11 Sartre’s Bad Faith

Climate change raises existential questions about where personal freedom and responsibility lie. Many people feel alienated or powerless in the face of climate change, but Sartre’s concept of Bad Faith may offer a way to move beyond this anxiety.

Existentialists like Sartre argue that individuals are “condemned to be free,”^[1] meaning we cannot escape responsibility for our actions, even when our problems seem impossible. Climate change compels us to confront the choices we make regarding energy consumption, lifestyle, and resource use. This creates tension between personal experiences and our shared responsibility for the planet’s future. Climate change goes beyond a simple “belief question” about whether climate change is true or not. Regardless of our stance, the reality remains: we must address the phenomenon, and ignoring it is certainly not a solution. So how can we address the phenomenon and understand how climate change impacts our experience of the world? That is where existentialism jumps in!

Existentialism in a nutshell

Existentialism is a philosophical movement that emphasizes individual freedom, choice, and subjective experience in a world often perceived as indifferent or absurd. Rooted in the belief that human existence precedes essence, existentialism reasons that individuals are not born with a predetermined purpose but must create their own meaning through their actions and decisions. This philosophy emerged in the 19th and 20th centuries, with influential figures such as Kierkegaard, Nietzsche, Sartre, and Heidegger contributing to its development.

At its core, existentialism grapples with questions of existence, freedom, and the human condition. It challenges traditional views of a fixed human nature, instead focusing on the idea that we determine our own purpose and meaning in life. Without inherent meaning or external authority dictating moral choices, individuals must confront the nothingness of existence and craft their own values and purpose.

Existentialism in contemporary uses has influenced comparative and environmental philosophy. Interpreting existence in a different way to substance ontology and metaphysical dualism provides room to look beyond those concepts and provides an opportunity to tackle our environmental crisis. From an existentialist’s point of view, we need to undergo an ontological transformation do that the environment (and the Earth) becomes part of our self-understanding.

SaRtre’s Bad Faith as a Philosophical tool

Jean-Paul Sartre (1905–1980) was a French philosopher, but also a playwright, novelist, and one of the leading figures in 20th-century existentialism. His work has had a lasting impact on philosophy, literature, and political thought, addressing the nature of human existence, freedom, and responsibility. Sartre’s existentialism focuses on the individual’s experience in an often chaotic, indifferent world, where traditional values and meanings no longer provide clear guidance.

Central to Sartre’s philosophy is the idea that “existence precedes essence.” This concept means that humans are not born with a predetermined purpose or nature. Instead, we define ourselves through our actions and choices. According to Sartre, individuals are radically free, but this freedom is both a privilege and a burden. It forces us to confront the weight of responsibility for shaping our own lives, as well as the world around us.

One of Sartre’s most influential ideas is the notion of Bad Faith (mauvaise foi).^[2] He argued that people often deceive themselves by denying their own freedom and responsibility. Instead of embracing the anxiety and uncertainty that come with total freedom, individuals may hide behind societal roles, obligations, or false beliefs to avoid making difficult choices. This act of self-deception, Sartre believed, ultimately leads to inauthentic living.

To illustrate the concept, Sartre introduces the example of the waiter. For Sartre, this waiter is an example of someone acting in Bad Faith, a term he uses to describe the human tendency to evade the uncomfortable truth of our freedom by adopting false identities or living according to socially-prescribed roles. The waiter, in this case, is pretending that his entire existence is limited to the function of “being a waiter.” He goes through the motions as if his role defines his essence, thereby avoiding the deeper realization that he is fundamentally free to choose what kind of person he wants to be.

Sartre believes that Bad Faith occurs when individuals deny their own freedom by reducing themselves to fixed roles or labels. The waiter, for example, behaves as if being a waiter is his entire essence, when in reality, he is much more than that. He is a human being with the ability to make choices and redefine his identity beyond the confines of his job. Yet by throwing himself entirely into this role, the waiter seeks to escape the anxiety and responsibility that come with acknowledging his freedom.

The key problem with this kind of self-deception, according to Sartre, is that it leads to inauthentic living. By adopting roles or identities that are externally imposed or convenient, individuals can avoid facing the anxiety of freedom, but at the cost of living a life that is truly their own. In the case of the waiter, his performance reflects an effort to convince himself (and others) that he is a fixed, predetermined entity (merely a “waiter’) when in reality, he is always free to transcend that role.

Bad faith and climate change

What does climate change have to do with Bad Faith? At first glance, it might seem like very little. Climate change concerns the warming of our planet and the changes in climate patterns driven by pollution and human activity. Bad Faith involves the tendency of individuals to hide behind social roles and expectations to avoid confronting their true freedom and responsibility.

However, climate change forces us to confront fundamental questions about freedom and meaning. If our planet, the only one we have, is in danger, where do we turn to? This existential threat creates a deep anxiety within society, leading people to react in different ways. Some recognize the problem and want to take action, hoping to steer humanity toward a more sustainable future. Others try to ignore or deny the issue, claiming it is either not real or that its impacts on humanity will be minimal.

From Sartre’s perspective, those who choose to ignore or deny climate change may be acting in Bad Faith. By avoiding responsibility, they fall into the role of the “ignorant bystander,” distancing themselves from the uncomfortable truth that their choices matter. For example, some might say, “What can I do if my role in society is too small to make a difference?” By questioning their power, they surrender their freedom and evade the anxiety that comes with accepting individual responsibility for an enormous global problem. In effect, they are choosing inaction over the discomfort of confronting their freedom to influence change.

The question remains: do people knowingly act in Bad Faith? Are they aware that they are hiding behind a societal role, denying their own freedom in the process? And if they are, do they understand why they do this? As discussed earlier, freedom can be both a burden and a privilege. Sometimes, the weight of responsibility that comes with true freedom is so overwhelming that we prefer to give it up, choosing comfort over the uncertainty that freedom entails.

bad faith and freedom

To illustrate how a preconceived role can diminish one’s freedom, let us have a look at the short story “The Freedom to Choose.”

Through her conversation with her friend Hana, Lyz discovers a surprising truth about herself. As humans, we like to think of ourselves as free, yet we often avoid acknowledging our freedom because it brings discomfort and responsibility we would rather evade. Climate change is one such challenge, confronting us with the reality that we do not control everything. But even when things feel out of our control, we still have the power to make choices that shape how we handle the situation we are in.

An important takeaway from the story is that Lyz still has the choice not to change her behavior regarding climate change. What matters is that she realizes she truly does have a choice—and the freedom to act on it. Understanding this kind of freedom involves taking responsibility, so it would make sense that Lyz would start to feel a sense of duty to care for her home, the Earth. But this is up to the individual to decide.

Realizing that one has been acting in Bad Faith opens up the opportunity to reshape how one approaches certain situations. Sartre’s philosophical tool can shed light on the challenges we face in addressing climate change, offering insights that might otherwise go unnoticed.

In confronting the realities of climate change, Sartre’s concept of Bad Faith provides a powerful lens for self-reflection. By recognizing our own freedom and the choices available to us, we can move beyond passive acceptance and begin to act with purpose, even in small ways. This philosophy challenges us to acknowledge our responsibility, inspiring a more authentic engagement with the world. Ultimately, embracing our freedom means not only facing discomfort but also finding meaning in our actions, empowering us to contribute to the care and future of our shared home, the Earth.