After reading both essays, Existentialism by Jean-Paul Satare and Stephen Hawking's essay Is Everything Determined?, it is very evident that both authors posed very different central arguments. In Existentialism, Satare's central argument is that existence precedes essence. What this notion means to me is that as we exist as humans-- we are here in full form and as we exist we determine who we are as individuals in society. Satare places a strong emphasis on having our own fate in the palms of our hands. For example, Satare talks about how as an individual he has the choice to marry whomever or even have children. He also points out that as people realize that they control their fate, they hold a deeper responsibility and have a stronger regard for mankind as a whole. On the other hand, in Hawking's essay, Is Everything Determined? he argues that everything is determined when it comes to our fate and we have no control over what truly happens to us. He also applies science to this argument and sheds light on the fact that even though everything is determined, we don't truly know for a fact what things are actually determined. All in all, I agree more with Satare's argument about Existentialism-- I believe that we determine our fate and we as humans have free will to determine what happens to us.