CAT ARTICLE DOSE – 26

Existentialism, a philosophy that dwells in the complex realm of humanities, presents itself as an intricate
labyrinth of paradoxes and intricate questions revolving around human existence. It propels us into an
exploration of our bare self, a journey bereft of societal norms, religious dogmas, or any external constructs that
often frame our understanding of life. At the crux of this exploratory terrain lie two intertwined concepts—
freedom and responsibility, seemingly contradictory yet inextricably connected. These concepts are not mere
philosophical postulates. Instead, they take tangible form in the divergent perspectives of two intellectual
heavyweights—the French philosopher Jean-Paul Sartre and the Russian novelist Fyodor Dostoevsky. Their
philosophies serve as different lenses, each revealing a unique aspect of existentialism and providing a distinct
understanding of the human condition.

Jean-Paul Sartre's existentialism positions freedom as the central pillar upon which human existence is built.
Sartre's existentialist philosophy revolves around a revolutionary assertion—"existence precedes essence." This
proposition drastically deviates from traditional philosophical and theological perspectives, which contend that
humans come into being with a predetermined essence. This essence, according to classical notions, acts as a
blueprint, guiding individuals along the course of life. Sartre boldly refutes such deterministic viewpoints. He
advocates that humans first exist, devoid of any inherent essence or nature. They subsequently define their
essence through their actions and choices. Hence, individuals find themselves adrift in a vast ocean of radical
freedom, untethered by any preordained nature, divine dictation, or societal shackles. However, Sartre warns,
this unbounded liberty is not synonymous with unmitigated joy; instead, it brings with it existential angst and a
profound sense of disquiet.

This untrammelled freedom proposed by Sartre carries with it an onerous companion—the hefty burden of
responsibility. If individuals are the artisans of their essence, fashioning their own existence through their
decisions and actions, then they must bear the brunt of their choices. As Sartre profoundly stated, "We are
condemned to be free," a phrase that encapsulates the paradoxical nature of human freedom. It is as much a
blessing as it is a condemnation. Every decision an individual makes, every step they take, serves as a testament
to their self-determined essence. Consequently, the repercussions of these choices become the sole
responsibility of the individuals themselves. This philosophy forms the bedrock of Sartre's theory of 'bad faith' or
'self-deception,' which emerges when individuals shirk their freedom and evade responsibility, plunging
themselves into a life marked by inauthenticity and existential despair.

Opposing Sartre's perspective, we have Fyodor Dostoevsky, whose literary works serve as fertile grounds for
delving into existential themes. Unlike Sartre, Dostoevsky provides a profound and intricate portrayal of the
human spirit, delving into the psychological complexities and moral dilemmas that define our existence. A case in
point is the provocative proclamation in "The Brothers Karamazov" - "If God does not exist, everything is
permitted." Through these words, Dostoevsky conjures a world bereft of divine oversight, a world where moral
freedom holds sway. However, the implications of such unfettered moral freedom are as myriad as they are
complex. In the absence of a divine moral compass, society could spiral into moral anarchy, with individuals,
unbound by fear of divine retribution, giving free rein to their desires. On the flip side, the absence of divine
oversight could instill an acute sense of responsibility, as humans would then have to grapple with the full weight
of their moral choices without the ability to defer accountability onto a higher power. Dostoevsky, thus, stirs a
profound introspection on human morality—is our moral conduct an innate quality, or does it depend on divine
oversight and the prospect of divine punishment?

[Turn to the next page to check your comprehension & analysis]

Page 1 of 9
PASSAGE DETAILS
• Length of the Extract: 604 words
• Flesch Kincaid Grade Level: 14.7
• Genre: Philosophical Discourse

MIND MAPS

After carefully reading the passage, evaluate your understanding through the following exercises:

1. Comprehension Check: This part is focused on identifying and summarising the main ideas in the passage.
Look for pivotal sentences or groups of sentences that encapsulate the core themes in each paragraph.
Summarise these main ideas using your own words. Your goal is to capture the essence of the passage
accurately.

2. Reasoning Check: In this part, you’ll engage with questions centred on inference and critical reasoning.
These questions will require you to analyse the logic and arguments presented in the passage and make
inferential deductions. Reflect on the strength of the reasoning, assess the evidence provided, and evaluate if
the conclusions drawn are well-supported.

