First short answer

short questions (choose 2 of 4 to answer, all will be present)

1. Explain how sartre develops an ontological proof for the existence of both the pre-reflective cogito and the world from the fact of consciousness.

ANSWERS:
{maria}
Consciousness is constituted in such a way that it intends toward a transcendental object which it is not. In order for consciousness to be intentional, there has to be some thing to be intended. So, if there were not some sort of object outside of consciousness, then consciousness could not exist.

Therefore consciousness is a being such that in its being, its being is in question in so far as this being implies a being other than itself.  

Consciousness has only the obligation to be a revealing intuition of something. Pure subjectivity cannot posit the outside world because it is strictly conscious of being conscious.  Consciousness of being consciousness is still a revealing intuition and a revealing intuition implies something revealed. A revealed revelation of being which is not consciousness constitutes a pre-reflective consciousness as well as an object outside of consciousness.

[LAURA-DIFFERENT ANSWER SAME QUESTION]

The fact of consciousness exists in two parts: intentional and non-intentional awareness. Consciousness must have consciousness of itself - otherwise, anything it was conscious of would have no context in which to exist. {How can you be conscious of something without realizing you are conscious of it?} The intentional awareness is the consciousness of some thing, and the non-intentional is the reflective awareness (pre-reflective cogito). It is a reinvention of consciousness.


     The non-intentional awareness or, the pre-reflective cogito is defined as having no essence – “being what it is not, and not being what it is.” {also, it cannot be objectified} The pre-reflective cogito is subjectiveness, and remakes itself by constantly being aware of its consciousness – it has no essence {in order to be sad, one must make oneself sad from beginning to end, and in order to make oneself sad, one must not be sad to begin with – “I am what I am not”} To objectify one as sadness would be to give an essence for consciousness (which it has not).

     The intentional consciousness is always conscious of something which it is not (because it is what it is not) and must transcend itself toward the object of intention. Consciousness is empty and must intend toward towards an object which is always external to consciousness. It appears to my consciousness as opposed to in. Again, if an object were to be in consciousness, it would intend an essence which consciousness has not.

     Thus, the two parts of consciousness are dependent on each other. Consciousness constitutes both elements. Consciousness has to be intentionally conscious of some object in the world (hence the world) which it is not. But it is impossible to be conscious of an object without be self-conscious (pre-reflective cogito). The pre-reflective cogito is not possible without being conscious of an object-in-the-world of conscious. So, from the fact of consciousness, both the pre-reflective cogito and the world must exist.