Freedom is what every human being clamor for, just as Sartre said that “it is only in freedom that man realizes his being" [1]. Man, beyond being intelligent, is also free in his actions and deliberations in the face of serious or difficult decisions and choices. We can better understand Sartre’s philosophy when we study the background that constitute his philosophy of freedom as well as responsibility. He had a secluded childhood that equally limited his freedom. Besides, the Second World War influenced his view on human freedom. The meaning of human freedom is disclosed in Sartre’s important philosophical treatise of 1943, Being and Nothingness, which was written during the bitter year of World War II in France. After Sartre had been imprisoned and released as a result of ill-health, he became active in the French Resistance Movement. He consequently became a political activist. 

 Freedom

“Freedom is identical with my existence” [1]. Freedom is the object of man’s yearning. From the positive perspective, freedom implies the innate power that is rooted in reason and will, that power that enables one to act or not to act. In other words, to take a deliberate or free- willed action in one's own responsibility. This equally implies the absence of any external social pressures or demands. It refers to the absence of external social pressures and demands. Viewed from the negative side, freedom means 'the absence of constraints' [2]. It has to be noted that constraint is not a term that covers every form of inability. In the words of Ekwutosi, "constraint here means that which prevents one to accomplish that which one wants to and is within one's nature to do"[3]. For Partridge, “Freedom refers primarily to a condition characterized by the absence of coercion or constraints imposed by another person; a man is said to be free to the extent that he can choose his own goals or course of conduct; can choose between alternatives available to him, and is not compelled to act as he would not himself choose to act, or prevented from acting as he would otherwise choose to act, by the will of another man, of the state or of many other authorities" [4].

The term freedom is at the heart of existentialism. Freedom, for the existentialists, is the very structure of the being of man and not just merely a property of the will. Nor do Existentialists make any attempt to prove the reality of human freedom. They see human freedom as the structure of man's being and basic condition of human existence. Sartre conceived freedom as the freedom to choose and not the freedom not to choose. It is not possible for a free being to avoid making choices. “Freedom can also be viewed as the right of the individual to choose between alternatives. The alternatives must be knowable to the individuals who are to choose” [5].

Responsibility

Man’s freedom is inseparably accompanied by a heavy responsibility, for man is responsible for the way he uses his freedom. He is responsible for what he makes of himself. For this responsibility that accompanies freedom, Sartre emphasizes thus; “I am responsible even for the very desire of fleeing my responsibilities” [1]. Man’s radical freedom implies total responsibility without the possibility of any excuse. Man is responsible for what direction he decides to take and whichever way he shapes his own life. No values exist a priori, independently of human freedom. When man sees his freedom radically with its concomitant responsibility, he comes to realize that freedom is a heavy burden. His freedom compels him to assumed to responsibility for his life, for what he makes of himself, and for all his actions. His destiny is in his own hands. Sartre holds that responsibility is the price one has to pay for enjoying one’s freedom, otherwise it would lead to inauthentic life. Responsibility is the necessary consequence of freedom and it also gives freedom its essence. “To be responsible is to render an account of one's actions ... to bear the consequences of one's action; to make good the damage which it may have caused to others, to undergo the sanction which it calls for"[3]. To deny responsibility is to water down the profundity of human freedom. Hence, responsibility here, implies cultivation of consciousness of the fact that one is the author of one’s action. It also means accountability for one’s action. Here, “one becomes somebody and not nobody; a doer - deciding, not being for, self-directed. It is the freedom which consists in being one's own master. It is I who decide and choose"[3].

Bad Faith (Inauthentic Existence)

According to him, freedom is the most fundamental essence of the being-for-itself. His slogan, existence precedes essence connotes that man being essentially free, creates his own existence, that is, makes himself whatever he chooses. This radical freedom gives rise to the possibility of bad faith, which is an attempt on the part of the ‘for-itself’ to choose itself as a being that need not or cannot choose itself [6]. “A person in bad faith avoids responsibility for his embodied situation by denying that it is his situation" [7]. Sartre’s inauthentic existence captures people’s attempt to evade responsibility. This evasion consists in, the denial of the cardinal truth that we are free and responsible whereas authenticity, as the antithesis of inauthenticity, is the acceptance or affirmation of this cardinal truth [6]. The terms “inauthenticity” and “self-deception” provide a holistic and perfect definition of bad faith. In bad faith one realises that one is free but instead adopt a role which masks one's freedom. “The goal of bad faith … is to put oneself out of reach; it is an escape" [6]. Hence, “To the extent that we think that we have succeeded in finding such excuses or justifications”, Sartre argues, “we are in bad faith" [8]. Bad faith is “an attempt to deny our freedom, to see ourselves as products of circumstance" [7].

