentialism

The only time I ever passed out in my life was during the reading of this book. I actually felt and heard my brain pop and awoke on the floor next to the couch.

This is an extremely difficult text. I recall spending an entire week on just one paragraph. I still do not fully understand this work but will eventually have to revisit it to complete something I am writing on Free Will.

flag 6 likes · Like · see review

Sep 24, 2011 Isla McKetta rated it really liked it · review of another edition

Verbose yet profound, I went through a myriad of emotions while reading this book. To find out how Sartre made me reconsider everything from my friendships to my relationship with truth, read a full-length essay on my blog. ...more

flag 6 likes · Like · see review

Jun 10, 2012 David Withun rated it really liked it · review of another edition

Shelves: philosophy

flag 6 likes · Like · see review

Oct 12, 2007 Sophia rated it liked it · review of another edition

In Sartre’s Being and Nothingness, he promotes the existentialist outlook that existence precedes essence. It’s a view that opposes the Aristotelian quest for the meaning of something by asking after its function, and defining its virtue based on how well it performs that function. Sartre argues that although the function of something can be used to define an object, it does not define a Being in that a Being is not an object, but a subject. Unlike inanimate objects Beings are in constant flux, ...more

flag 5 likes · Like · see review

May 27, 2019 Goatboy rated it really liked it · review of another edition

Shelves: abandoned

I wish Goodreads had another main category for books for when you abandon them yet still intend one day to come back and finish them. Don't want it cluttering up my Currently Reading list and yet cannot tag as read or remove entirely. Oh well...

If I was going to be completely honest I think from what I read of this I would probably rate it closer to 3.5 stars (for whatever that's worth). Recently learning more about Kojeve and his lectures on Hegel, it's easy to see how Sartre took what he might ...more

flag 5 likes · Like · see review

Nov 20, 2008 Tiger rated it it was amazing · review of another edition

Every ten or so pages I had to stop and do "The Chicken Dance", U know, where U flap your arms like a silly chicken at Oktoberfest and then shimmy on down!

If U want to play a fun drinking game with the book have a drink every time ol' Jean-Paul uses the word "conscious" 'cuz he is waaaayyyy into consciousness!

Mais le livre est superieure en francais, je pense! ...more

flag 6 likes · Like · see review

Aug 17, 2011 Nathan Perry rated it it was amazing · review of another edition

"Being and Nothingness" is the principle existential text of philosophy written by Jean-Paul Sartre'. It seems to serve more as a phenomenological extension of Martin Heidegger's text on Ontology (Being and Time) rather than the common belief that it is a profound misunderstanding of Heidegger's idea's. Which ever the case may be, Sartre' produced a text which landed the philosophical lineage of existentialism on the academic map; complete with a strange train of logic, for which might not be gr "Being and Nothingness" is the principle existential text of philosophy written by Jean-Paul Sartre'. It seems to serve more as a phenomenological extension of Martin Heidegger's text on Ontology (Being and Time) rather than the common belief that it is a profound misunderstanding of Heidegger's idea's. Which ever the case may be, Sartre' produced a text which landed the philosophical lineage of existentialism on the academic map; complete with a strange train of logic, for which might not be grasped at all, if Heidegger's "Being and Time" is not read first with firm understanding. Of the issues addressed is the historical/intellectual damage inflicted by Cartesian dualism and which Sartre attempts to repair, his arguments against theism and metaphysics, and most importantly, the premise of the "for-itself" upsurge from the "in-itself" aspect of all things in reality; and the 'nothingness' that arrives from the friction of the these two fields, serving for us all the well-spring of human experience and our own human reality (which suggests is an on-going stream of fiction that we all invent and buy into).

