The meaning of life according to Simone de Beauvoir Iseult Gillespie

At the age of 21, Simone de Beauvoir
became the youngest person

to take the philosophy exams
at France’s most esteemed university.

She passed with flying colors.

But as soon as she mastered
the rules of philosophy,

she wanted to break them.

She’d been schooled
on Plato’s Theory of Forms,

which dismissed the physical world
as a flawed reflection

of higher truths and unchanging ideals.

But for de Beauvoir,
earthly life was enthralling, sensual,

and anything but static.

Her desire to explore the physical world
to its fullest would shape her life,

and eventually,
inspire a radical new philosophy.

Endlessly debating with her romantic
and intellectual partner Jean Paul Sartre,

de Beauvoir explored free will, desire,
rights and responsibilities,

and the value of personal experience.

In the years following WWII,

these ideas would converge
into the school of thought

most closely associated with their work:
existentialism.

Where Judeo-Christian traditions
taught that

humans are born with preordained purpose,

de Beauvoir and Sartre proposed
a revolutionary alternative.

They argued that humans are born free,

and thrown into existence
without a divine plan.

As de Beauvoir acknowledged, this freedom
is both a blessing and a burden.

In “The Ethics of Ambiguity” she argued
that our greatest ethical imperative

is to create our own life’s meaning,

while protecting the freedom
of others to do the same.

As de Beauvoir wrote,

“A freedom which is interested only
in denying freedom must be denied.”

This philosophy challenged its students
to navigate the ambiguities and conflicts

our desires produce,
both internally and externally.

And as de Beauvoir sought to find
her own purpose,

she began to question:

if everyone deserves
to freely pursue meaning,

why was she restricted by society’s ideals
of womanhood?

Despite her prolific writing,
teaching and activism,

de Beauvoir struggled
to be taken seriously by her male peers.

She’d rejected her Catholic upbringing
and marital expectations

to study at university, and write memoirs,
fiction and philosophy.

But the risks she was taking
by embracing this lifestyle

were lost on many
of her male counterparts,

who took these freedoms for granted.

They had no intellectual interest
in de Beauvoir’s work,

which explored women’s inner lives,

as well the author’s open relationship
and bisexuality.

To convey the importance
of her perspective,

de Beauvoir embarked
on her most challenging book yet.

Just as she’d created the foundations
of existentialism,

she’d now redefine the limits of gender.

Published in 1949, “The Second Sex”
argues that, like our life’s meaning,

gender is not predestined.

As de Beauvoir famously wrote,

“one is not born, but rather becomes,
woman.”

And to “become” a woman, she argued,
was to become the Other.

De Beauvoir defined Othering
as the process of labeling women

as less than the men who’d
historically defined, and been defined as,

the ideal human subjects.

As the Other, she argued that women
were considered second to men,

and therefore systematically restricted
from pursuing freedom.

“The Second Sex” became
an essential feminist treatise,

offering a detailed history
of women’s oppression

and a wealth of anecdotal testimony.

“The Second Sex”’s combination
of personal experience

and philosophical intervention

provided a new language
to discuss feminist theory.

Today, those conversations are still
informed by de Beauvoir’s insistence

that in the pursuit of equality,

“there is no divorce between
philosophy and life.”

Of course, like any foundational work,

the ideas in “The Second Sex” have been
expanded upon since its publication.

Many modern thinkers have explored
additional ways people are Othered

that de Beauvoir doesn’t acknowledge.

These include racial
and economic identities,

as well as the broader spectrum of gender
and sexual identities we understand today.

De Beauvoir’s legacy
is further complicated

by accusations of sexual misconduct
by two of her university students.

In the face of these accusations,

she had her teaching license revoked
for abusing her position.

In this aspect and others,
de Beauvoir’s life remains controversial—

and her work represents a contentious
moment in the emergence of early feminism.

She participated in those conversations
for the rest of her life;

writing fiction, philosophy,
and memoirs until her death in 1986.

Today, her work offers
a philosophical language

to be reimagined, revisited
and rebelled against—

a response this revolutionary thinker
might have welcomed.

