Sartre's Nausea and the Metaphysical Enlightenment

Sartre's Nausea is the result of the metaphysical enlightenment. Nietzsche tore away the previous understanding of the world and it's purpose. Realizing that the world has no meaning, morals, or purpose throws Sartre's character, Roquentin, into a whirlwind of attempts to restructure his view of the world. This is a frightening realization compared to pre-metaphysical enlightenment thinking when it was believed that every person and object had meaning and purpose.

The Nausea is his disgust at realizing that everything in the world is accidental and without purpose. The existence of mundane objects nauseates him simply because they exist and exist without a purpose or intention. He feels as if the objects don't even want to exist, but only do so because they were created. His Nausea towards objects becomes so severe that he fears them like "a living beast". He cannot bear to touch or be touched by them because they are not alive and should not have the ability to touch. The "essences" of objects are merely fiction and they have no meaning. Objects are just objects, the meanings and categories humans assign them make life easier, but do not exist in any concrete way. He is nauseated by objects which mean nothing and are nothing without their human assignments.

His Nausea extends to human beings because they are blindly existing with no purpose or meaning. The Nausea even extends to himself as he realizes that he, himself, holds no meaning or significance.

There is also the fear of a world without values or morality which also increases the Nausea. Sartre writes about how incomprehensible a world without morality is. Adjusting to, and living in, a world without values, purpose, or meaning is horrifying. It defies everything that was believed and valued pre-Nietzsche. He is struggling to make sense and overcome the nausea of a world that means nothing.

Sartres analysis of this issue is fundamentally different from Neitszche's, although their conclusions are very similar. Neitzsche's madman proclaiming that "God is dead" is an attempt at shedding light on the same issue that Sartre's Roquentin is: the meaninglessness of life. The difference between their viewpoints is that Neitzsche focused on the realization that society and morality has been created by man, not God, and that society no longer needs God to create meaning. The madman was warning about the implications of such a world where we create our own meaning and validity. Sartre is focusing more on the realization that there is no meaning in people or objects and consequently there is no meaning in the world. He is attempting to address the fact that people are living their lives assigning meaning where there is none instead of realizing that the only meaning in our lives is the meaning we give it.

Sartre proposes to counteract the Nausea by creating meaningful experiences in a meaningless world. His character, Roquentin, concludes that life must be lived as an adventure. He must find things to do and enjoy to give himself purpose and meaning. His conclusion is not that he will live without the Nausea, but rather that he will accept it and realize that it is a part of who he is. He feels a freedom to do and be whatever he desires, but he also feels "crushed" realizing that everything he thought was true about life is not and he must create his own purpose.

Sartre's elucidation of the problem and resolution is flawed. Roquentin's realization of the meaninglessness of objects is understandably startling, but only if by lack of meaning he is referring to lack of metaphysical meaning. The loss of the belief that objects have metaphysical meaning does not logically conclude in the intense feelings of nausea that Roquentin experienced. The objects are not losing their morphological meaning, just their artificial metaphysical one. A book is still a book and was still designed to print words on and be read. Nothing about it's existence or purpose has changed. It still holds the same meaning to Roquentin, other people, and the universe. Consequently, there should be no reason for the level of nausea experienced by Roquentin. Objects are not meaningless, they are simply metaphysically meaningless.

Even morality has a function because human's assigned it the function of maintaining order. It provides comfort and safety and creates meaning in human life. Roquentin does not need to experience the Nausea that he does, he simply needs to shift his understanding of "meaning" away from metaphysical meaning. His ultimate conclusion is along this vein, concluding that humans must assign meaning to their life, but he does not address the fact that humans have been assigning meaning to every object and individual all along. There was no metaphysical force that suddenly stopped creating meaning. There is now and always has been only the meaning created by humans.

The Nausea that he attributes to realizing that life is meaningless is much more understandable. Unlike objects, which were created with innate meaning and purpose by their creators, life has no innate or metaphysical significance. Humans are not created to fulfill needs or functions. Roquentin is exploring a world in which human life means nothing.

Sartre's resolution is the most flawed. He concludes that human's must give their life meaning, but what he neglects to realize is that human's have been giving their life meaning all along. They have also been giving objects and morality meaning. He concludes that he must live with the Nausea and live a life of adventure. This is unnecessary. Instead of remaining nauseated, he need simply to look at the world and realize that the purpose and meanings that humans assign to objects and morality are just as valid as his proposed solution of assigning meaning to life. He need not be as "crushed" as he feels. He simply needs to accept that humans created the meaning in his life, not some metaphysical force. Objects and morality are only meaningless without people. People are meaningless without God. But by assigning meaning to life, we are also assigning meaning to objects, morality, and the universe. If Roquentin were to realize that, he could enjoy his life without the nausea and without mourning the lack of metaphysical significance.