Sartre and other existentialists assert that existence precedes essence—that we first exist, and only then determine who we are. To them, true freedom means creating our own identity without any other determination. We cannot have an essence given to us by God as our Creator. Authenticity requires that we be the sole authors of our essence, entirely self-defined and uncaused.
This idea dominates much of our culture today, particularly in radical views of sexuality and gender. The demand to “be true to yourself” is often framed as absolute, with no regard for God as Creator and determiner. According to this view, nothing about human nature—biological or moral—should limit self-expression. If God determines good and evil for humans then we are not truly free, we are coerced.
For many, they can’t even conceive of a different definition of “free will”; this is just what “free” must mean. The materialist accepts that assumption and says, “Then we can’t be free because there are no uncaused events and every choice is an event with a cause.” But neither of them can explain why we would ever want this definition of free to be true, except it is their rebellion against God. They recognize that this kind of freedom cannot be real if God exists and so they hate God.
But this philosophy isn’t new. It’s the same old refusal to accept our creatureliness, the same desire from the beginning: I must be my own authority, my own determiner, or I cannot truly live. It blurs the line between God and man, insisting that to be free, we must be our own creators—we must be as God.
At least the existentialists acknowledge they are working with a full-fledged competing system against theism. The real question is: is it possible to be contingent, exist, but have no essence and thus be uncaused in your choices? No, it is logically impossible. This is why those who hold this view of freedom also end up denying reason: to be truly free, they say, you must go beyond reason itself because otherwise your beliefs are determined by something outside of you.
In the end, existentialism always becomes a non-cognitive assertion.
Leave a Reply