The pursuit of authenticity as most existentialist philosophers see it requires a person to be intellectually aware of certain truths of the human condition. To affirm freedom as an ultimate goal, for example, it seems a person must first realize the futility of trying to be at one with himself, of trying to be a thing that does not have to make choices.
When existentialist philosophers criticize a person for his inauthenticity – as they are very fond of doing – they do not seem to fully appreciate that the person may simply not realize he is inauthentic. The person may genuinely believe, knowing no better, that it is possible for him to be at one with himself. He is unlikely, of course, to present his belief to him- self in such intellectual terms. His belief will more likely take the form of a faith in the possibility of satisfying all his desires and achieving com- plete fulfilment. Similarly, if a person is not aware of the existential truth that he is only his being-in-situation then inevitably he will believe he is what he has always been rather than what he has suddenly become. He will believe, for example, that he is a civilian in disguise rather than a soldier, if the role of civilian is all he knew prior to his conscription.
Against this kind of criticism existentialist philosophers will insist that it only takes limited intelligence to recognize the existential truths of the human condition. They are not mysterious truths buried in obscure works of philosophy. Everyday life is a hard lesson in the elu- siveness of satisfaction, the contingency of existence, the immanence of death and so on. If people do not see these existential truths and the implications of these truths, it is not because they are uninformed, but because they refuse to confront them. It is because they are exercising wilful ignorance motivated by cowardice and sustained by bad faith.
In most cases, it is not because people lack the intelligence that they do not see the existential truths of the human condition, but because they do not want to see them. The fact that they do not want to see them implies, of course, that they have already seen them. Having already seen them and having been made terribly anxious at the sight of them they desperately want to avoid seeing them again. The way they avoid seeing them again is by resorting to bad faith.
There was once a woman whose father died. She was the kind of woman who insisted on being carefree and optimistic so when her friends gave her their condolences she replied that she hoped the same thing never happened to them. But, of course, everyone who doesn’t die first suffers their father’s death. If this seems an improper thing to
say then that is due to the influence of bad faith. Finding hard truths offensive is one of the most common expressions of bad faith. As said, bad faith is wilful ignorance. Bad faith is a coping strategy that helps people avoid overwhelming anguish. If this is so then ironically there is a kind of wisdom in the wilful ignorance of people who lack the cour- age to confront the hard truths of the human condition. As they say in Yorkshire, it is wise to be ‘thick ont’ right side’.
If the pursuit of authenticity was necessarily an intellectual project, then only educated people would pursue authenticity, which is certainly not the case. History shows that uneducated people strive to assume their freedom, just as it shows that Heidegger, an expert in the theory of existentialism, gave way to the inauthenticity of anti-Semitism and joined Hitler’s National Socialist Party.
Although the pursuit of authenticity need not necessarily be an intellectual project, some people are, nevertheless, inspired to pursue authenticity as a direct result of studying existentialism. Studying exis- tentialism highlights existential truths, exposes bad faith and empha- sizes the necessity of freedom and responsibility. Studying existentialism can be a process of profound personal enlightenment that influences the very nature of a person’s existence in the world.
In an age when philosophy is often regarded simply as an academic subject alongside other academic subjects, the claim that profound personal enlightenment can result from the study of philosophy sounds grandiose. According to the Ancient Greek founders of Western philosophy, however, achieving personal enlightenment is precisely the point of studying philosophy. The trouble with too many philosophy students and teachers is that they think the point of studying philoso- phy is to get a Philosophy degree and to hell with enlightenment.
For the Ancient Greek philosopher Plato, for example, the purpose of studying philosophy, especially his philosophy, is to achieve knowl- edge of the fundamental truths that enable a person to distinguish appearance from reality. Like Platonism, although its world-view is very different, existentialism offers enlightenment and a way out of the dark cave of ignorance. In his most famous work, The Republic, Plato
compares the process of enlightenment to the ascent of a person from a world of shadows within a cave up into the clear light of day.
This is all well and good but the nagging doubt I raised earlier remains: Can a person become authentic as a result of an intellectual process? Sure, studying philosophy can give him all sorts of noble inten- tions as well as a relatively useful qualification, but doesn’t his thinking, ‘I am authentic,’ immediately spoil whatever authenticity he has attained? As said, a person cannot simply be authentic, he has to con- stantly behave authentically, and thinking he is authentic is not behav- ing authentically. Then again, perhaps my nagging doubt isn’t so serious after all. What is really so wrong with a person who is behaving authen- tically thinking ‘I am behaving authentically at the moment’? Does thinking this really make his action inauthentic? Consider a compara- tive case:–
If, while I’m helping an old lady carry a heavy box up a flight of stairs, I think, ‘This is my good deed for the day,’ does that suddenly make my deed a selfish act? It is just an idle thought. I was once encour- aged to think this idle thought by an old lady who said to me, ‘It’s your good deed for the day young man.’ It seems absurd to suggest the old dear transformed the quality of my action simply by popping this mun- dane thought into my head. Our attitude to our actions is important and can influence the character of what we do, but we shouldn’t always attach too much significance to the casual and arbitrary thoughts that shoot through our minds while we are doing what we do.