【正文】 om others most by his humancentered thinking. “Sartre appreciated Decarte’s ‘I think’, and thought that any truth in the world can not depart with ‘I think before I am’, only from which we can get an ‘a(chǎn)bsolute real selfconsciousness.’” Of course, there are differences between them. In Sartre’s opinion, “Before Decarte’s reflective cogito, ., ‘I think’, there should and must be the prereflective thought, which should be the subject of philosophy and the starting line of the phonology.” There are shortings in Decarte’s thinking. For example, “from the prereflective cogito, Decarte sets up ‘I’ as the instinctive structure of ideology, and as the subject of thinking dominating ideology”, and consequently he went into dualism, which separates subject from object. Also in “Cogito ergo sum”, Decarte defines “I” as a real and tangible person, which in “I think before I am”, Sartre thinks that “I” is a general theoretical definition, not a real one. What’s more, Sartre pays more attention to the authenticity and creativity of individuals, ., he focuses on the initiative of human beings. We choose to be what we want ourselves to be, and we must think first, not behaving in bad faith.In spite of those detailed differences, the two theories, no matter Sartre’s “Existence before essence” or its origin “I think, so I am”, both stress the initiative of people. With the aim of discussing the initiative of those pilots, let’s see how they respond differently to the paradoxical Catch22. The initiative of the soldiers“The existence of reality is always surrounded and penetrated by man’s subjectivity.” For a soldier, the immediate rules from the upper officials of the army where he serves are essential and impetuous for his daily life, although here, in this squadron, the dominating rule, Catch22, even doesn’t exist at all, while all the enlisted men following it blindly. Sartre holds that “existence before essence”, man is free to choose himself to be a certain kind of person, who at the same time has the liability for himself as well as for the others, if not, he is said to be in a “bad faith”, which is a kind of escape from the responsibility he should take. And that’s why Sartre’s theories are called “the philosophy of action”. His theory encourages people to make their own choices, and to realize their authentic self. So initiative is important in Sartre’s theories of existence, while without which you can be called in inertia, or bad faith.For the squadron of soldiers, some of them just act themselves in relation to the orders from the military system。 Nearly every time he flies a bat mission, He will be shot down. People consider Orr pitiful, so does Yossarian. Yossarian’s such worrying seems rational because Orr has acted ridiculously. But is Orr really a so funny and simpleminded person? He remains enigmatic up to the last chapter. In fact, Orr makes himself look stupid, his funny behavior makes him a look of stupid innocence that nobody would ever think any cleverness of him．The oppressors will not think such a funny soldier would do anything against their control. Orr is the personification of qualifies of intelligence and endurance which make possible the survival of humanity under the worst condition of oppression and exploitation (Milne 184). He banks on the military establishment’s general lack of imagination．He is a doer and admirably equipped to survive. He is pletely awake what he wants, and that is the same thing that ostensibly energizes Yossariansurvival. To achieve it, Orr first pays the whore for being beaten. Then he chooses to do something as a fool and practices being shot down. At last，he goes to the ideal country. His successful escape to Sweden is ‘‘a(chǎn) miracle of human intelligence and human endurance” (458). It convinces Yossarian that escape is possible and leads to his own desertion near the end of the novel. YossarianHeller propagates in this novel the absurdity of the world and the alienation of human beings, and at the same time he suggests the chance of free choice in the absurdity. Such a possibility is well embodied in the aviatorprotagonist Yossarian. Living in all unfavorable circumstance, he resists the irrationality in an absurd way. Heller has description of Yossarian39。s whore39。s such experience is well reproduced in the affair of Snowden39。 while others really start to desert. In this special situation, the soldiers of the third group is those of selfconsciousness, they think more about themselves, more about the war and even more about the world than others do, which is accordant with Decarte’s “Cogito ergo sum”. The most representative figure of this group, besides Yossarian, is Orr.Under the control of Catch22, Yossarian and Orr are brave enough to show their initiative in seeking their “authentic self”. Compared with Yossarian and Orr, most of the soldiers are lack of initiative, ., living in “bad faith”. Under the rule of Catch22, they aren’t in authentic existence, and just as above I have mentioned, they are only puppets.“Bad faith” is one of famous themes of existentialism. If you act in “bad faith”, you are trying to force away from the anguish of realizing that you are absolutely free, and you do not choose your being on the basis of this or that matter, but out of nothing. As said by Sartre’s theory, “bad faith” has many forms. One manifestation of it occurs in the person who lives as a role that is mere stereotype. In order to escape one’s responsibility of choosing a meaning and a value for his life, one adopts a readymade role, which provides him with a meaning he does not have to head for himself. I will mention several soldiers as examples living in “bad faith” in the following section.In Sartre’s views, the war itself is a danger to people’s freedom, which erases their initiative. MacWatt, Yossarian’s pilot, enjoys driving Yossarian up the wall by flying his airplane just a few inches over Yossarian’s tent.