Analysis of Subjectivity in The Ethics of Ambiguity

In The Ethics of Ambiguity, Simone de Beauvoir explores the "ambiguity" of the human condition. For her, subjectivity is not a static or singular state but a constant tension between opposing dimensions. To find what will NOT hold, we must identify descriptions that deny this dual nature.

1. Why "It is pure interiority" does NOT hold (Option 1)

Beauvoir, rooted in existential phenomenology, rejects the idea of the "Cartesian" or "solipsistic" subject. Subjectivity is not a closed-off mental state or "pure interiority." Rather, it is "being-in-the-world." A subject only exists through its interactions with the physical world and other consciousnesses.

2. Why "It is pure exteriority" does NOT hold (Option 2)

If subjectivity were "pure exteriority," a human would be nothing more than a "thing" or an object (facticity). This would deny the "for-itself" (consciousness) and the ability to project oneself toward the future. Beauvoir argues that while we have an exterior presence, we are not defined solely by it.

3. Why "It presupposes radical freedom" does NOT hold (Option 3)

While Beauvoir is an existentialist, her work is a critique of abstract radical freedom. In this specific context, she argues that subjectivity is always situated. We do not possess a "radical" freedom in the sense of being totally unconditioned or independent of our historical and social situation. Freedom must be actively achieved and willed within the constraints of our situation; it is not a simple, abstract "radical" presupposition of the self.

4. Why "It is both for-oneself and given for others" HOLDS (Option 4)

This statement is the essence of Beauvoir’s notion of ambiguity. She explicitly describes the human being as a "sovereign subject" (for-oneself) who is simultaneously a "given object" in the world for other people (given for others). Because this statement holds true to her theory, it is not part of the correct answer for this "NOT" question.

Conclusion

According to the principle of ambiguity, subjectivity can never be "purely" one thing. Therefore, any description using the word "pure" or implying an abstract, unconditioned state (like abstract radical freedom) will not hold.

The correct selections for what will NOT hold are:

• Option 1: It is pure interiority
• Option 2: It is pure exteriority
• Option 3: It presupposes radical freedom

Final Answer: Options 1, 2, and 3.