LEADERSHIP AND EXISTENTIALISM’S KEY TENANTS

ForTHEO 525 LUO (Fall 2011)

Systematic Theology I

Dr. Steven W. Ladd

Liberty Baptist Theological Seminary

Todd Hine

October 13, 2011

Table of Contents

THESIS 1

INTRODUCTION 1

ESSENCE 2

FREEDOM 4

OTHERS 6

AUTHENTICITY 9

ABSURDITY 11

CONCLUSION 13

BIBLIOGRAPHY 15

THESIS

The prevalence of existentialistic philosophy has permeated a vast array of human

concepts to include the idea of leadership. This paper seeks to demonstrate that existentialism

has failed in its practical application to leadership under its own foundational principles

compared to the opposing Biblical principles that ensure the proper execution of leadership.

INTRODUCTION

The highly publicized leadership failures found in many vocations and occupations

covering a multitude of geographical regions and locations rightly deserves a closer examination

of the causes of such failures. One surprisingly powerful yet under-emphasized belief system is

that of the existentialist. While an individual leader may not be an avid follower of

existentialism, the individual may or may not even be aware of the already present beliefs that

may be lurking under the surface, preparing the leader’s inevitable fall.

This not only warrants a closer look at existentialism and its unstable pillars when applied

to leadership, but a comparable viewpoint of Biblical Christianity and how such theological

doctrines can provide any leader with a substantial foundation upon which to build. Therefore,

this paper which look closely at key points that can be found within the existentialist belief

system to include those ideas that span secular and sacred existentialist backgrounds.

In addition this paper will utilize references to key ideas that have been developed by the

founding fathers of the existential movement from early writers such as Soren Kierkegaard, Jean

Paul Sartre, and others. Many sources will be sited as evidence in support of the claim that

Biblical Christianity is a superior belief system upon which to build a leadership style.

1

ESSENCE

Jean Paul Sartre, a well-known secular existentialist that lived within the most recent of

generations, brings to the discussion a principle belief of his predecessors still carried out

through existentialism currently. Sartre claims that existence precedes essence.1 This requires

some expositional clarity though. When addressing the essence of a said “thing,” the application

of the word refers to what Elwell calls “An essence, then, consists in a thing’s most basic

properties, what it is most fundamentally.”2

Sartre maintained the claim that existence precedes essence. This means that nothing has

essence without first existing. Then and only then will it be credited as having essence. The

logical conclusion is that when applied to any specific human being, a person that exists does in

fact, has an essence or has essence. The key point: without existence, there is no essence.

Even further, a person without essence cannot exist. Take away the person’s most

essential of essences and the person will not only be able to function but will no longer possess

familiar enough essences to be referred to as human and therefore have to possibility of existing.

Having made this presentation for the concepts of existence and essence under an existentialistic

point of view, the pertinent information is more within what the existentialists do with such

beliefs. It is here the existentialist will argue for Sartre’s point:

Modern Existentialism, particularly in the writings of Sartre, has made much of the thesis: existence precedes essence. In the case of man, its meaning is not difficult to grasp. Man exists and makes himself to be what he is; his individual essence or nature comes to be out of his existence; and in this sense it is proper to say that existence precedes essence. Man does not have a fixed essence that is handed to him ready-made;

1 Plantinga, Alvin. “On Existentialism.” Philosophical Studies 44, no 1 (Jul, 1983) pp 12 Elwell, Walter. Evangelical Dictionary of Theology. 2d ed. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House,

2001. pg 389

2

rather, he makes his own nature out of his freedom and the historical conditions in which he is placed.3

From this point the reader must examine the two positions applicable under the concept

of leadership. The first is that of the leader. Under such a belief as that of existentialism that one

creates their own essence based on the aforementioned criteria, the result is that the leader

maintains the freedom to determine their own personal essence. This poses a problem though.

For if the leader chooses to modify their own essence, they do so at the expense of known

standards to which the followers have submitted. What is true for the leader is true for all.

The second position comes in the form of the follower’s perspective. Although the

follower has willingly submitted to the standards of the leader, under the existentialistic belief of

essence, the follower has the freedom to define their own personal essence. This should be true,

even if the essence is found at the cost of violating the leader’s known standards.