21岁的西蒙娜·德·波伏娃
成为

参加法国最受尊敬的大学哲学考试的最年轻的人。

她以优异的成绩通过了。

但是一旦她掌握
了哲学的规则,

她就想打破它们。


受过柏拉图形式理论的教育,

该理论认为物质世界

对更高真理和不变理想的有缺陷的反映。

但对于 de Beauvoir 来说,
尘世的生活是迷人的、感性的,绝不是

静态的。

她想要充分探索物质世界的愿望
将塑造她的生活,

并最终
激发出一种激进的新哲学。

波伏娃与她的浪漫
而知性的伴侣让·保罗·萨特无休止地争论,

探索了自由意志、欲望、
权利和责任,

以及个人经历的价值。

在二战后的几年里,

这些思想将汇聚

与他们的工作最密切相关的思想流派:
存在主义。

在犹太-基督教传统
教导

人类生来就有预定目的的地方,

德波伏瓦和萨特提出
了一种革命性的替代方案。

他们争辩说,人类生而自由,


没有神圣计划的情况下被投入存在。

正如德波伏瓦承认的那样,这种自由
既是一种祝福,也是一种负担。

在“模棱两可的伦理”中,她
认为我们最大的伦理责任

是创造我们自己的生活意义,

同时保护
他人这样做的自由。

正如德波伏瓦所写的那样,


必须否认只对否认自由感兴趣的自由。”

这种哲学挑战它的学生
去驾驭

我们的欲望
在内部和外部产生的模棱两可和冲突。

而当德波伏娃试图找到
自己的目标时,

她开始质疑:

如果每个人都
应该自由地追求意义,

为什么她会受到社会女性理想
的限制?

尽管她多产的写作、
教学和激进主义活动,

德波伏娃还是
很难被她的男性同龄人认真对待。

她拒绝了

在大学学习、写回忆录、
小说和哲学的天主教教养和婚姻期望。

但是她接受这种生活方式所冒的风险在她

的许多男性同行身上都消失了

他们认为这些自由是理所当然的。

他们对 de Beauvoir 的作品没有智力上的兴趣

该作品探索了女性的内心生活,

以及作者的开放关系
和双性恋。

为了传达
她观点的重要性,

de Beauvoir 开始
写她迄今为止最具挑战性的书。

正如她创造了存在主义的基础一样

她现在重新定义了性别的界限。

1949 年出版的《第二性》
认为,就像我们生命的意义一样,

性别不是注定的。

正如 de Beauvoir 所写的那句名言:

“一个人不是天生的,而是成为
女人的。”

她认为,“成为”一个女人
就是成为他者。

德波伏瓦将他者定义
为将女性标记

为低于
历史上定义并被定义

为理想人类主体的男性的过程。

作为他者,她认为女性
被认为仅次于男性

,因此系统地限制
了她们追求自由。

《第二性》成为
一部重要的女权主义论文,

提供了女性受压迫的详细历史

和丰富的轶事见证。

《第二性》
将个人经历

与哲学介入相结合,

为讨论女权主义理论提供了新的语言。

今天,这些对话仍然
受到波伏娃的坚持

,即在追求平等的过程中,


哲学与生活之间没有脱节”。

当然,与任何基础作品一样,

《第二性》
自出版以来,其思想已得到扩展。

许多现代思想家已经探索

了德波伏瓦不承认的其他方式。

这些包括种族
和经济身份,

以及我们今天理解的更广泛的性别
和性身份。

德波伏娃的遗产

因她的两名大学生对性行为不端的指控而变得更加复杂。

面对这些指控,

她因滥用职权而被吊销了教师执照

在这方面和其他方面,
德波伏娃的生活仍然存在争议

——她的作品代表了
早期女权主义出现的一个有争议的时刻。

她在
余生中都参与了这些对话;

写小说、哲学
和回忆录,直到她 1986 年去世。

今天,她的作品提供
了一种哲学语言

,可以重新想象、重新审视
和反抗——

这位革命思想家
可能会欢迎这种回应。