Sartre considered himself an «existentialist». And the existentialism should be a «humanism».

But Sartre committed an error (naive) not only by reducing the ontology to the existence, as also doubled that (materialistic...) error by judging that the existence should be reducible to the physical presentation in turn.

So happens that all physical data are mere appearances, as they are submitted to the corruption, to the succession, which is imposed by the time.

And ontology shows sufficiently that the true Being is the one which remains indefinitely and always the same (i.e.: immutable). But anyone can see, however, that nothing in Nature is permanent and unchangeable.

Humanism believes that the human element is sufficiently enable to achieve everything only by himself, thus becoming a real «pride of the human kind», we could say.

And the humanism of Sartre adds to it the materialism – as he implicitly considered himself as an «existentialist materialist» when classified himself as an «atheist».

But his innocence went further, because that French philosopher of the last century, considering himself as an «atheist», just forgot that behind the humanism hides itself the old Christian idea that the human is the highest of the Creation and that the Earth was tailored for human gender as the center of the Universe (that was the main reason for the execution of Giordano Bruno and also the process of Galileo).

15.11.2014