Upon completing each exercise, review the provided answers to gauge your comprehension and reasoning
performance. This is a valuable opportunity to enhance your critical reading skills.”

Page 2 of 9
COMPREHENSION CHECK
“In this exercise, your task is to identify the key sentence or group of sentences in each paragraph that best encapsulates
its main idea. Once you’ve identified these, provide a concise summary of the principal theme or message conveyed in each
paragraph. Remember, your goal is to effectively distil the essence of the paragraph using the key sentences and your own
summarisation.”
KEY IDEA
[1] Existentialism, a philosophy that dwells in the complex realm of humanities, presents itself as an
intricate labyrinth of paradoxes and intricate questions revolving around human existence. [2] It
propels us into an exploration of our bare self, a journey bereft of societal norms, religious dogmas,
or any external constructs that often frame our understanding of life. [3] At the crux of this
exploratory terrain lie two intertwined concepts—freedom and responsibility, seemingly
contradictory yet inextricably connected. [4] These concepts are not mere philosophical postulates.
[5] Instead, they take tangible form in the divergent perspectives of two intellectual heavyweights—
the French philosopher Jean-Paul Sartre and the Russian novelist Fyodor Dostoevsky. [6] Their
philosophies serve as different lenses, each revealing a unique aspect of existentialism and
providing a distinct understanding of the human condition.

[7] Jean-Paul Sartre's existentialism positions freedom as the central pillar upon which human
existence is built. [8] Sartre's existentialist philosophy revolves around a revolutionary assertion—
"existence precedes essence." [9] This proposition drastically deviates from traditional
philosophical and theological perspectives, which contend that humans come into being with a
predetermined essence. [10] This essence, according to classical notions, acts as a blueprint,
guiding individuals along the course of life. [11] Sartre boldly refutes such deterministic viewpoints.
[12] He advocates that humans first exist, devoid of any inherent essence or nature. [13] They
subsequently define their essence through their actions and choices. [14] Hence, individuals find
themselves adrift in a vast ocean of radical freedom, untethered by any preordained nature, divine
dictation, or societal shackles. [15] However, Sartre warns, this unbounded liberty is not
synonymous with unmitigated joy; instead, it brings with it existential angst and a profound sense of
disquiet.

[16] This untrammelled freedom proposed by Sartre carries with it an onerous companion—the
hefty burden of responsibility. [17] If individuals are the artisans of their essence, fashioning their
own existence through their decisions and actions, then they must bear the brunt of their choices.
[18] As Sartre profoundly stated, "We are condemned to be free," a phrase that encapsulates the
paradoxical nature of human freedom. It is as much a blessing as it is a condemnation. [19] Every
decision an individual makes, every step they take, serves as a testament to their self-determined
essence. [20] Consequently, the repercussions of these choices become the sole responsibility of
the individuals themselves. [21] This philosophy forms the bedrock of Sartre's theory of 'bad faith'
or 'self-deception,' which emerges when individuals shirk their freedom and evade responsibility,
plunging themselves into a life marked by inauthenticity and existential despair.

[22] Opposing Sartre's perspective, we have Fyodor Dostoevsky, whose literary works serve as
fertile grounds for delving into existential themes. [23] Unlike Sartre, Dostoevsky provides a
profound and intricate portrayal of the human spirit, delving into the psychological complexities and
moral dilemmas that define our existence. [24] A case in point is the provocative proclamation in
"The Brothers Karamazov" - "If God does not exist, everything is permitted." [25] Through these
words, Dostoevsky conjures a world bereft of divine oversight, a world where moral freedom holds
sway. [26] However, the implications of such unfettered moral freedom are as myriad as they are
complex. [27] In the absence of a divine moral compass, society could spiral into moral anarchy,
with individuals, unbound by fear of divine retribution, giving free rein to their desires. [28] On the
flip side, the absence of divine oversight could instill an acute sense of responsibility, as humans
would then have to grapple with the full weight of their moral choices without the ability to defer
accountability onto a higher power. [29] Dostoevsky, thus, stirs a profound introspection on human
morality—is our moral conduct an innate quality, or does it depend on divine oversight and the
prospect of divine punishment?

