Thematic Distinction Between Essence and Existence

Abstract or Introduction

The terms essence and existence have dominated philosophical discussions for centuries, at least from the era of Plato up to the contemporary times. The central issue at the heart of this discourse in the preliminary stage had to do with the question of what actually makes an essence of an existing entity. For example, if you say God, philosophers will probe further to ask: what is the essence of God? In other words, ‘what are those characteristics that are truly exclusive to God? If, again, you say a Satsuma (a type of orange) exists, then one will be prompted to ask as to what features distinguish it from a tangerine. That is, what are those distinctive qualities - essentially immaterial - that will not make me call an existential Satsuma a tangerine? What the inquirer is demanding is simply something more than mere the Satsuma or any of the accidental features like colour, taste, etc. Questions have also been raised in terms of what actually exists as against what is believed to exist. The discourse quickly like wild fire moved from the level of mere conceptualizing the terms to the level of philosophers trying to find out which of essence and existence precedes each other. In other words, granted, at least, at level of assumption that both human and objects exist, philosophers are asking whether their essence precedes their existence. The battle to resolve this crisis of concepts pitted modern Christian philosophers like Bishop George Berkeley and Immanuel Kant against contemporary existentialists like Jean Paul Sartre and Martin Heidegger. The former school, led by Berkeley in its submission had argued that essence precedes existence, while the latter, championed by extensively by Sartre disagrees, saying existence precedes essence. However, there are other variations to the discourse but it is sufficient for the scope of this paper to limit discussion to these two, with more emphasis on Sartre.