*Excerpt*

In the eighteenth century, with the atheism of the philosophers, the notion of God disappeared, but not the idea that essence precedes existence. We find this idea almost everywhere: in Diderot, in Voltaire, and even in Kant.

We are told that man possesses a human nature. This human nature, which corresponds to the concept of "man," is found in all human beings. Thus every individual is merely a particular example of a universal concept: humanity. In Kant, this universality implies that the man of the forest, the man of nature, and the bourgeois all fall under the same definition and share the same essential characteristics. Here too, the essence of man precedes the historical existence that we encounter in the world.

The atheistic existentialism that I represent is more consistent. It declares that if God does not exist, there is at least one being whose existence precedes its essence; a being that exists before it can be defined by any concept. That being is man, or, as Heidegger says, human reality.

What does it mean to say that existence precedes essence? It means that man first exists, encounters himself, emerges into the world, and only afterwards defines himself.

As the existentialist sees him, man is not initially anything. He becomes what he makes of himself. There is no human nature because there is no God to conceive it. Man is nothing other than what he makes of himself. This is the first principle of existentialism.

Man is not only what he conceives himself to be, but also what he wills himself to be after he exists. He is what he projects himself toward becoming. Therefore, man is nothing else but that which he makes of himself.

This is what is meant by subjectivity. Yet what do we mean by this except that man possesses a greater dignity than a stone or a table? For we mean that man first exists; that he is, before all else, a being directed toward a future and conscious of projecting himself into that future.

Man is, before anything else, a project which is lived subjectively. Nothing exists prior to this project; nothing is inscribed in heaven. Man will become, above all, what he has planned himself to be. Not what he merely wishes to be, for what we usually call will is often only the conscious expression of a deeper and more fundamental choice.

If existence truly precedes essence, then man is responsible for what he is. Thus the first task of existentialism is to place every individual in possession of himself and to make him bear the full responsibility of his existence. And when we say that man is responsible for himself, we do not mean only for his individual person, but for all humanity.

When we say that man chooses himself, we mean that each of us chooses what he is. But in choosing himself, he also chooses all mankind. There is not a single one of our actions that does not create an image of humanity as we believe it ought to be.

Choosing to be this or that is at the same time affirming the value of what we choose. For we can never choose evil knowingly; what we choose is always what appears good to us. And nothing can be good for us without also being good for others.

Therefore our responsibility is much greater than we might suppose, for it concerns all humanity. In choosing ourselves, we choose mankind.