[Check your answers on the next page]

Page 3 of 9
 KEY IDEA
[1] Existentialism, a philosophy that dwells in the complex realm of humanities, presents itself as an The central exploration of
intricate labyrinth of paradoxes and intricate questions revolving around human existence. [2] It existentialism revolves around the
propels us into an exploration of our bare self, a journey bereft of societal norms, religious dogmas, concepts of freedom and
or any external constructs that often frame our understanding of life. [3] At the crux of this responsibility, offering insights
exploratory terrain lie two intertwined concepts—freedom and responsibility, seemingly into these themes via the
contradictory yet inextricably connected. [4] These concepts are not mere philosophical postulates. philosophies of Sartre and
[5] Instead, they take tangible form in the divergent perspectives of two intellectual heavyweights— Dostoevsky.
the French philosopher Jean-Paul Sartre and the Russian novelist Fyodor Dostoevsky. [6] Their
philosophies serve as different lenses, each revealing a unique aspect of existentialism and
providing a distinct understanding of the human condition.

[7] Jean-Paul Sartre's existentialism positions freedom as the central pillar upon which human Sartre's existentialism places
existence is built. [8] Sartre's existentialist philosophy revolves around a revolutionary assertion— radical freedom at the core of
"existence precedes essence." [9] This proposition drastically deviates from traditional human existence, suggesting that
philosophical and theological perspectives, which contend that humans come into being with a humans create their own essence
predetermined essence. [10] This essence, according to classical notions, acts as a blueprint, through actions and choices,
guiding individuals along the course of life. [11] Sartre boldly refutes such deterministic viewpoints. although this leads to existential
[12] He advocates that humans first exist, devoid of any inherent essence or nature. [13] They anxiety.
subsequently define their essence through their actions and choices. [14] Hence, individuals find
themselves adrift in a vast ocean of radical freedom, untethered by any preordained nature, divine
dictation, or societal shackles. [15] However, Sartre warns, this unbounded liberty is not
synonymous with unmitigated joy; instead, it brings with it existential angst and a profound sense of
disquiet.

[16] This untrammelled freedom proposed by Sartre carries with it an onerous companion—the The notion of freedom in Sartre's
hefty burden of responsibility. [17] If individuals are the artisans of their essence, fashioning their philosophy is intricately tied to
own existence through their decisions and actions, then they must bear the brunt of their choices. responsibility, with the avoidance
[18] As Sartre profoundly stated, "We are condemned to be free," a phrase that encapsulates the of both leading to 'bad faith' and
paradoxical nature of human freedom. It is as much a blessing as it is a condemnation. [19] Every existential despair.
decision an individual makes, every step they take, serves as a testament to their self-determined
essence. [20] Consequently, the repercussions of these choices become the sole responsibility of
the individuals themselves. [21] This philosophy forms the bedrock of Sartre's theory of 'bad faith'
or 'self-deception,' which emerges when individuals shirk their freedom and evade responsibility,
plunging themselves into a life marked by inauthenticity and existential despair.

[22] Opposing Sartre's perspective, we have Fyodor Dostoevsky, whose literary works serve as Dostoevsky's perspective
fertile grounds for delving into existential themes. [23] Unlike Sartre, Dostoevsky provides a contrasts Sartre's, exploring the
profound and intricate portrayal of the human spirit, delving into the psychological complexities and moral implications and
moral dilemmas that define our existence. [24] A case in point is the provocative proclamation in complexities of human existence,
"The Brothers Karamazov" - "If God does not exist, everything is permitted." [25] Through these particularly in the context of a
words, Dostoevsky conjures a world bereft of divine oversight, a world where moral freedom holds world devoid of divine oversight.
sway. [26] However, the implications of such unfettered moral freedom are as myriad as they are
complex. [27] In the absence of a divine moral compass, society could spiral into moral anarchy,
with individuals, unbound by fear of divine retribution, giving free rein to their desires. [28] On the
flip side, the absence of divine oversight could instill an acute sense of responsibility, as humans
would then have to grapple with the full weight of their moral choices without the ability to defer
accountability onto a higher power. [29] Dostoevsky, thus, stirs a profound introspection on human
morality—is our moral conduct an innate quality, or does it depend on divine oversight and the
prospect of divine punishment?

