What is the meaning of nothingness in Sartre's ⟪Being and Nothingness⟫?

Question

A head-up: I am from an analytic background, and I have only read continental philosophy via second sources.

I am confused about what 'nothingness' mean in Sartre's ⟪Being and Nothingness⟫. Some authors explain that 'nothingness' is the denial of thinking of one's consciousness as a concrete entity with predefined essence. Consciousness is nothing more than the state of perceiving numerous individual stimulations; consciousness is nothingness. Sartre's 'nothingness' is an affirmation of vanishing the boundary between the subject(consciousness) and the object(the external world).

Other authors explain that 'nothingness' represents the unique ability of a human to perceive a lack of something in the world. Ordinary objects can only exist, and in that sense, it is a being-in-itself. Humans, on the other hand, can perceive a lack of something and can strive forward to solve its deficiency, and in that sense, it is a being-for-itself.

Which explanation is correct? Are both correct? Or is my understanding just wrong?

Answer 1

In Jean-Paul Sartre's existentialist masterpiece, "Being and Nothingness" (1943), nothingness (néant or le néant in French) is a central concept that plays a crucial role in understanding human existence and freedom. As Sartre himself notes, "Nothingness lies coiled in the heart of being – like a worm" (Sartre, 1943, p. 21).

Sartre distinguishes between two modes of being: being-in-itself (être-en-soi) and being-for-itself (être-pour-soi). Being-in-itself refers to objects or things that simply exist, without consciousness or self-awareness. Being-for-itself, on the other hand, is the mode of being associated with human consciousness, which is characterized by self-awareness, intentionality, and the capacity for self-negation or negation of objects (Sartre, 1943, p. 106).

Nothingness, for Sartre, emerges from the distinction between these two modes of being. Human consciousness, as being-for-itself, introduces nothingness into the world by negating or "making nothing" of the being-in-itself (Sartre, 1943, p. 49). This capacity for negation allows humans to envision possibilities, alternatives, and potentialities that do not currently exist.

Furthermore, Sartre argues that human consciousness is defined by a fundamental lack or absence – it is always conscious of something other than itself, and is thus always directed towards something it is not (Sartre, 1943, p. 86). This lack is what makes desire, choice, and freedom possible, as humans are constantly striving to fill the void created by the nothingness at the core of their being. As Sartre writes, "Man is a being who makes himself a lack of being in order that there might be being" (Sartre, 1943, p. 616).

References:

Sartre, J.-P. (1943). Being and Nothingness: An Essay on Phenomenological Ontology. Gallimard.