Should One Go to War or Not? a Study of Sartre's Student and Austin's Plea for Excuses

Sartre's essay "Existentialism and Humanism" tells the story of a pupil who is given a choice to avenge an elder brother who was killed in the German offensive of 1940 or stay with his mother at home. The student consults with Sartre who advises that the weight of any judgment is in the performance of the action chosen and that one must trust his instincts.

The student has a free choice to make because there is no means of excusing his actions one way or another which rests in the decision itself. If the student stays at home with his mother, his decision is based upon personal devotion and the results would be concrete and immediate. If the student joins the military to satisfy his "burning to avenge" the death of his brother, there may be an infinitely greater end with a nationally collective goal, however, the end would be ambiguous at best and may be frustrated along the way. Whatever the student decides, Sartre says, the student will find a way to justify the decision which creates a kind of subjective "vicious circle" where the student "exists first and defines himself afterwards".

Sartre explains that true existentialism is a doctrine which affirms that every truth and every action imply both an environment and human subjectivity or choice. Rather than blame "human nature" or the essence of man, society enacts rules to constrain behavior. Existentialism believes that existence comes before essence and that we begin from the subjective. Where one does not believe that God exists, then everything is permitted and one cannot explain or justify one's actions by reference to some outside influence. Man would be free with no means for justification or excuse. Sartre says we are tempted to flee from the reality that we are free to choose our destiny, because to acknowledge this would mean that we ourselves decide our being.

In J. L. Austin's essay, "A Plea for Excuses" in the book Philosophical Papers, the term "excuse" in relation to its meaning as a reason for conduct is further examined. While Sartre claims any cause of events is our own, Austin looks at models of how things happen or are done. If one is going to blame or disapprove of a course of action taken, then we need to better understand the student's justification or excuse in which the choice was made.

Sartre outlines the ambivalence and subjectivity of action, however, Austin tells us we need a fuller description of the event in its context by examining intentions, motives and conventions which are acceptable and unacceptable. Did the student use his intelligence and"due care" when deciding? Was there a true appreciation of the situation?

Austin claims that in military life it is most difficult to do so when there are so many variables involved and where a person's actions are being coerced or directed by others. How much planning, resolve and control of execution is involved in the decision? Are the actions rule-governed or invoked by some kind of guiding principle like "family comes first"? If the student's decision rests on some kind of obligation or influence, one would need to question how voluntarily or freely he acted. Any plea, defense or justification of behavior cannot evade responsibility or have been decided unwillingly or reluctantly, otherwise, it would not be true choice.

Rather than making excuses whereby people say "almost anything to get off," as Austin puts it, the excuse should be founded on a deliberate, purposeful and considerate decision after weighing the consequences, results and outcomes of the decision.

When someone makes a thoughtless mistake, commits a clumsy accident, or even acts compulsively or in a displaced manner, we do not usually assign blame or disapproval about the decision depending upon whether the action was done in a certain way. Austin uses the example of people accidentally stepping on snails on the sidewalk, who would otherwise be held responsible if they did not exercise care if they stepped on a baby instead. That kind of action would imply some kind of abnormal failure in judgment which is precisely the reason why we would want to flee or disguise ourselves from the reality of freedom in our actions and decisions. If we accept that there are some actions for which there are no acceptable excuses, than we must accept accountability which extends beyond some exterior authority (God) or internal consciousness (Kant).

In the movie "Saving Private Ryan," the son decides to stay and fight with his comrades so that they can all go home to their mothers. Going against military orders, the platoon decides to fight collectively for the good of the whole. Since Private Ryan rested his decision on the collective beliefs and benefit of them all, rather than simply on what was best only for himself, he was able to make a free choice which he could justify not only in his own eyes, but in the eyes of everyone. Sartre's student should also look to the greater good.