Notes on Heidegger's "Being and Time"

Being and Time

By Martin Heidegger

A Summary

Contents

Worldhood of the World....... 2

Being-with and the Others....... 2

Being-There....... 3

Being-there as State of Mind....... 3

Being-there as Understanding....... 3

Being-there as Assertion....... 4

Daesin’s Average Everydayness....... 5

Being-there as Anxiety....... 6

Being-there as Care....... 7

The Being of Reality....... 9

The Being of Truth....... 10

Being-as-a-whole....... 13

Being-towards-death....... 13

Being-towards-the-end as Care....... 15

Everyday Being-towards-the-end....... 16

Being-towards-death, Anticipation and Authenticity....... 17

The Call of Conscience....... 20

The Being of Conscience....... 20

Conscience as a Call of Care....... 21

Being-guilty and the Call of Conscience....... 22

Everyday Interpretation of Conscience and Being-guilty....... 25

The Call of Conscience and Resoluteness....... 26

Authentic Potentiality-for-being-a-whole and Temporality....... 29

Anticipatory Resoluteness....... 30

Daesin’s Selfhood and Circular Being-in-general....... 32

Selfhood and Care....... 34

Temporality....... 35

Temporal Interpretation of Everyday Daesin....... 39

Temporality of fear....... 41

Temporality of anxiety....... 42

Temporality of curiosity....... 43

Temporality of discourse....... 44

Temporality of Being-in-the-world....... 44

Temporality of circumspective concern....... 44

Problem of the transcendence of the world....... 47

Temporality and historicality....... 49

Temporality of Within-time-ness....... 53

Division One

Worldhood of the World

Daesin has Being-in-the-world as an essential part of its being; Daesin only has Being-in in the world. Another essential component of Daesin’s being is that it’s being is an issue for it.

The world has many things in it. Daesin is orientated toward these things as equipment that is ready-at-hand (e.g. a hammer is a “hammer” because it is useful for Daesin; it has readiness-at-hand for Daesin). Readiness-at-hand (because it is useful to Daesin and Daesin can interact with it) is different to being merely present-at-hand (things lacking Daesin’s interaction with it).

The total things in the world that are ready-at-hand and therefore of concern to Daesin is a totality of equipment.

The total orientation of readiness-at-hand to Daesin is a totality of involvements.

In its circumspective, concernful dealings with the world, Daesin brings things close to itself by deseverence of a totality of equipment (e.g. concentrating on something brings it close so it emerges from a totality of equipment into concernful circumspection).

Daesin’s concernful circumspection in readiness-at-hand gives the world its worldhood.

Being-with and the Others

Another essential part of Daesin’s being as being-in-the-world is Being-with.

Daesin shares Being-in-the-world with the “Others”, including other Daesins; Daesin’s Being-in-the-world includes Being-with-one-another.

The Others form the “They”.

Daesin can get lost in the They (based on Nietszche’s concept of the herd); it becomes lost in “collective consciousness” or the They-self. Daesin that is lost in the They is inauthentic; authentic Daesin is Daesin knowing itself in disclosedness.

Being-There

Being-with the Others already implies that Daesin has Being-There; Daesin occupies a definitive position in the world to enable it to relate to the Others.

Daesin has disclosedness (or open-ness) to the Being-there of itself (and the world); Daesin knows itself as occupying a definitive position in the world and knows it is this position. This open-ness to itself is essential to Daesin; Daesin is Being-there of itself. Disclosedness is the reason Daesin’s being is an issue for it.

State of mind and Understanding are essential components of Daesin’s Being-there of itself.

Being-there as State of Mind

State of mind is defined as having moods. Being-there for itself is Daesin’s disclosed mood or That-it-is (i.e. Daesin’s specific state of being).

That-it-is is Daesin’s Being-there as Thrownness. Daesin is thrown into its That-it-is (i.e. thrown into the world in a specific state).

Daesin’s disclosive submission to the world and its thrownness is dependent on moods.

Being-there as Understanding

Daesin is Being-possible. Daesin can be its possibilities by Understanding its own being/itself.

The Being-possible of Daesin is a thrown possibility; a possibility which is surrendered (or limited) to thrownness.

Daesin understands by understanding itself.

Understanding projects Daesin’s being onto the world. This makes Daesin’s possibilities possible.

Understanding is authentic when Daesin understands itself. Daesin is inauthentic when it loses understanding of itself.