Any opposing argument would invalidate the existentialist argument. For instance, as a

follower, if the one’s essence is found to violate a known standard and the essence is then

removed from the one, then the existentialist argument of one’s own freedom in finding essence

is itself violated. In addition, in limiting the one from claiming such an essence the potential for

eliminating an essential essence does exist and if the essential essence is not permitted then the

one may indeed cease to exist.

The Biblical approach under the concept of essence comes from the doctrine of existence.

While a Christian theologian would agree that essence and existence are mutually exclusive, the

3 Barrett, William (2011-01-26). Irrational Man: A Study in Existential Philosophy (p. 102). Anchor. Kindle Edition.

3

theologian would assert that it is impossible to choose one’s essence.4 However, what one

chooses through each and every individual decision or choice becomes then a part of their

individual character. This common thread between the leader and the follower can now be

delineated clearly.

Both leader and followers have essence in their existence and what each decides to do

with said essence and existence becomes part of and a reflection of each personal character. As a

result, the leader can now establish clearly defines standards and move personally and freely

within said boundaries without establishing a double-standard. The follower, likewise, provided

with a clearly defined set of boundaries and expectations now have the freedom to move and

operate within known realms. Each now possess the ability to change individual character

without infringing upon the development of the other.

FREEDOM

Although this concept did not receive first billing in this paper, it nonetheless holds a

common theme of existentialism in all areas of this belief system. One of the simplest definitions

of existentialism incorporates this concept mightily in defining existentialism. Noted Christian

apologetic Francis Schaeffer defines existentialism as,

“A modern theory of man that holds that human experience is not describable in scientific or rational terms. Existentialism stresses the need to make vital choices by using a man’s freedom in a contingent and apparently purposeless world.”5

4 Elwell, Walter. Evangelical Dictionary of Theology. 2d ed. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 2001. Pg 424

5 Schaeffer, Francis. Francis A. Schaeffer Trilogy. Edited by Crossway Books. Wheaton, IL: Crossway Books, Good News Publishers, 1990. Pg200

4

It is this freedom that must be addressed. To many existentialists the mere presence of

consciousness is freedom. The making of the statement that man is free because he is conscious

or has consciousness results in the logical conclusion of man’s personal subjectivity. This

subjectivity results in a veritable personal defining of all that can be considered as existing or

having a sense of “being.”

As one traces this line of thought back through the years and across the varying degrees

of philosophers, the end result would be seen as a concept that developed from the original writer

of many existentialistic points, Soren Kierkegaard. Kierkegaard reduced such concepts of

appearing and not appearing to being nothing more than subjective negativity. This subjective

negativity presented itself as that from within that opposes all that exists outside, namely all that

is objective. Thus, as indicated by Frogel, Kierkegaard’s approach replaced the abstract unity of

the world with the unity of the subject and was negated by giving “priority to the concrete

existence of the individual.”6

From this assertion comes eventually the claim made by Sartre that this negativity is the

soul of freedom: subjectivity is primarily free.7 To an existentialist, however, this freedom

presents a significant degree of paralyzing fear in the hearts of many who never lay claim to their

rightful possession of acknowledgment in the world. It actually causes trouble and pain in

individual lives, the opposite of its purpose.

The strange dichotomy to this is that under such freedom an existential leader possesses

the ability to define the world under personal terms and with such defining points act

6 Frogel, Shai. “The Soul: An Existentialist Point of View” Human Studies 33(2010): 191-204

7 DuFrenne, Mikel. “Existentialism and Existentialisms.” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 26, no 1 (Sep., 1965) pp54

5

accordingly. Measurement of the leader’s actions then becomes the only source of standard-

meeting or failing. But taking this idea even further, if the individual has freedom to define and

act accordingly, and every other individual has the freedom to act accordingly, how then can the

group measure the leader when all they are really doing is measuring subjectively which all can

do anyway? The end result must be that the leader cannot adequately be measured.

The Christian theologian, however, operates under a more direct, objective, and specific

set of standards. The very heart and center of an individual leader can now be ascertained to the

point where even the intent of the individual can be measured against an objective and unmoving

standard. As indicated byWartenberg, “Protestantism saw the interior lives of people as more

significant than their external behavior.”8

For the Christian leader, freedom comes from knowing that even the thoughts and intents

of the heart will be measured against the perfect standard. As a result, the leader should desire to

adhere to the highest form of righteousness to the deepest levels internally. This also serves to

ensure the followers of a leader who does not measure inconsistently but only judges rightly.

