mentioned in Sartre’s DES thesis at the E ́cole, as well as inThe Legend of
Truth, and is listed in his application letter to the fellowship committee as
one of the thinkers whose thought he intended to study in a proposed
research year in Berlin.^12 Given Aron’s interest in Weber (he introduced
Weber’s work to the French public in the late 1930 s, a task performed
by Talcott Parsons for the Americans a decade later), it is likely that he
communicated with Sartre aboutVerstehenandExistenzphilosophieduring
his fellowship year in Berlin, which corresponded to Sartre’s second full
year at Le Havre. Unfortunately, we do not have that correspondence.
Vincent de Coorebyter has argued convincingly that theCarnet Dupuis
can be read “as an early pre-text toNausea” that pre-dates Sartre’s
research year in Berlin.^13 The concluding section of the notebook con-
sists of a numbered list of items to be discussed in the novel. De
Coorebyter reads it as beginning the task of liquidating Sartre’s youthful
illusions about the relation between metaphysics and aesthetics that the
published version ofNauseawill complete.^14
(^12) See Alain Flajoliet,La Premiere philosophie de Sartre(Paris: Honore ́Champion, 2008 ), 351 , n. 76 ; hereafterPPS. He sees the presence of Jaspers chiefly in Sartre’sdiploˆmeand his Sketch for a Theory of the Emotions(December 1939 ). However, in addition to Max Weber and Wilhelm Dilthey, who used the method of “Verstehen” (understanding) extensively, we shall observe Sartre’s appeal to “comprehension” increase as he turns to social thought and 13 the philosophy of history. “Un avant-texte pre ́coce deLa Nause ́e,”ESnos. 9 , 10. He makes this claim notwithstanding Andre ́Dupuis’s having found theCarnetwhile Sartre’s philosophy student in 1935 – 1936. Sartre’s “factum on contingency” went through several versions, the first of which is dated from 1931 to 1933 , viz., during his first two years at Le Havre and perhaps the beginning of his research year in Berlin. De Coorebyter’s hypothesis is that theCarnet Dupuisserved as a resource for this initial version (ES nos. 9 , 10 ) and that the attack on metaphysics thatNausea undertakes confidently is anticipated tentatively in this notebook (ES nos. 8 , 11 ). Be that as it may, the discussion we have just summarized is certainly metaphysical and not merely psychological in character. In fact, I shall ague that Sartre never “abandoned” metaphysics, though he occasionally confused it with ontology – the philosophy of being. Consider his 14 approach to literary criticism, for instance, discussed below inChapter^15. For a careful discussion of the historical genesis of the text ofNausea, relevant documents including theCahier Dupuisand Sartre’s “Please Insert” advice attached at the end of the first French edition, samples of early reviews, bibliography of studies, list of secondary sources and a lengthy application of critical apparatus to the text, seeOR 1657 ff., with 1718 – 1802 (for the “Notes et Variantes”). The editors note the “half-ironic, half-serious tone” of the two paragraphs of the “Priere d’inse ́rer” as if to mark “a compromise between
the anecdotal content of the book and its philosophical meaning” (OR 1694 ). As such, it
underscores the bifocal character of Sartre’s work, balanced between philosophical and the
literary values and methods.
54 Teaching in the lyce ́e, 1931–1939