What do you think?
Rate this book
Writers & Readers Documentary Comic Book #57
Sartre para principiantes / Sartre for Beginners
Spanish translation of "Sartre for beginners". Ilustrated introduction to the French philosopher's thought.
159 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1995
34 people are currently reading
186 people want to read
About the author
Donald D. Palmer
19 books17 followersEmeritus Professor of Philosophy at the College of Marin in Kentfield, California. He is known for writing introductory books on philosophy and philosophers which attempt to make philosophical ideas accessible to novices. He also illustrates his own books.
Currently he is visiting Assistant Professor of Philosophy at North Carolina State University in Raleigh, North Carolina.
Currently he is visiting Assistant Professor of Philosophy at North Carolina State University in Raleigh, North Carolina.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 23 of 23 reviews
May 19, 2020
It was a great introduction, in which I discovered a shocking truth about Sartre : that he left Existentialism for Marxism. And in the end left Marxism too.
January 18, 2013
Don't be fooled by its modest sounding title. It is for beginners all right, but one needs a bit of patience to gain even a rudimentary understanding of some concepts like bad faith or phenomenological existentialism.
After reading the same page for about six or seven times, I finally thought I got what bad faith was. And then, I came across this paragraph:
"Sincerity", Sartre claims, "is the antithesis of bad faith." So it would seem that striving for sincerity is "good faith," but this is not the case. To try to be sincere is to try to be what one is. But such an effort already presupposes that one IS WHAT ONE IS in the way that a rock is what it is. Therefore, sincerity itself is in bad faith.
So, I went back 50 pages and started reading it again. (The fact that it was a comic book really helped save time.)
But the language is as lucid as it can get. The illustrations bring out a few smiles when the words get too dry and once you get the hang of it, you'll really start loving it. Overall, it serves as a fitting introduction to one of the most complex schools of thought ever.
Ideally, one should read something like
1. Kierkegaard for beginners
2. Nietzche for beginners
3. Hagel for beginners
4. Marx for beginners
and then, Sartre for beginners; but starting with this one isn't that bad either. That's what I did ;)
After reading the same page for about six or seven times, I finally thought I got what bad faith was. And then, I came across this paragraph:
"Sincerity", Sartre claims, "is the antithesis of bad faith." So it would seem that striving for sincerity is "good faith," but this is not the case. To try to be sincere is to try to be what one is. But such an effort already presupposes that one IS WHAT ONE IS in the way that a rock is what it is. Therefore, sincerity itself is in bad faith.
So, I went back 50 pages and started reading it again. (The fact that it was a comic book really helped save time.)
But the language is as lucid as it can get. The illustrations bring out a few smiles when the words get too dry and once you get the hang of it, you'll really start loving it. Overall, it serves as a fitting introduction to one of the most complex schools of thought ever.
Ideally, one should read something like
1. Kierkegaard for beginners
2. Nietzche for beginners
3. Hagel for beginners
4. Marx for beginners
and then, Sartre for beginners; but starting with this one isn't that bad either. That's what I did ;)
November 14, 2024
Terrific intro to Sartre’s philosophy. Really well explained and full of quotes.
February 12, 2017
A nice review book.
Life Facts: His mother was a first cousin of Albert Schweitzer. His father died when he was a year old, so his mother lavished all her attention on him. But his grandfather and later stepfather were stern influences. He was only 5 feet 3 inches tall. He had a strabismus or wandering eye. He met Simon de Beauvoir, and they became companions until his death: they never married or lived together, had other lovers, and deeply each other's works. Ashes buried next to each other in Paris's Montparnasse Cemetery. He studied under Edmund Husserl, the founder of phenomenology. He took mescaline and thought a lobster chased him. Reading Kierkegaard led him to existentialism. He spent time with Camus and Picasso. For some stupid reason he was enchanted with the Soviet Union until the 1968 suppression of the Czech uprising. He finally in the late 70s said he was no longer a Marxist. He died in 1980, and 50,000 people honored him on his final journey to the cemetery.
Existentialism in a nutshell: existence precedes essence. As a determinist myself, I find it hard to give much credence to Sartre's belief in choices. But his philosophy helped to pick up the spirits of post WWII Europe.
Bad Faith: Self deception. A flight from freedom, responsibility, and anguish.
Being-for-Itself: Exclusive human existence. Open to the past, present, and future.
Being-for-Others: The transforming gaze of others affects my behavior.
Being-in-Itself: Non-human reality.
"In choosing myself, I choose man."
"Our responsibility is much greater than we have supposed, because it involves all mankind."
"Man is a useless passion."