OTHERS

The only reason ‘leadership’ exists as a word is the notion that within its definition is the

existence of people in the plural form. In a world where all people are totally equal or where only

one singular person exists there is no need for such a word. No vacuums exist though and as a

result the world is full of people requiring interactions at various levels of hierarchy. Sartre as a

secular existentialist recognized this and through his writings his perspective of people and how

8 Wartenberg, Thomas E. Existentialism: A Beginner’s Guide. Oxford, England: Oneworld Publications, 2008 pp818

6

their presence effects the beliefs system of existentialism. In a play he wrote entitled No Exit, he

recorded these dreadful words:

So this is hell. I’d never have believed it. You remember all we were told about the torture-chambers, the fire and brimstone, the ‘burning marl.’ Old wives’ tales! There’s no need for red-hot pokers. Hell is – other people.(No Exit 46-47)9

With this perspective in mind the existentialist leader must address the question as it

relates to ‘others:’ Is what makes me a leader “where I am” or ‘who I am” that makes me a

leader? Clearly the existentialist point of view of a person’s place in life comes from its primary

perception of a single human being to begin with: “a being that determines the meaning of its

existence by its choices.”10 The answer then, is that the existentialist makes the determination

according to his or her own freedom of consciousness. And this can only be arrived at through a

self-centered approach limited in scope and perspective. This view entirely removes the presence

of others, a fact that allows for the word leadership to exist itself.

Yet in reality it cannot physically occur and as result the extension of the word others

carries over into the context of a gathering of others that existentialists now term ‘the They.”

Hence this term can be seen when applied when used in expressions such as “they believe this to

be true.” Exactly who are “the They?’ This is the group referred to be the particular existentialist

at the given time of the expression used. This requires a bit more study.

As discussed, the individual, according to existentialism, maintains freedom and this

freedom allows for the individual to define oneself. This characteristic of existentialism is critical

9 Wartenberg, Thomas E. Existentialism: A Beginner’s Guide. Oxford, England: Oneworld Publications, 2008 pp 893-895

10 Frogel, Shai. “The Soul: An Existentialist Point of View” Human Studies 33(2010): 191-204

7

and has become nihilistic, or “creatures who were able to structure their own behavior instead of

being determined by nature to behave in pre-established ways.”11 Herein the problem can be

observed objectively: if each individual defines their won existence, how then does the group

come together as a ‘They’ and exist? The obvious answer comes in the form of a double-

standard in which the ‘They” expects the individual to conform to the ‘They’s” expected

standards. This requires the individual to relinquish said freedoms, reducing their defining.

The circumstances surrounding such a scene raises extremely important questions: who

establishes the standards and further who enforces them? The questions beg for a positional

fulfillment in the form of a leader. It is at this point the Biblical model of leadership takes over

and presents an accurate reflection of true leadership and how it applies to others. Such examples

can be seen in the selection of standards by the Creator Himself who established the foundational

standards in the form of the 10 Commandments. From these 10 Laws all other forms of

governmental standards flow or are drafted, especially those that deal directly with the relating of

the individual to others.

In the Biblical template of leadership, a hierarchy can be seen as being established where

responsibility and authority are ascribed positionally and resultantly delegated to lesser degrees

per the positional level within the hierarchy. The leader cannot then define their own existence

without the inclusion of the follower or that of others. For it is in the establishment of such

standards the leader must be found personally as well. Further, the leader must be found to be of

such a mindset as to “Do nothing out of selfish ambition or vain conceit, but in humility consider

11 Wartenberg, Thomas E. Existentialism: A Beginner’s Guide. Oxford, England: Oneworld Publications, 2008pp 1072

8

others better than yourselves. 4 Each of you should look not only to your own interests, but also

to the interests of others.”12

AUTHENTICITY

The existentialist follows existence with essence. The existentialist develops the

definition of self based on the freedom of choice. The existentialist concludes that actions to life

in response to circumstances become the standards by which he is to be measured, but only from

within the context of his own definition. This according to Wartenberg, captures the definition of

the authentic existentialistic life, by saying, “an authentic life is one lived in full

acknowledgement of one’s freedom as a human being to choose how to conduct one’s life.”13

