Sartre's Existentialism Is a Humanism › The Student's Dilemma

The most famous passage in *Existentialism Is a Humanism* concerns a student who came to Sartre for advice during the German occupation of France. The student faced an agonizing choice: should he stay with his mother, who lived only for him and would be devastated by his departure, or should he leave to join the Free French forces and fight against the occupation? Traditional moral frameworks offered no clear guidance. Kantian ethics told him to act according to universalizable maxims, but which maxim? "Always support your mother" and "Always fight injustice" are both universalizable. Christian ethics told him to love his neighbor, but who is his neighbor? His mother, or his compatriots suffering under occupation? Utilitarian calculations were impossible: how do you weigh the certain good he could do for his mother against the uncertain contribution he might make to the war effort? Sartre's point is not that the student should have ignored these frameworks. No framework could make the decision for him. He had to choose, and in choosing, he would define what kind of person he was and what he valued most. The frameworks could inform his deliberation, but they could not substitute for the act of decision. When the student asked Sartre what he should do, Sartre replied: "You are free, therefore choose, that is to say, invent." There is no general formula. There is only the concrete situation and the person who must decide. This is not moral relativism. Sartre is not saying that any choice is as good as any other. He is saying that the goodness of a choice cannot be determined in advance by appeal to abstract principles. It is constituted by the commitment, authenticity, and responsibility with which the choice is made.