Kinds of Freedom

We have different kinds of freedom which we shall treat briefly.

Political Freedom

All political systems are concerned with some form of freedom. Nation claim sovereignty or freedom to chart their own course without pressure or hindrance from other nations. Number of individuals who are free vary according to each nation. In a monarchy or dictatorship, only one ruler has power and is therefore free. Aristocracy places power and freedom in the hands of upper class of nobles. In republics and democracies like Nigeria, greater percentage of the citizens are free. Political philosophers used the idea of natural rights to influence their societies in the direction of democracy, in which all citizens will be considered free. Such political philosophers include; John Locke in England, Thomas Jefferson in America, Jean Jacques Rousseau in France and Thomas Hobbes. They held that the chief purpose of government is to protect these natural rights. Political freedom usually operates within a code of law that both limits and protects the freedom of the individual. For instance, the law restricts the citizen’s freedom to harm his neighbour and at the same time guarantees his freedom to live his own life without fear of being harmed by the neighbour. 

Physical Freedom

Consciously, striving beings enjoy their physical freedom to the extent that external material objects does not impede them.it is the absence of any physical coercion or constraints, it involves physical movements and actions. For instance, someone in prison is physically prevented from going anywhere that he wants to go because his movement is highly restricted. Someone forced under gunpoint to eat what is dangerous to his health is deprived of his physical freedom. So here, one is not physically prevented from doing what he wants to do, neither is he compelled to do something against his will.

Moral/Ethical Freedom

Moral systems assert that one is free to choose a particular course of action over another and that he is morally responsible for the choices he makes. Many moral philosophers usually distinguish freedom from license, which is the freedom exercised without regards to its harmful consequences on the person performing the act, on other persons or on the society.

Social Freedom

It is the freedom from social pressure. Unless we have this social freedom, we shall continue to lay blame on others. It was as a result of this that Kwame Nkrumah made this statement, “as long as we are ruled by others, we shall lay our mistakes at their doors, and our sense of responsibility will remain dulled. Freedom breeds responsibility, and our experiences can be enriched only by the acceptance of these responsibilities.”

Religious Freedom

One cannot claim to be free religiously until one is free economically. To be free religiously is to be free from all possible factors that will obstruct one’s genuine religious belief. These factors include; religious chauvinism, wrong pedagogies, emphasis on financial assistance, over familiarity with sacred objects etc. 

 Freedom and Determinism

Sartre says that “the ultimate meaning of determinism is to establish within us an unbroken continuity of existence in itself" [1]. From the above we gather that, whatever might be the situation, human reality is free. “Human reality may be defined as a being, such that in its being, its freedom is at stake because human reality perpetually tries to refuse to recognize its freedom" [1]. But, “the refusal of freedom can be conceived only as an attempt to apprehend oneself as being-in-itself" [1]. Those who affirm that everything has a cause(determinists) hold that we have no free will, thus, “it is extremely doubtful whether the freewill is at all inconsistent with the principle that everything is caused [10]. The essential character of this point is the problem that though man is a free being, his freedom is never absolute but, in some way, limited and determined by some factors outside of him. This led to the assertion by Mondin that ‘Man is free but not unboundedly free’ [11]. In n line with same pattern, Njoku argues, to a certain extent, the individual is free since he can bring about events through his willing or violation. Although that might be the impression that one’s Chi has measured everything, that one is simply a pawn in the hand of fate. On the other hand, there is a fact that one can bargain or negotiate with one’s chi as one does not deny the fact that the world is constituted of human intentions or events brought about by humans. There is then freedom- inwe onwe. It seems however that this freedom coexists with determinism- nkpebi chi (Njoku). Man, in certain situations determines his actions through his free choice, but in some circumstances, he cannot do otherwise. To attain a reasonable mediation and solution between freedom and determinism, we must in a way of conclusion maintain in unison with Dr. Igwemma that, “freedom and determinism are not opposites, but complementary, that is we are not totally free neither are we totally determined. It is because we are determined that we are free…freedom on a large scale depends on determinism…do not exclude each other”.