[More Analysis on the next page]

Page 4 of 9
Central Theme: The passage explores existentialism's nuanced philosophy, focusing on the intertwined concepts of
freedom and responsibility through the lens of two prominent figures—Jean-Paul Sartre and Fyodor Dostoevsky.

Tone: The tone of the passage is informative, insightful, and introspective. It seeks to explain and explore complex
existentialist ideas and their impact on understanding human existence.

Structure of the Passage: The passage begins with a general introduction of existentialism, emphasizing the key concepts
of freedom and responsibility (Para 1). It then delves into Jean-Paul Sartre's interpretation of these concepts, focusing on his
belief that "existence precedes essence" and discussing the implications of radical freedom (Para 2). The author continues
with Sartre's view, further exploring the inherent responsibility that accompanies this freedom and its potential pitfalls, such
as 'bad faith' or 'self-deception' (Para 3). Finally, the passage contrasts Sartre's perspective with that of Fyodor Dostoevsky,
whose philosophical ideas prompt readers to consider the moral implications of freedom and responsibility in a world without
divine oversight (Para 4)

[Check your Reasoning on the next page]

Page 5 of 9
REASONING CHECK
Choose the best alternatives for each of the 7 questions.

Question 1:
"At the crux of this exploratory terrain lie two intertwined concepts—freedom and responsibility, seemingly contradictory yet
inextricably connected." Why are they contradictory and how are they connected?
A. Freedom implies the absence of limitations and constraints, a space where an individual can make independent choices,
which contrasts with the idea of responsibility, signifying the obligation to answer for one's actions. They are connected
as the exercise of freedom necessitates the acceptance of the consequences, thus invoking responsibility.
B. Freedom implies a state of complete autonomy and sovereignty, whereas responsibility suggests an inherent lack of
control or power. They are connected through the fact that the exercise of personal freedom automatically triggers the
assumption of responsibility for the outcomes.
C. Freedom refers to the capability of individuals to act according to their own discretion, while responsibility implies an
obligation to conform to societal norms and expectations. They are interconnected as an individual's actions (freedom)
lead to consequences for which they must be accountable (responsibility).

Question 2:
"Existence precedes essence." Which one of the following statements is most aligned with this assertion?
A. Human beings first exist, and through their actions and choices, they create their essence or nature.
B. Humans are born with a predetermined essence that shapes their existence and future actions.
C. Human beings first exist, but their essence or nature is determined by the societal and cultural norms they grow up with.

Question 3:
"However, Sartre warns, this unbounded liberty is not synonymous with unmitigated joy; instead, it brings with it existential
angst and a profound sense of disquiet." What is the essence of this statement?
A. Existentialism is characterised by an experience of limitless freedom, which frequently results in a state of contentment
and fulfilment as a result of a plethora of available options..
B. The unfettered freedom in existentialism, far from generating pure happiness, induces existential anxiety and deep
unease as individuals grapple with the weight of their choices and their consequences.
C. Because it frees a person from all societal and religious constraints, the absolute freedom that can be attained through
existentialism is, in essence, the secret to achieving profound peace.

Question 4:
The passage mentions Sartre's theory of 'bad faith' or 'self-deception,'. What can we infer about the crux of this theory?
A. According to this line of thinking, human beings can free themselves from the consequences of their actions by
distancing themselves from the decisions they make and placing the blame on external factors.
B. 'Bad faith' or 'self-deception' suggests that an individual, by choosing not to acknowledge their freedom and evade
responsibility, risks living an inauthentic and despair-ridden life.
C. According to the 'bad faith' or'self-deception' theory, people frequently deceive themselves about who they are and how
they behave in order to have a life that is more successful and enjoyable.