I would not recommend this text to anyone unless they had first a) an authentic interest in philosophy and b) if they have had a firm prior understanding of both phenomenology and ontology. I might recommend it to those who fancy the appearance of being intellectual, for if they attempt to read "Being and Nothingness" to support their personal image, they may secretly experience the shame of failing to understand what they are trying to read; an existential kick in the nuts, in itself. If such a person were able to set aside their highly protected esteem, however, they'd likely realize that they are not intellectually insufficient, but that they are just reading a very difficult and strange philosophical text. Being and Nothingness, although not as challenging as Hegel's "Phenomenology of Spirit" and "Being and Time", comes close. My analogy of consensus might maintain that Sartre's "Being and Nothingness" is as easy to comprehend (at least in its majority) as it is to pull a nail from a wooden floor board with one's lips; a nail that may or may not really be there in the first place, and the idea that one experiences it regardless of its actuality and yet chooses to orally yank it free, is possible; it is just that it is not necessarily something that one might desire to accomplish, even if the possibility of succeeding is strong. ...more

flag 3 likes · Like · see review

Jul 21, 2018 Amirtha Shri rated it it was ok · review of another edition

This is one of those books I'd not regret not striving to get through! I dropped this book almost in the very beginning because: a. The man drones where he can simply put a point, rephrasing, paraphrasing, and what not, which is fine as long as it remains entertaining / valuable, I do not know whether it is Satre or the translator who makes the writing absolutely dreary. b. A lot of jargon and references I could not follow, which was understandable, given that is an essay on ontology. Also, I di ...more

flag 4 likes · Like · see review

Feb 25, 2011 Reed rated it it was ok · review of another edition

Shelves: philos-ethics-metaphysics

Okay...wow. Seriously? Over 600 pages to describe the phenomenology of "being" and "nothingness" (okay, I know he covers other concepts)? What Sartre should have done, in my opinion, is publish the book with only one empty page in it - this would have probably gotten his point across. To be fair, I dig Sartre as a writer and I appreciate his contributions to philosophy and literature, but I have a hard time stomaching this stuff. For my money, Sartre's concept of "bad faith" is probably the most ...more

flag 4 likes · Like · see review

Aug 20, 2019 Pyramids Ubiquitous rated it did not like it · review of another edition

Being and Nothingness represents all that I dislike in Philosophy. It is an overlong and repetitive rendering of simple ideas, which shrouds edifice to the point of not having any practical application. Let me get it straight: nearly none of the ideas presented here are difficult concepts to grasp. Sartre's genius lies in his ability to reword and reappropriate the same basic idea in a multitude of ways, often using purposely misleading and confusing language. The only positives in this tome are ...more

flag 4 likes · Like · see review

Oct 17, 2014 Dhandayutha rated it did not like it · review of another edition

Shelves: 2014, philosophy

The problem i have with Sartre is he have conclusion before even exploring the topic. He only explore it to affirm his conclusion.Whether it be nausea or no exit whatever his idea(conclusion) he only explore it to conclude an imaginary cul-de-sac!

flag 4 likes · Like · see review

Jul 25, 2007 Krissy rated it it was amazing · review of another edition

Recommends it for: the brave

I was 11 the first time I read Sartre. The theory of existentialism in his words made me wiser and more afraid. I am still terrified but would rather be that than oblivious.

flag 4 likes · Like · see review

Mar 26, 2015 Aya Habib rated it it was amazing · review of another edition

Do you like to read words? This book has alot.
Maybe Sartre and I have a connection beyond the limits of consciousness.
This took me a very long time to digest.
What a book!

flag 4 likes · Like · see review

« previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 next »

new topic
Discuss This Book

topics	posts	views	last activity
Goodreads Librari...: Fix title of French book	2	11	Aug 28, 2019 04:38PM
mirrorings	1	6	Jul 05, 2018 03:32AM
Customer service Toll Free Numbers Of Bullguard Antivirus: 1 844 892 4680	1	3	Mar 16, 2017 03:18AM

Readers also enjoyed

See similar books…

Genres

Philosophy

2,730 users

Nonfiction

398 users

Classics

182 users

Cultural > France

110 users

Psychology

59 users

European Literature > French Literature

39 users

Unfinished

37 users

Philosophy > Theory

34 users

Literature > 20th Century

25 users

Literature

24 users

See top shelves…

About Jean-Paul Sartre

Jean-Paul Sartre

8,522 followers

Jean-Paul Charles Aymard Sartre, normally known simply as Jean-Paul Sartre, was a French existentialist philosopher and pioneer, dramatist and screenwriter, novelist and critic. He was a leading figure in 20th century French philosophy.

He declined the award of the 1964 Nobel Prize in Literature "for his work which, rich in ideas and filled with the spirit of freedom and the quest for truth, has ex ...more