Essay on Sartre on Freedom and Responsibility

This composition seeks to compare the writing styles and structures of Sartre in “Why Write?” and Foucault in “Panopticism” from Discipline & Punish: The Birth of the Prison”. The discussion of influence and its wielder by both writers will be drawn upon to establish parallels with the developments of Artificial Intelligence (AI).

In their writings, both authors display profound illustrations to further their arguments. In “Why Write?”, Sartre begins with a descriptive depiction of the world and its elements. How the “star which has been dead for millennia, that quarter moon and the dark river are disclosed” (P.1) as a result of one’s observation and interpretation. This is again put on show by Sartre as his hatred is “solicited and wheedled out” in creating Raskolnikov’s “hatred of the police magistrate who questions him” (P.4). Likewise, Foucault utilizes descriptive writing in his narration on anti-plague measures. To facilitate rationing during a plague, “small wooden canals are set up between the street and the interior of the houses”, while “meat, fish, and herbs will be hoisted up into the houses with pulleys and baskets.” (P.1) This vividness can also be seen as Foucault brings the Panopticon to live in one’s mind: “an annular building; at the center, a tower; this tower is pierced with wide windows that open onto the inner side of the ring” (P.5). Sartre’s and Foucault’s descriptions serve to be better establish the scenario in the readers’ minds as they illustrate their points.

At the same time, both Sartre and Foucault consistently reference the works of other artists in their exposition. Sartre calls upon the Kantian expression of “finality without end” (P.5) to contrast the work of an artist with that of nature. The works referenced extend from literary works to paintings; “that tree on the first plane of the Cézanne painting” (P.9). Similarly, the Archives militaires de Vincennes (P.1-3) and Bentham’s Panopticon (P.5-7) were greatly referenced in Foucault’s work to discuss the concepts of surveillance and power.

On the other hand, Sartre presents a more intimate voice than Foucault. As Sartre expounds on how it is virtually impossible to appreciate one’s effort through the eyes of a stranger, he makes frequent use of the first person plural: “It is we who have invented the laws by which we judge. It is our history, our love, our gaiety…” (P.2). In fact, his use of a personal voice: “If I(Sartre) were to suspect the artist of having written out of passion and in passion, my confidence would immediately vanish” (P.9) drives into readers his stand on intentional and purposeful creation. This abundance of involvement provides the reader with a clear interpretation of Sartre’s belief on the topic. Conversely, Foucault exhibits a great deal of detachment from his writing. The matter-of-fact manner Foucault writes leads readers to second-guess his position on the issue at hand.

Save your time!
We can take care of your essay

• Proper editing and formatting
• Free revision, title page, and bibliography
• Flexible prices and money-back guarantee

Place Order

About the concepts of influence and power, Sartre’s discussion of the writer’s and reader’s roles reveals the influence one holds over the other. According to Sartre, “There is no art except for and by others” (P.3). A piece of art, without its audience, holds little value, as the “creative act is only an incomplete and abstract moment in the production of a work” (P.3). It is only through the eyes of a viewer, that life is breathed into the art by the viewer’s interpretation. This is similar to the “Observation Effect” in physics, where the mere inspection of an event or body inevitably leads to its alteration (Dent, E. B., 2013), which leads to the conclusion of how reality does not exist till its observation of a quantum level (Manning, A. G. et al, 2015). Consequently, the essentiality of the reader grants him/her significant influence over the writer. At the same time, Sartre draws on the analogy of the photoelectric effect to describe the responsibility of the reader, how “it is he, on the contrary, who allows the signification of each of them to be understood”. As exemplified by the quote: “With great power comes great responsibility” ('Collection générale des décrets rendus par la Convention Nationale, etc.-Septembre 1792.-brumaire, an IV', 1793, p. 72), the responsibility of the reader to realize the work through the writer’s language underlines the power wielded by the reader. However, Sartre follows up with a transition of influence from the reader to the writer in what he describes as “a gentle force (that) accompanies us and supports us” (P.8). The reader’s ability to progress in freedom and safety is underscored by the efforts of the writer to secure the path. Thus, it can be seen that there is a correlation between the reader’s power and the writer’s.

Similar to Sartre, Foucault’s narration begins with the power in the hands of the “watcher”. The warden wields his/her power against the captives in the form of the Panopticon. The inhabitants of each cell “is seen, but he does not see; he is the object of information, never a subject in communication” (P.5). The architecture presents the “watched” a view of the inspection tower silhouetted by cross lighting, leaving the “watched” to constantly guess at the presence of the “watcher”. However, as Foucault progresses in his thoughts, power in its perfection, which is both “visible and unverifiable” (P.6), dissociates itself from the “watcher”. Foucault cites Bentham on how “the efficiency of power, its constraining force have, in a sense, passed over to the other side”. It is in the mind of the “watched”, that this restraining force phenomenon results, so much so that the Panopticon no longer requires its bars and chains. Thus, power comes to rest with the inmate, who “becomes the principle of his subjection” (P.7).

Fast-forward to the world today, technological acceleration and penetration have led AI to become increasingly commonplace. Machine Learning (ML), AI’s foundation, concludes the formation of patterns and inference rather than exact instructions, creating a reality well reflected by Foucault’s and Sartre’s discussion. In Sartre’s case, AI and its creator can be likened to the reader and writer. Just as “the author guides him, but all he does is guide him” (P.4), the creator sets out unfurnished guidelines for the machine. The complex mass of data forming its input mirrors the “landmarks” that the machine has to “unite” and “go beyond” (P.4), for even the creator is unable to make sense of it. Thus, the ability to analyze enables AI to grant value to the various aspects of society, as the reader grants value to the works of writers, leading to AI’s deployment on the numerous fronts of modern society. At the same time, the lack of definitive guidance in ML, calls forth a “black box”, whose murkiness yet functionality is dittoed by Foucault’s description of a visible yet unverifiable power. The AI and society, the Panopticon, and its inmates. Just as power shifts “to the side of its application” (P.7), the self-learning capabilities of AI draw upon the data shared by society to furnish its inner workings and to learn from experience. For instance, Microsoft’s AI meant to engage people on Twitter, degenerated into an abusive chatbot within 24 hours of being released as it learned and developed from Twitter’s users (Vincent, J., 2016). As such, it can be observed that society forms the roots of AI’s influence.

To conclude, both Sartre and Foucault hold numerous similarities in their writing styles and perspectives despite the differences in the finer details. Though they differ on the topic of discussion, their discussion, and the roles involved provides an interesting view of power and its play. On the theme of AI, the transfer of power between the binaries set out by the authors is well matched with its mechanisms and its influence on and by society.