"A vertigo of possibility."
Life Facts: His mother was a first cousin of Albert Schweitzer. His father died when he was a year old, so his mother lavished all her attention on him. But his grandfather and later stepfather were stern influences. He was only 5 feet 3 inches tall. He had a strabismus or wandering eye. He met Simon de Beauvoir, and they became companions until his death: they never married or lived together, had other lovers, and deeply each other's works. Ashes buried next to each other in Paris's Montparnasse Cemetery. He studied under Edmund Husserl, the founder of phenomenology. He took mescaline and thought a lobster chased him. Reading Kierkegaard led him to existentialism. He spent time with Camus and Picasso. For some stupid reason he was enchanted with the Soviet Union until the 1968 suppression of the Czech uprising. He finally in the late 70s said he was no longer a Marxist. He died in 1980, and 50,000 people honored him on his final journey to the cemetery.
Existentialism in a nutshell: existence precedes essence. As a determinist myself, I find it hard to give much credence to Sartre's belief in choices. But his philosophy helped to pick up the spirits of post WWII Europe.
Bad Faith: Self deception. A flight from freedom, responsibility, and anguish.
Being-for-Itself: Exclusive human existence. Open to the past, present, and future.
Being-for-Others: The transforming gaze of others affects my behavior.
Being-in-Itself: Non-human reality.
"In choosing myself, I choose man."
"Our responsibility is much greater than we have supposed, because it involves all mankind."
"Man is a useless passion."
"A vertigo of possibility."
February 23, 2017
Reading core philosophy is not an easy thing to do. I enjoyed the illustrations and simplified way of presenting a complicated philosophy such as Sartre's. I'd say it still difficult to grasp it quickly.
March 1, 2015
It didn't seem right to give this book 4 stars, being a cartoon format survey of a major philosopher, so I gave it only three stars. But it did do a very good job of explaining Sartre's philosophy(ies) in simple, understandable language. I have always had a bent toward existentialism and tried to read some Sartre over the years, but aside from his plays ("No Exit" and "The Flies") I found his work too ponderous ("Being and Nothingness" and "Search for a Method"). So when I saw this book on the library shelves, I figured why not give it a try.
It was a good decision. I know Sartre talked about freedom and choice and radical conversion, emptiness, existence precedes essence, "hell is other people," objectification of others. I had a reasonable sense of what I thought he meant with these concepts. I also previously had a vague idea of concepts such as Being-for-Itself, Being-in-Itself, Bad Faith, reflective and unreflective consciousness, and other more obscure, tongue-twisting terms. Not only did this book clarify those concepts for me, it also gave me a much better understanding how they tie together to form a whole, and how the concepts relate to Descartes, Plato, and Kierkegaard. (Given the context provided by the author, I even thought I understood "A freedom-which-wills-itself freedom is in fact a being-which-is-not-what-it-is and which-is-what-it-is-not, and which chooses as the ideal of being, being-what-it-is-not and not-being-what-it-is" as I read it - though my understanding may have been an example of "really-really-bad-faith" .)
I know I was never going to read "Being and Nothingness," and probably not even a book-length summary of Sartre or his philosophy. This book was a good compromise. It gave me what I wanted - a basic understanding of Sartre's philosophy, in a relatively easy package. Anything more than that wasn't in the cards. On those grounds I considered giving the book 4 stars.
It was a good decision. I know Sartre talked about freedom and choice and radical conversion, emptiness, existence precedes essence, "hell is other people," objectification of others. I had a reasonable sense of what I thought he meant with these concepts. I also previously had a vague idea of concepts such as Being-for-Itself, Being-in-Itself, Bad Faith, reflective and unreflective consciousness, and other more obscure, tongue-twisting terms. Not only did this book clarify those concepts for me, it also gave me a much better understanding how they tie together to form a whole, and how the concepts relate to Descartes, Plato, and Kierkegaard. (Given the context provided by the author, I even thought I understood "A freedom-which-wills-itself freedom is in fact a being-which-is-not-what-it-is and which-is-what-it-is-not, and which chooses as the ideal of being, being-what-it-is-not and not-being-what-it-is" as I read it - though my understanding may have been an example of "really-really-bad-faith" .)
I know I was never going to read "Being and Nothingness," and probably not even a book-length summary of Sartre or his philosophy. This book was a good compromise. It gave me what I wanted - a basic understanding of Sartre's philosophy, in a relatively easy package. Anything more than that wasn't in the cards. On those grounds I considered giving the book 4 stars.
