Critique of Dialectical Reason: Difference between revisions

Sartre argues that while the free fusion of many human projects may possibly constitute a Communist society, there is no guarantee of this. Conscious human acts are not projections of freedom that produce human 'temporality', but movements toward 'totalization', their sense being co-determined by existing social conditions. People are thus neither absolutely free to determine the meaning of their acts nor slaves to the circumstances in which they find themselves. Social life does not consist only of individual acts rooted in freedom, since it is also a sedimentation of history by which we are limited and a fight with nature, which imposes further obstacles and causes social relationships to be dominated by [[scarcity]]. Every satisfaction of a need can cause antagonism and make it more difficult for people to accept each other as human beings. Scarcity deprives people of the ability to make particular choices and diminishes their humanity. [[Communism]] will restore the freedom of the individual and his ability to recognize the freedom of others.<ref name="Kołakowski" />

 

From the time the ''Critique of Dialectical Reason'' was published in 1960, there has been much discussion about where it stands in relation to Sartre's earlier, seminal work, ''Being and Nothingness''. Some Sartre scholars and critics, like George Kline, see the work as essentially a repudiation of Sartre's existentialist stance. Marjorie Grene thinks that the ''Critique of Dialectical Reason'' can be readily translated into the categories of ''Being and Nothingness''. [[Hazel Barnes]] and Peter Caws see a shift in emphasis between the two works but not a difference of kind.<ref name="Catalano" /> Barnes observes that the title ''Critique of Dialectical Reason'' "suggests both [[Immanuel Kant|Kant]] and [[Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel|Hegel]]." According to Barnes, the ''Critique of Dialectical Reason'' resembles Kant's ''[[Critique of Pure Reason]]'' in that it is concerned "with the nature, possibilities, and limitations of human reason." She sees this as the only similarity, however, since Sartre's interests are not primarily epistemological or metaphysical and he is more indebted to Hegel than to Kant.<ref name="Search" /> Josef Catalano argues that the ''Critique of Dialectical Reason'' gives a historical and social dimension to the being-for-itself described in ''Being and Nothingness''. Finally, [[Fredric Jameson]] believes that a reading of the Critique forever alters our view of what Sartre meant in ''Being and Nothingness'', that the label "existentialist" as applied to Sartre can no longer have its previous meaning.<ref name="Catalano">{{cite book |author=Catalano, Joseph S. |title=A Commentary on Jean-Paul Sartre's Critique of Dialectical Reason, Volume 1, Theory of Practical Ensembles: |publisher=University of Chicago Press |location=Chicago |year=1986 |pages=6–8 |isbn=978-0-226-09701-5 |oclc= |doi= |accessdate=}}</ref>