Karl Jaspers, noted existentialist of the 1930’s, observed the conditions that were

occurring in his time prior to the start of the First World War. His observations of the world were

captured in his book Man in the Modern Age. In it Jaspers characterized all the events going on

at the time as being “depersonalizing forces within modern society.” As a result, his view of the

existentialist is a struggle to live a genuine and authentic life in the wake of a society attempting

to standards a mass scale of people.14

The application of the authenticity to the position or function of leader comes more from

the lines of the one being inauthentic. Here the true existentialist would take the approach that

any person in such a position of leadership that conform to the demands of the followers or

group is then living an inauthentic life, and as a result is unworthy of being is such a position of

12 Philippians 2:313 Wartenberg, Thomas E. Existentialism: A Beginner’s Guide. Oxford, England: Oneworld Publications,

2008pp2102

14 Barrett, William. Irrational Man. New York, NY: Anchor Books, 1958 pp32

9

influence. Such a person is in fact, denying who they are in an effort to act according to the

norms of society as opposed to the true self definition. To do such would be relinquishing one’s

freedom.

This aspect of authenticity for the existentialist Heidegger comes in the form of

understanding and taking upon self one’s own death. This approach taken by Heidegger is

summed up best in his own words:

The authentic meaning of death—“I am to die”—is not as an external and public fact within the world, but as an internal possibility of my own Being. Nor is it a possibility like a point at the end of a road, which I will in time reach. So long as I think in this way, I still hold death at a distance outside myself. The point is that I may die at any moment, and therefore death is my possibility now.15

The elusive concept that eventually becomes in full view is that of suicide. Death is then

the most personal and intimate of any potential personal encounters or experiences that one can

have. While the death itself cannot be substituted by anyone or anything, the process of death can

be externally generated, reliving the existentialist with the opportunity to execute death under his

own freedom. As a result, suicide can be viewed quiet easily as the final opportunity to

demonstrate one’s one freedom and authenticity. This then becomes the final leap of faith

crossing the ultimate obstacle to one’s finite being into eternal existence.

When it comes to Christian theology the definition of authentic takes on a rather

opposing and just as potent context in a contrasting view. The Bib le first takes on the notion that

things that are done for the sole purpose of glorifying God, those things are to be done in private

and not in public. The purpose behind this coming from the books of Matthew and 1 Corinthians

15 Barrett, William (2011-01-26). Irrational Man: A Study in Existential Philosophy (p. 225). Anchor.pp225

10

tells us that our actions are to not bring attention to ourselves unjustly, thus resulting in our

actions stealing from the rightful owner of our worship, namely God.

The context of authentic extended further takes into consideration the idea of a

counterfeit as opposed to the real thing. Take into consideration the $20 bill. The real bill has

been produced under the proper design and replication to that of the original and has been

commissioned to operate with the assigned value ascribed. The counterfeit on the other hand, has

no legal grounds of authority and therefore though modeled after a copy of a copy bears no real

value and is hence a fake filled with deceit. This analogy applied to the leader ensures the leader

is seen as one with assigned value by proper authority and has no falsity within, no deception of

those to which depends on its viability. The authentic leader is real.

ABSURDITY

“Man’s existence is absurd in the midst of a cosmos that knows him not; the only

meaning he can give himself is through the free project that he launches out of his own

nothingness.16 Thus with these words the summation of existentialism can be seen. Driven by the

original writings of Kierkegaard, the term has come to describe what existentialists hold dear;

that anything contrary to reason is in and of itself, absurd. The idea of faith to an existentialist

defies the basic of principles where one defines self through one’s own freedom and actions.

As a result when the existentialist takes into consideration the notion of things that

require faith on the part of the individual, the idea becomes simply an absurd idea requiring more

than mere reasoning to believe. This does not indicate that existentialistic thinking takes a notion

of something to be believed by faith as being totally irrational and unreal. What this actually

16Barrett, William (2011-01-26). Irrational Man: A Study in Existential Philosophy. Anchor. Pp247

11

means is that the existentialist makes the claim that the amount of faith required to accept a

concept as being real or true is such that it defies reason. And life to an existentialist is absurd,

which is the most well-known claim involving the notion of absurdity.17

The absurdity that existentialism then sees in the forms of leadership comes in the notion

that as the follower enters the organization at any level, the followers chooses to relinquish a

certain degree of freedom in order to conform to the standards of not only the organization but of

the leader as well. This, in turn, is recompensed by the leader who strives to empower the

follower through a system of releasing power back to the individual in order to create an

environment where the follower has the freedom to be who they chose to be through their own

actions. The idea of this cyclic revolution is absurd.