Question 5:
"We are condemned to be free." What does this statement mean?
A. This phrase conveys the idea that the very act of having the freedom to choose our own actions can be seen as a form
of torment due to the inherent constraints that exist on our decision-making capabilities.
B. The statement refers to the unavoidable condition of human freedom, indicating that freedom is a double-edged sword -
a gift that also brings with it the burdensome responsibility for our choices and actions.
C. The proclamation gives the impression that freedom is a constraining condition that is imposed upon us and prevents us
from following a life path that is both predetermined and uncomplicated.

[Contd…]

Page 6 of 9
Question 6:
"If God does not exist, everything is permitted." What is Dostoevsky trying to communicate through this statement?
A. The declaration suggests that the absence of a divine entity leads to a chaotic society where individuals are bound by no
moral laws.
B. Dostoevsky is conveying that without the belief in God, society becomes highly structured, adhering strictly to moral
principles.
C. Dostoevsky is proposing that if God does not exist, people would lose their freedom and would be forced to live under
stringent moral laws.

Question 7:
"does it depend on divine oversight and the prospect of divine punishment?" what is the purpose of this question?
A. The purpose of this question is to establish the importance of divine supervision and punishment for the preservation of
moral order and social control in human society.
B. The purpose of this question is to make the claim that when people aren't afraid of being punished by a divine being,
they are more likely to engage in unethical and immoral behaviour.
C. This question is posed to provoke introspection about the origins and foundations of our moral conduct - whether it's an
innate quality or dependent on the fear of divine retribution.

[Answers on the next page]

Page 7 of 9
Question 1:
"At the crux of this exploratory terrain lie two intertwined concepts—freedom and responsibility, seemingly contradictory yet inextricably
connected." Why are they contradictory and how are they connected?
A. Freedom implies the absence of limitations and constraints, a space where an individual can make independent choices, which
contrasts with the idea of responsibility, signifying the obligation to answer for one's actions. They are connected as the exercise of
freedom necessitates the acceptance of the consequences, thus invoking responsibility.
B. Freedom implies a state of complete autonomy and sovereignty, whereas responsibility suggests an inherent lack of control or power.
They are connected through the fact that the exercise of personal freedom automatically triggers the assumption of responsibility for
the outcomes.
C. Freedom refers to the capability of individuals to act according to their own discretion, while responsibility implies an obligation to
conform to societal norms and expectations. They are interconnected as an individual's actions (freedom) lead to consequences for
which they must be accountable (responsibility).

Option A is correct as it precisely defines freedom as the capacity to make choices independently and responsibility as being accountable
for those choices. It emphasizes the interconnection of these two concepts: freedom begets responsibility.
Option B incorrectly suggests that responsibility denotes an inherent lack of control, which is not the case. Responsibility refers to the
obligation to accept the consequences of one's actions, not a lack of control or power.
Option C, though subtly nuanced, inaccurately implies that responsibility is tied primarily to societal norms and expectations. While societal
norms may influence our sense of responsibility, they do not define it in its entirety.

Question 2:
"Existence precedes essence." Which one of the following statements is most aligned with this assertion?
A. Human beings first exist, and through their actions and choices, they create their essence or nature.
B. Humans are born with a predetermined essence that shapes their existence and future actions.
C. Human beings first exist, but their essence or nature is determined by the societal and cultural norms they grow up with.

Option A is correct as it resonates with Sartre's existentialist claim that existence precedes essence, indicating that humans first exist, and
then, through their actions and choices, define their essence.
Option B is incorrect because it directly contradicts Sartre's claim by proposing a predetermined essence guiding human actions and
existence.
Option C, although nuanced, incorrectly suggests that societal and cultural norms primarily determine a person's essence or nature, which
deviates from Sartre's assertion that individuals define their essence through their own actions and choices.

Question 3:
"However, Sartre warns, this unbounded liberty is not synonymous with unmitigated joy; instead, it brings with it existential angst and a
profound sense of disquiet." What is the essence of this statement?
A. Existentialism is characterised by an experience of limitless freedom, which frequently results in a state of contentment and fulfilment
as a result of a plethora of available options..
B. The unfettered freedom in existentialism, far from generating pure happiness, induces existential anxiety and deep unease as
individuals grapple with the weight of their choices and their consequences.
C. Because it frees a person from all societal and religious constraints, the absolute freedom that can be attained through existentialism
is, in essence, the secret to achieving profound peace.

