51�鱨վ

May 6, 2025 – August 7, 2025

Professor: D.Z. Shaw, Ph.D.

Contact: shawd3@douglascollege.ca

Thursdays, 6:30pm–9:20pm

Room: Anvil Office Tower AOT 910/911

Summer Institute 2025: Between Absurdity and Ambiguity, 

Or, The Break between Sartre and Camus 

Jean-Paul Sartre and Albert Camus are often associated among the literary public and specialists as the towering literary and philosophical figures of French existentialism. Both are seen as thinkers who respond to the absurdity of the world by calling for commitment, engagement, and revolt. 

This year in the Summer Institute, we will revisit the early convergences between Sartre and Camus, their divergences, and—ultimately—their political, philosophical, and personal break. We will revisit some of their early literary interactions and engage with two other philosophers who are often cast as supporting characters, Simone de Beauvoir and Francis Jeanson. We will see that the break between Sartre and Camus turned on debates about the differences between a philosophy of absurdity and a philosophy of ambiguity, but also concerning the differences between socialism, syndicalism, and communism, the relation between individual action and collective action, obligations to the other, and even anti-colonialism. We may even discover, in our reading of this major literary event of the early 1950s, how our very understanding of this debate is shaped by our own social and political situation.

Enrolment

Prerequisites: 9 prior credits in Philosophy or permission of the instructor.

Enrolment Requirements: 51�鱨վ students who have met the prerequisites can enrol directly.

PHIL 3380: Contemporary Continental Philosophy is open to all post-secondary students with 9 credits in Philosophy (or suitable equivalents) and may transfer as third-year credit to universities across British Columbia, including UBC and SFU. Students currently enrolled in a BC post-secondary institution do NOT need to apply for admission to 51�鱨վ in order to take this course. Students may apply to enroll into PHIL 3380 by completing and submitting the enrolment form and accompanying documents to Don Reimer, Associate Registrar (reimerd1@douglascollege.ca), as per instructions on the form. All applications will be reviewed by the instructor. Please contact Dr. Shaw with any questions.

Uncommon Ground: Camus and Sartre on Colonialism

Jérôme Melançon, University of Regina

June 26, 2025, 6:30pm, room TBA

Jérôme Melançon is Professor of Philosophy and Head of the Department of Philosophy and Classics at the University of Regina. He is the author of La politique dans l’adversité: Merleau-Ponty aux marges de la politique (Metispresses, 2018), the editor of Merleau-Ponty’s radio interviews in Entretiens avec Georges Charbonnier et autres dialogues 1946-1959 (Verdier, 2016), and the editor of four journal issues or collective books about Merleau-Ponty’s political philosophy. His more recent research has focused on settler colonialism in Canada, and specifically on the role and place of French speakers within this system, as well as on the possibilities and limits of reconciliation. His current research deals with methodologies for research in the archives of Indian Residential Schools, and notably for the translation of documents from French into English. He is also a poet and a translator.

Abstract

A comparison between Albert Camus and Jean-Paul Sartre on the question of colonialism faces many pitfalls. The first is their respective insularity, and that of the comparison itself: both came to the topic through the accounts and arguments of others, and theorized colonialism through what they could see, from a distance, of the political movements that struggled against it. A study that focuses solely on these two authors thus has the drawback of minimizing and ignoring the decolonial struggles of the colonized. It might then lead to give writers who are so well established in France a central place in theorizing, even though they were far from the first to do so, spent relatively little of their efforts on this problem. The second pitfall is their provincialism, and that of the comparison as well: their interventions in wider debates are proper to two different, though related, contexts, which each refused to connect to the other. Camus saw colonialism from the perspective of settlers in French Algeria, while Sartre did so from the perspective of metropolitans in France, where the specificity of Algeria is lost to a concern for the world stage and for history. These two provincialisms are out of phase with each other – and with the lived experience of the colonized. 

A third pitfall is present in the narrative and images we have received of these two authors. We hear of Sartre and Camus, forgetting that Sartre had the last word because Camus died young and Sartre could write about him; but also forgetting that Camus wrote about and against colonialism long before Sartre ever did. We see the picture of Sartre beside Beauvoir and Guevara, while we remember Camus’ concern for his mother at the moment of his acceptance of the Nobel Prize for Literature – which Sartre would eventually reject. We remember the scorn philosophers like Sartre, like Merleau-Ponty, and political thinkers like Arendt, had for Camus the journalist and essayist; and we remember Camus’ anti-communism. Through these representations, and a possible lack of understanding of the complications of the various French debates concerning colonialism, we are likely to misunderstand their theorizing.

Why then turn to Camus and Sartre to understand colonialism? The difficulties are great, the rewards seem limited, and our energies might be better spent going back to the works of those who actively took part in movements of decolonization. Nonetheless, given that this research is indeed also taking place and that it does and must inform my own, I believe that leaving Camus’ and Sartre’s separate theorizing and their implicit debate aside would be a mistake, which has to do with over-correcting our focus on settlers and metropolitans’ views of colonialism. As Fanon himself indicated, decolonial struggles need the support of anti-colonial struggles from those who would otherwise benefit from colonialism. 