How then, does the idea or concept of absurd fit into the world of Christian leadership?

As stated by Wartenberg,

“Within a traditional Judeo–Christian–Islamic perspective – though not Kierkegaard’s revolutionary one – there is a clear answer to this question: life’s purpose is to fulfill God’s commandments, often in hope of being rewarded in the afterlife. The metaphysical assumptions behind such a view are not hard to discover. God, it is thought, made human beings with a certain purpose in mind. In this respect, human beings are taken to be similar to many of the objects that we ourselves create.”18

Thus the Christina life, including the life of the leader is to fulfill God’ purpose as

established for that particular individual by God Himself. To do otherwise according to the

Christian Theologian would be absurd. According to same, humans were created with a purpose

and it makes no sense or reason to not act according to our designed purpose.

CONCLUSION

17 Wartenberg, Thomas E. Existentialism: A Beginner’s Guide. Oxford, England: Oneworld Publications, 2008pp1828

18 Ibid. pp1829

12

When examined closely the key tenants and principles that can be identified through

existentialist writers such as Soren Kierkegaard and Jean Sartre, the applicability of such tenants

and principles prove to be costly when utilized functionally by a person in a position of

leadership. Key notions, themes, or even ideas framed within the design of existentialism include

such terms as essence, freedom, others, authenticity and absurdity. What these key terms come to

define is the overriding belief system of existentialism: that man is free to be whatever man

chooses to be in the freedom of man’s own making of values where even man only measure self

based on the standards designed by man’s self.

It has been shown that these principles representing only a small portion of the

existentialist mantra can prove to be detrimental when applied to the person in leadership.

Notwithstanding the fluidity of standards the fact that remains behind a leader is that the leader

actually has followers. The importance of this fact cannot be overstated: The leader's actions

have an effect on the followers.

This being so eternally important the leader must take into consideration the

insurmountable negative consequences of being allowed to establish subjective and changing

personal standards while attempting to create objective and immoveable standards by which to

measure subordinates. The double standard become readily apparent to those under the leader

and the end result can only come in the form of disloyalty and distrust among many.

The only true model of leadership that maintains the necessary degree of integrity and

stability in order to be applicable to a multitude of leadership positions remains that of the

Biblical Christianity model. It is within this context the standards for both leader and followers

are clearly defined and the accountability for the leader remains that much great than for the

13

follower. This ensures the leader’s decisions affecting the group are made within the standards,

are balanced, and have the good of the entire group as well as those of the individuals in mind.

14

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Barrett, William. Irrational Man. New York, NY: Anchor Books, 1958

Breese, David. Seven Men Who Rule the World From the Grave. Chicago, IL: Moody Press, 1990

DuFrenne, Mikel. “Existentialism and Existentialisms.” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 26, no 1 (Sep., 1965) pp51-62

Elwell, Walter. Evangelical Dictionary of Theology. 2d ed. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 2001.

Erickson, Millard. Christian Theology. 2d ed. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1998. ISBN: 0-8012-2182-0.

Frogel, Shai. “The Soul: An Existentialist Point of View” Human Studies 33(2010): 191-204

Ihde, Don. “Existentialism Today.” Journal of Thought 2:4 (1967:Nov.) p.19

Lawler, John. “The Essence of Existential Leadership? Existentialism and Leadership.” Leadership 215 (2005) http://lea.sagepub.com/ (accessed September 18, 2011)

Medina, Marc. “Leadership and the Process of Becoming” Existential Analysis vol 22, no 1. (Janruary 2011) 70-82.

Plantinga, Alvin. “On Existentialism.” Philosophical Studies 44, no 1 (Jul, 1983) pp 1-20. http://www.jstor.org/stable/4319612 (accessed September 18, 2011)

Schaeffer, Francis. Francis A. Schaeffer Trilogy. Edited by Crossway Books. Wheaton, IL: Crossway Books, Good News Publishers, 1990.

Visker, Rudi. “Was Existentialism Truly a Humanism?” Sartre Studies International 13, no 1, 2007. Pp3-15.

Wartenberg, Thomas E. Existentialism: A Beginner’s Guide. Oxford, England: Oneworld Publications, 2008

15