Human freedom contradicts the existence of a god

This argument is used in the debate : Does God exist?.

This argument is a “con” argument in the debate : Does God exist?.

Summary

For Sartre, man does not correspond to what he should be if God had created him: he should have finalities inscribed in him, have been made to achieve a goal, conform to a Law. But "if man [...] cannot be defined, it is because he is first of all nothing. Only then will he be, and he will be as he has become. Thus, there is no human nature, since there is no God to conceive it. Man is not only as he conceives himself, but as he wills himself" ("Existentialism is a humanism"). Unlike a washing machine, man does not have a "good program" for use; if God existed, God would limit this situation of man open to all possibilities and making himself. The religious conception is wrong, because man creates himself within a horizon of possibilities.

Quotes

« If God does not exist, there is a being in whom existence precedes essence, a being that exists before it can be defined by any concept, and this being is man [...]. What does it mean here that existence precedes essence? It means that man first exists, encounters himself, arises in the world, and then defines himself. If man, as existentialism conceives him, is not definable, it's because he is first of all nothing. He will only be afterwards, and will only be as he has made himself. Thus, there is no human nature, because there is no God to conceive it. Man is not only as he conceives himself, but as he wills himself, and as he conceives himself after existence [...], as he wills himself after this impulse towards existence, man is nothing other than as he makes himself. »

Jean-Paul Sartre, Existentialism is a humanism

« Template:Citation »

Author not provided

References

Justifications

Human freedom cannot be reconciled with divine omnipotence

Objections

Parent debate

renameEdit