This talk will be one moment of a broader study of the arguments settlers and metropolitans have given against colonialism – alongside past studies of Tran Duc Thao and ongoing studies of Esprit, Les Temps Modernes, Merleau-Ponty, Beauvoir, and Francis Jeanson, the latter in collaboration with Dr. D.Z. Shaw, and all in conjunction with studies of Francophone anti-colonial and decolonial thinkers. I more generally seek to find out what leads those who benefit from colonialism to argue against it and at times take part in struggles against it. This talk will thus focus on the arguments Camus and Sartre have each given against colonialism, their definitions and depictions of the system, as well as their main references and influences in approaching colonialism. It will proceed through an internal reading of the texts and will show that the two thinkers stand on different grounds, both geographically and theoretically, in theorizing a system that does not allow for the sharing of the land or relations that recognize the humanity of those who are colonized – at the same time as they both stand on uncommon ground in that they were willing to criticize a system that continues to be heralded as system that has made the glory of France.

These required readings are available at the 51�鱨վ Bookstore:

• Simone de Beauvoir, The Ethics of Ambiguity, trans. Bernard Fretchman (New York: Open Road, 2018), ISBN: 9781504054225.
• Albert Camus, The Stranger, trans. Matthew Ward (New York: Vintage, 1989). ISBN: 978-0679720201.
• Jean-Paul Sartre, Existentialism is a Humanism, ed. John Kulka (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2007). ISBN: 978-0300115468.
• Jean-Paul Sartre, On Revolution, trans. Chris Turner (Seagull Books, 2021). ISBN: 9780857429056.
• David A. Sprintzen and Adrian van den Hoven, editors, Sartre and Camus: A Historic Confrontation (Amherst, NY: Humanity Books, 2004), 79–221. (Pending)

This recommended reading is available at the 51�鱨վ Bookstore (otherwise, an excerpt will be provided via Blackboard):

• Albert Camus, The Rebel, trans. Anthony Bower (New York: Vintage, 1991). ISBN: 978-0-679-73384-3.

All other readings are available on Blackboard in PDF format.

First Essay, worth 30% of the final grade, due June 5th. This essay, of 2000–2400 words, must follow accepted academic conventions. It must directly address material found in the course texts and must engage with secondary literature on the topic. Choose one of the following topics:

1. Analyze and defend Sartre’s critique of Camus. Respond to at least one criticism of Sartre in the secondary literature.
2. Analyze Sartre’s critique of Camus and outline a response defending Camus. Respond to at least one criticism of Camus in the secondary literature.

Second Essay, worth 30% of the final grade, due July 17th. This essay, of 2400–3000 words, must follow accepted academic conventions. It must directly address material found in the course texts and must engage with secondary literature on the topic. Choose one of the following topics:

1. Defend the thesis that Beauvoir’s Ethics of Ambiguity is a critique of Camus’s philosophy of absurdity. I would like to see your engagement with secondary literature on Beauvoir’s concept of freedom in The Ethics of Ambiguity and any secondary literature that addresses her work in relation to Camus (excluding the cursory remarks I have made in my own work).
2. Outline Sartre’s engagement with Marxism in “Materialism and Revolution” and “Portrait of the Adventurer.” I expect you to defend a thesis that could include themes such as ‘whether Sartre’s engagement with Marxism theoretically fruitful’; ‘whether Sartre is a Marxist’; or ‘how did Sartre’s engagement with Marxism shape his theory of commitment?’ There is an immense secondary literature about Sartre and Marxism, and I expect that you engage with some of the claims made in these debates.

Third Essay, worth 40% of the final grade, due August 15th. This essay, of 3000–3500 words, must follow accepted academic conventions. It must directly address material found in the course texts and must engage with secondary literature on the topic. 

• This essay must outline the general contours of the debate between the authors associated with Les Temps Modernes (Jeanson and Sartre) and Camus. I expect you to defend one of the authors against criticisms of the other(s) and engage the debates and assessments in the secondary literature. 

Late Assignment Policy

I will accept at no penalty any work that is submitted after the deadline but before I finish grading the submissions from this class that were handed in on time. I only accept late work submitted after I have completed grading on-time submissions for full credit when we have made prior arrangements. I grade late work as I can fit it into my schedule and at a minimum with a 10-percent penalty. If an assignment is handed in more than two weeks overdue without prior arrangement, I may refuse to grant any credit, but I will assess this on a case-by-case basis. Please note that I have far less discretion with the hard deadline for submitting marks at the end of the semester.

The Summer Institute for Continental Philosophy is directed by four 51�鱨վ faculty, philosophers who have specialized in this area of Philosophy:

Dr. Devin Zane Shaw completed his PhD at the University of Ottawa. He is the author of three books, Philosophy of Antifascism: Punching Nazis and Fighting White Supremacy (Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, 2020), Egalitarian Moments: From Descartes to Rancière (Bloomsbury, 2016) and Freedom and Nature in Schelling's Philosophy of Art (Bloomsbury, 2010). He has also published articles in the area of political philosophy. 

Dr. John Bruin received his PhD from Guelph/McMaster with a dissertation on Husserl which was subsequently published by the University of Ottawa Press in 2001 under the title Homo Interrogans. Dr. Bruin has also published articles on Heidegger.

Dr. Robert Nicholls (retired) completed his PhD at the University of Waterloo in 1988 with a dissertation entitled Sense and Existence: Heidegger 1925-29. Dr. Nicholls has published essays on Nietzsche, Husserl and Heidegger, as well as in the areas of literary theory, philosophy of education and Eastern philosophy.

Dr. Mano Daniel (retired) completed his doctorate at the University of Waterloo with a dissertation on the work of Hannah Arendt. He co-edited the book Phenomenology of the Cultural Disciplines, and  has written papers in the areas of  environmental sustainability; philosophy of biography; philosophy and public policy; and the nature of apology.