June 29, 2017
I took this book out for my oldest grandson, who wants to be a philosopher. When he left it on my desk to return the next day (it's a quick read), I decided to keep it a little longer to read myself. Here is what I learned:
1) I do not want to be a philosopher
2) The contextual part of who Sartre was, his place in history, and his contemporaries was interesting
3) The philosophy section mostly left me shaking my head.
4) My favorite passage (p.77) talks about the many meanings that Abraham had to choose between when God told him to sacrifice his son (God is a cruel monster, this is my own sadistic nature speaking, it's the devil tempting me, it is God and I will obey, I must not have understood him, etc.) It sort of reminds me how we teach students to think critically. Best part of the book.
1) I do not want to be a philosopher
2) The contextual part of who Sartre was, his place in history, and his contemporaries was interesting
3) The philosophy section mostly left me shaking my head.
4) My favorite passage (p.77) talks about the many meanings that Abraham had to choose between when God told him to sacrifice his son (God is a cruel monster, this is my own sadistic nature speaking, it's the devil tempting me, it is God and I will obey, I must not have understood him, etc.) It sort of reminds me how we teach students to think critically. Best part of the book.
Read
May 27, 2024this served as my first proper introduction to Sartre and his work. i have owned Being and Nothingness for sometime but struggled to truly grasp it and was left abandoning each attempt quite quickly. i found this book to be a great jumping off point to begin further understanding Being and Nothingness as well as the rest of Sartre’s work. i am certain i’ll return to this book along my journey into Sartre, this text provides straight forward explanations of complex ideas and gives a solid basis to learn from.
February 22, 2023
A quick but certainly not easy read, this book provided me a great bird's eye overview of the French philosopher while simultaneously leaving me baffled at how obscure even a dumbed down version of his ideas can be. The graphic novel style helped me move along quickly but I often found myself rereading a page several times before (not really) getting it. By the end though, I felt I had a decent understanding of the basics of Sartre's existentialism and of his life more generally.
August 8, 2018
When I chose this book I hadn't realized it was basically a graphic kind of novel... or as they call it a Beginners documentary comic book. That said, it is FABULOUS. I don't think I have ever read a book written in this style but this was a perfect way to be introduced more fully to the philosophy and man - Sartre. Totally recommend!
May 18, 2022
Interesting and insightful, even if "light." It is presented in an almost graphic novel style and so it feels cartoonish at times, but it does a good job of distilling some of Sartre's thought into consumable bits.
September 11, 2022
With or without the sometimes goofy graphics, this book did its job for this non-philosopher. Palmer's text was by and large understandable. It has prepared me to go on to Sartre's 'Basic Writings' next. The glossary and bibiography at the end were especially helpful as refresher and wrap-up.
August 5, 2024
Imposible escapar de la mala fe. Puro voluntarismo sinsentido. Quizás lo único auténticamente sartreano sea perder batallas contra monstruos imaginarios, después el suicidio. Parece que hay algo totalmente errado en la filosofía sartreana. Palmer no lo dice, pero lo sugiere.
August 6, 2019
A philosophical rollercoaster: must-read.
December 30, 2019
Great refresher with relevant cartoons.
March 9, 2017
Pretty good explanation of Sartre's complicated branch of existentialism. Unfortunately it's meaningless.
January 13, 2017
For anyone intimidated by, or tired of, the overcomplexity of modern philosophical wiritng, intro books like this can serve as a good intro. This particular book does a great job of introducing it's readers to this basic ideas behind Sartre's thought and delves into some of his more famous writings. The illustrations provide clarity on basic concepts, but, as with any intro book, some details get lost in the vaguery. This book is a good place to start with Sartre, but will leave you needed a more indepth analysis to fully comprehend the ideas introduced.
February 7, 2012
BUT what is the definition of existentialism??!¥£€€<~~. Haha! A great refresher of the twisted minds who had the time to pontificate the meaning of life. THIS was a great departure from my daily existence! Loved it... Philosophy 101 without the classroom.
August 27, 2012
One of the not so great entries in the for beginners series. It really didn't aid in my understanding of Sartre or existentialism at all and I really couldn't say that I got much of anything out of the experience.
A waste of time for the most part.
A waste of time for the most part.
June 13, 2017
cartoon et philosophie sur buck de bière, quoi de mieux!
October 27, 2015
I love all of the books in the "for beginners" series.
November 21, 2019
Helpful in simplifying Sartre's complex philosophical ideas and explaining how they evolved. Found the explanations of Sartre's post Existential (Marxist) ideas to be very confusing.
December 23, 2013
Very informative.
Displaying 1 - 23 of 23 reviews