The Relationship Between Freedom and the Past According to Sartre

Extract

[...] Freedom is the fact of being able to determine one's actions without any external influence. However, the past and the elements related to it have an influence on the present. A child who had already had a shot would not be in pain, and this, before the needle even touches their skin? Total freedom seems impossible to achieve since the past plays a role in our actions, even without us wanting it. The past and the present seem to be linked to each other without the possibility of a complete break between the two times. [...]

[...] The past allows us to understand the whys and wherefores of the actions we can take. Our past creates memories in our minds that, when we are about to take an action similar to one we have taken before, recall necessary information. Sartre indicates, in a new way, that the past has only a very limited impact on the present and the future. He shows that actions are not driven directly by the past. For him, the past exists, but it does not create the actions of the present and does not determine the future. [...]

[...] Each person's past plays a role in their present and future. The past could be seen as a system of gears that are lined up and that, when turned, are necessary for the constitution of the present. But the present is not a repetition of the past. The individual must precisely free themselves from the past to be free. If I always repeat the actions of my past, then I am not free and I become determined to repeat the same mistakes. [...]

[...] The past allows us to learn from our mistakes and avoid repeating them. Freedom would therefore be the ability to draw on the past to know the possible impact of our actions, without the past being predominant in the realization of those actions. The man who knows his past is in a way determined by it in his actions but is no longer, as a result, in absolute freedom. What power do I have with respect to my own past? [...]

[...] Based on the concepts of subjectivity and interpretation, explain why Sartre's interpretation of the past is original. Subjectivity can be defined as what is specific to an individual, what is created by oneself and what is generated or marked by oneself. Interpretation, on the other hand, is the act of appropriating a fact or concept to make it something that is our own. From there, Sartre shows us a new approach to the past. He proposes a rather negative view of the past, but explains that it is possible to detach oneself from it. [...]