Sartre claims we are free outside of facticity, ie. we live on earth,
with other humans, who need oxygen to live and obey the laws of
physics etc. He even says that if they do not understand aspects of
facticity that we cannot truly "act."
to get to the point, clearly the above cannot be categorised and
closed off from the rest of life just by deeming them facticity.
The fact that we live in a world with other humans constrains every
action we make. (depending on your definition of constraint)
Yes, we remain free to decide, but are constrained due to the simple
fact that: whenever we make any interaction with an individual or for
that matter thing, our future actions, although they do not exist as
yet, become different, than if we had not had this interaction with
Saying that "living in a world with other people" is part of our
facticity and that is where it stops, is clearly a cop out that
evades the phenomena that lies before us in everyday life and action.
Whilst Sartre would say that others influence us, or make us more
probable to act in one way or another, he would not concede that they
constrain us and change our actions. To exemplify the fact that
effects of the outside world influence but not constrain us, he has
used many examples such as men who resolve to quit gambling, or
smoking but remain free to smoke. Whilst the decision they make is in
part free, clearly the effect of others stretches further than what
sartre claims it does by effecting the possibilities of the present
and therefore the future.