Man, as an Agent of Freedom

The term “agent” comes from the Latin word agere which means to act. Thus, an agent is that being that acts. According to Sartre, “to act is to modify the shape of the world; it is to arrange means in view of an end...” [1]. As a being that acts, nothing is ready made for man; he can always place certain actions in order to arrive at the desired goal. It is in these senses then that Sartre holds that man is what he makes himself and that man’s “existence is said to precede essence” [1]. According to Sartre, “the indispensable and fundamental condition of all action is freedom of the acting being" [1]. It is known by all that man is an agent and not an instrument, because he is a conscious and rational being. He brings in his own intension, decision and creativity into whatever he does. An affirmation that man is an agent, is an inclusive that man is free because the freedom of the agent is the indispensable and fundamental condition of every action. An agent is a self-determining being.

Existence Precedes Essence

The precedence of existence over essence is one of the fundamental doctrines of existentialism. Also, Sartre’s philosophical stand on human nature dwells much on this doctrine. In order for Sartre to achieve this, he denied the existence of God, “Sartre believes that if there is no god, there is no given human nature precisely because there is no God to have a conception of it" [13]. For he believes that we cannot explain the nature of human beings which is being-for-itself, and that its nature is transcendent and thus cannot and can never be determined, unlike that of being-in-itself, whose essence precedes its existence because it is a manufactured article, and its blue print have already been conceived before the actual creation in the mind of the creator. Thus, the purpose for which it is created precedes its actual existence. Sartre argues and upholds that the existence of man precedes his essence. That is why human beings cannot be predicted because they are transcending towards the future. That is why he said that, “man first of all exists, encounters himself, surge up in the world and defines himself afterwards” [7]. Hence human beings have the capacity of making out for themselves what they want. He further illustrated this by saying that man is thrown into the world neither with his consent nor with any pre-determined nature or purpose. They have freedom to choose whatever they want to be, through which their essence can be determined.

Limits to Freedom and Responsibility

In his Philosophical Anthropology, Mondin defines freedom as “the faculty which man enjoys to determine himself to an action and to being its cause, after having taken consciousness of the considerations that such an action carries for his life" [11]. The last part of this definition makes allusion to responsibility inasmuch as it talks about the consequences one’s action has on one’s life. Mondin goes on to say that freedom is a sublime yet dangerous tool in man’s hand. There is hardly any human achievement without conscious or unconscious reference to an external reality or even internal egoism. Even at the points of choosing to be responsible for the choices made, man shrinks at responsibility. The attitude exhibited does not correspond to the attitude of the free decision made. Man can be limited mentally, physically or even metaphysically. The passions, emotions and drives that move man to choose according to his desires and motives limit him and present him with emotional end instead of ultimate ends. The association of failures which resultantly move man to choosing outside his rational ordeals, often limits the freedom of man.

Physically, there are limitations to human freedom. Instances of flooding, earthquake, disease and disaster would tend to validate the fact of nature’s rebellion. Nature rebelling against its maker suggests either that the planner never planned well or that what he planned has run berserk. Metaphysically, man is determined by some factors beyond his own being. Thus, he cannot but obey or respond to the demands of these factors. An example of these is the natural law, which finds itself in the nature of man, and in fact constitutes the being of man. 

In all, there is an indubitable reality that man is embodied by passion, desire, emotion and drives, which propel him to rush towards accomplishing his ends posited by human freedom. Man is naturally limited to the extent he allowed by the above-mentioned factors. Therefore, one can postulate that man is naturally determined though intermittently allowed freedom. Through the exercise of freedom to choose, man becomes responsible to himself. However, he is not responsible to himself alone. This responsibility extends to others, so that in the end, it becomes universal responsibility. It is good to note, however, that one's universal responsibility does not imply that one is responsible for what one idiot does out there. 

The principle of universalizability would ask such question as, “How will the world be if the maxim of your action becomes a universal rule such that everybody in your shoes performs the same act?” Understood as such, “our responsibility is thus greater than we had supposed” [9]. Another limits to freedom are a type of “determinism which holds that what is going to be has already been fated” [12], and it is not up to a person to change his destiny. (Destiny is another meaning for fatalism.). What is destined to happen cannot but happen?