Option B is correct as it echoes the statement's essence that unbounded liberty in existentialism brings existential angst and a profound
sense of disquiet.
Option A and C are incorrect as they imply that absolute freedom leads to fulfillment, contentment, and profound peace, which directly
contradicts Sartre's warning of existential anxiety and deep unease resulting from unbounded liberty.

Question 4:
The passage mentions Sartre's theory of 'bad faith' or 'self-deception,'. What can we infer about the crux of this theory?
A. According to this line of thinking, human beings can free themselves from the consequences of their actions by distancing themselves
from the decisions they make and placing the blame on external factors.
B. 'Bad faith' or 'self-deception' suggests that an individual, by choosing not to acknowledge their freedom and evade responsibility, risks
living an inauthentic and despair-ridden life.
C. According to the 'bad faith' or'self-deception' theory, people frequently deceive themselves about who they are and how they behave
in order to have a life that is more successful and enjoyable.

Option B correctly encapsulates the crux of Sartre's theory of 'bad faith' or 'self-deception,' which states that individuals living in denial of
their freedom and shirking responsibility lead inauthentic lives marked by existential despair.
Option A misrepresents the theory by suggesting that it allows for an escape from the consequences of one's actions, which contradicts the
existential premise of freedom and responsibility.
Option C is incorrect as it implies that self-deception results in a more fulfilling life, which is inconsistent with Sartre's view of 'bad faith'
leading to inauthenticity and despair.

[Contd…]

Page 8 of 9
Question 5:
"We are condemned to be free." What does this statement mean?
A. This phrase conveys the idea that the very act of having the freedom to choose our own actions can be seen as a form of torment due
to the inherent constraints that exist on our decision-making capabilities.
B. The statement refers to the unavoidable condition of human freedom, indicating that freedom is a double-edged sword - a gift that also
brings with it the burdensome responsibility for our choices and actions.
C. The proclamation gives the impression that freedom is a constraining condition that is imposed upon us and prevents us from following
a life path that is both predetermined and uncomplicated.

Option B is correct because it captures the essence of the statement, highlighting the inevitable nature of human freedom and the
consequent responsibility that accompanies it.
Option A is incorrect as it implies that freedom is a punishment due to the inherent limitation of our abilities, which is not the core meaning
of the statement.
Option C is incorrect as it suggests that freedom is an oppressive condition that restrains us from pursuing a predetermined life, which
contradicts the existentialist perspective of freedom.

Question 6:
"If God does not exist, everything is permitted." What is Dostoevsky trying to communicate through this statement?
A. The declaration suggests that the absence of a divine entity leads to a chaotic society where individuals are bound by no moral laws.
B. Dostoevsky is conveying that without the belief in God, society becomes highly structured, adhering strictly to moral principles.
C. Dostoevsky is proposing that if God does not exist, people would lose their freedom and would be forced to live under stringent moral
laws.

Option A is correct as it aligns with Dostoevsky's suggestion that without a divine entity, moral anarchy could ensue as individuals are not
bound by any moral laws.
Option B is incorrect because it implies a strict adherence to moral principles in the absence of God, which contradicts Dostoevsky's
assertion.
Option C is also incorrect as it suggests a loss of freedom and imposition of stringent moral laws without God, which is not what Dostoevsky
is conveying.

Question 7:
"does it depend on divine oversight and the prospect of divine punishment?" what is the purpose of this question?
A. The purpose of this question is to establish the importance of divine supervision and punishment for the preservation of moral order
and social control in human society.
B. The purpose of this question is to make the claim that when people aren't afraid of being punished by a divine being, they are more
likely to engage in unethical and immoral behaviour.
C. This question is posed to provoke introspection about the origins and foundations of our moral conduct - whether it's an innate quality
or dependent on the fear of divine retribution.

Option C correctly identifies the purpose of the question as inciting introspection on the nature of our moral conduct.
Option A is incorrect as it presumes the necessity of divine oversight and punishment, which the question does not assume but rather asks
to ponder upon.
Option B is also incorrect as it prematurely concludes that without divine punishment, humans are likely to behave immorally, a statement
the question does not assert but rather invites consideration on.

Page 9 of 9