The existential philosophy of Jean Paul Sartre postulates that it is in man, and only in man, that existence precedes essence. Simply put, Sartre means that man is first and foremost, and only after his “being” does he become this or that. The implication in Sartre's philosophy is that man must create his own essence: it is in being thrown into the world through conscious intent, loving, struggling, experiencing and being in the world that man can define himself. However, the definition always remains open: we cannot say that the human being is definitively this or that before his death and in fact it is the ultimate nothingness of death that is defined as being. The concepts that Sartre examines in Being and Nothingness exist as part of a philosophical tapestry aimed at revealing the nature of Being. In many ways, the flow of considerations in Being and Nothingness is part of the examination of a single question: what is the nature of our existence? Sartre attempts to answer his question of existence in various ways, primarily by examining consciousness and its juxtaposition between existence and nothingness. The position in which Sartre places consciousness is always qualified by self-perception and the perceptions of others, applied to ourselves and to others, so as to create a continuous subject-object relationship through which being finds for itself a place where to be. his philosophy is based first and foremost on man's innate free will and declares that it is a by-product of the interaction between being and nothingness. According to Sartre, individuals are free from birth and continue to define their essence throughout their lives. The nature of an individual is what we have done in the past and what our actions are. In normative or traditional ethics, both the notion of God and Humanity allow us to ignore our responsibility for creating meaning in our lives and to deceive ourselves into believing that we have somehow evaded the ambiguity inherent in reality . In all established authoritarian ethical systems we find an appeal to an idealized destiny that would be found through the adoption of said ethical system, which allows us to justify almost any means as long as they work towards that end. In doing so, these ethical systems lead us to sacrifice the present moment, distorting our relationship with time. De Beauvoir, in contrast, insists that ethics must have implicit within it an acute awareness of our temporal and interconnected nature, which requires that our ethical choices uphold equanimity in the future and the value of the present moment..