More so, another form of determinism is the ‘spirit of seriousness. It is an attitude of self-deception which claims that absolute values, right, and wrongs are inscribed in nature and gives a priori. Those who take solace in what Sartre calls bad faith think they have been spared the anguish and the responsibility of making personal choices and decisions since they believe that these have been already made for them and inscribed I nature or in the intelligible sky. Sartre calls such people cowards- ‘those who either in the spirit of seriousness or by deterministic excuse hide from themselves their total freedom I shall called cowards' [1].

There are others who take refuge in passive conformity to social molds. This is another form of determinism that limit freedom, and it means simply following certain pattern of behavior passively in order to conforming to a social image.

Freedom and Ethical Implications

Sartre’s philosophy revolves entirely around the absolute freedom of man. This absolute freedom gives an equal expectation of absolute responsibility to man. According to Sartre, “I can neither seek within myself for an authentic impulse to action, nor can I expect, from some ethic, formulae that will enable me to act" [9]. It is obvious from what we have seen so far that Sartre’s idea of responsibility that authenticates freedom implicitly calls for morality in a sense. Stumpf writes: “What began in Sartre’s analysis as an amoral subjectivism now turns out to be an ethics of strict accountability based upon individual responsibility. If, that is, what we make of ourselves, we have no one to blame for that is what we expected of ourselves" [9].

Like any other philosopher, Sartre has his apparent inconsistencies, shortcomings and appraisals. But that notwithstanding, his philosophy remains undoubtedly that of action, hope, courage and optimism. It aims at making the individual to actualize his authentic existence via his freedom. His philosophy also emphasizes that man has to pattern his life the way he pleases. According to Sartre, each man has an origin and future which he is expected to fulfil by his action. Man distinguishes himself above other beings because of the exercise of his freedom. Freedom is the great power that is given to man who, builds from the scratch as he chooses, freely using the material and situations of life, so as to achieve his own project and give meaning to his own world.

It is therefore important to end in sweep concordance with the existentialists’ claim that man is an open possibility. This implies a person who is in the process of perpetual becoming, and who is capable of becoming whatever he wants to be, though not in a permanent way, because it can never become itself. It is this process of becoming that actually defines its very way of being. No wonder Sartre assigns this being of consciousness a nullifying capacity that devours other beings to fill its emptiness. Thus, man is a continuous becoming. Things need not be what they are, they can be changed, but the change has to be done by the individual himself, not for him. Virtue, they say, lies in the middle. Mediating between these two extremes, namely, limitless freedom and determinism, I therefore argue that even though man is relatively free, he is also sometimes influenced by some determined factors which are beyond his immediate control. For if we are to deny the idea of determinism, it will definitely also question the possibility of the scientific methodology which is based on prediction. On the contrary, if we deny freedom in the world, we indirectly sacrifice our existential reality on the altar of superstition, religious fanaticism and determinism which will lead humanity into the ocean/abyss of their slavery.

1. Sartre, J.P. Being and Nothingness: An Essay on Phenomenological Ontology. Translated by Hazel E.Barnes, Methuen & Co. Ltd., London, 1989.

2. Hospers, J. An Introduction to Philosophical Analysis. Routledge Kegan Paul Ltd., London, 1953.

3. Ekwutosi, C.M. Basic Issues in Ethics. Rex Charles and Patrick, Nimo, 2006.

4. Partridge, P.H. “Freedom.” Encyclopedia of Philosophy, edited by P.Edmard, vols. 3–4, London, 1967.

5. Ewelu, B.I. Unpublished Lecture Notes on “Freedom and Determinism.” Pope John Paul II Major Seminary, Okpuno.

6. Cox, G. Sartre: A Guide for the Perplexed. Continuum International Publishing Group, New York, 2006.

7. Lawhead, W.F. The Voyage of Discovery: A Historical Introduction to Philosophy. 2nd ed., Wadsworth Thomas Learning Group, London, 2002.

8. Levy, N. Sartre. Oneworld Publications, Oxford, 2002.

9. Sartre, J.P. Existentialism and Humanism. Translated by P.Mairet, Methuen, London, 1990.

10. Warnock, M. Ethics Since 1900. Oxford University Press, New York, 1978.

11. Mondin, B. Philosophical Anthropology. Urbaniana University, Rome, 1985.

12. Ewelu, B.I. “Man: A Creature That Goes on Creating.” Edited by C.Umezinwa, Afro-Orbis Publishing Company Ltd., Nsukka, 2011.

13. Stumpf, S.E. Philosophy: History and Problems. Book Company, New York, 1994.