Authentic knowledge of self is a transparent looking or projection of possibilities. Therefore, Being-there is full disclosure of Being-in-the-world with understanding.

Understanding develops itself as interpretation.

Articulation is something as something. Authentic articulation is something as itself.

Interpretation includes circumspectively discovering the world. It also includes seeing readiness-at-hand and understanding it among a totality of involvements.

Interpretation is always from a point of view; this includes a fore-having, fore-sight and fore-conception. Current interpretation is grounded on past understanding and interpretation.

The fore-structure of understanding and interpretation gives entities meaning.

Articulated understanding and interpretation is the state of being of Being-there.

Meaning is always orientated from Daesin; only Daesin is meaningful/meaningless because only Daesin gives meaning to things.

Understanding the world enables understanding of existence.

Being-there as Assertion

Assertion is another essential component of Daesin’s being.

Assertion involves pointing out, prediction and discourse/talking.

When Daesin asserts something, its view is restricted from the totality of involvements to make that something explicit. That something is given a definitive character.

Assertion is grounded on prior understanding and involves communication. Communication allows Others to see what Daesin points out.

What is shared in communication is Daesin’s Being-towards as Being-in-the world. This Being-towards (a pointing out from a definitive position in the world) must be expressed to be shared with the Others.

When an assertion is expressed, it loses the circumspective interpretation “as” (as such and such as readiness-at-hand) and becomes “as” of present-at-hand. This “as” then becomes desevered by another Daesin and brought close in circumspective concern. The “as” becomes ready-at-hand for this Daesin. This Daesin then expresses the “as” and so on.

Assertion as communication is discourse or talking. This involves articulation of intelligibility, which underlies interpretation and assertion. Intelligibility gives meaning (i.e. allows it to emerge) among a totality of significations.

Discourse or talking is the articulation of the There of Being-there; it discloses the intelligibility of the There by putting it into words.

Talking enables Daesin to express its state of mind as Being-in-the-world.

(Stammering is thematically inappropriate discourse – the inauthentic stammering “theme” imposes itself on the authentic, personal or me “theme” that I want to express).

Hearing is also a key feature of discourse. It is Being-open to Being-with the Others. It also includes Being-open to Being-there of Daesin itself.

Daesin has a choice whether to follow or turn away from what is heard.

What is asserted and what is heard is ready-at-hand and already has a fore-having; what is asserted, understood and interpreted is already “known” in the how of Daesin desevering and bringing close.

Daesin’s Average Everydayness

Daesin’s average everydayness is characterised by idle talk, curiosity and ambiguity.

Language enables the Others to participate in Daesin’s being. Language is common understanding or knowing the same averageness. This averageness is only passing the word along and not the entity itself. This averageness is therefore groundless and is called idle talk.

Disclosed discourse is made one’s own and is grounded in Daesin. Idle talk, in comparison, is groundless and involves a closing off from Daesin.

In idle talk, Daesin is uprooted (or lost) in this averageness. This is Daesin’s everydayness.

Daesin’s everydayness is also seeing as curiosity. Curiosity is letting the world be encountered and being distracted by new possibilities.

In curiosity, Daesin is uprooted (or lost) in this seeking the new. This is Daesin’s everydayness.

In language and words, everyone can understand a thing that is not personally disclosed. This results in ambiguity. Ambiguity can be publicly “passed off” as what’s happening in the world without directly experiencing the thing.

In ambiguity, Daesin is uprooted (or lost) in this non-disclosed understanding. This is Daesin’s everydayness.

Idle talk, curiosity and ambiguity in everydayness cause Daesin’s falling.

The falling of Daesin is a falling away from Daesin’s authentic Being-itself. Daesin’s falling involves being lost in the publicness of the They (e.g. in religion or celebrity). The falling into the They is therefore inauthentic.

Daesin in everydayness is mostly undisclosed and inauthentic and lost in the They. This happens because idle talk discloses Being-with Others (Being-with-one another), curiosity discloses everything and anything and ambiguity discloses everywhere and nowhere. They do not disclose Daesin’s Being-there as itself.

Daesin is tempted to fall into the They. The They purport to have “fullness” of understanding and this is comforting (e.g. religion).

Comfort in the They brings Daesin tranquillity. The They as comfort is therefore tranquilising to Daesin. Thus, falling into the They alienates Daesin from authentic disclosedness and causes Daesin to become self-entangled in the They.

The downward plunge of falling and losing authentic understanding causes Daesin turbulence (or depression).

When Daesin becomes lost in the They it flees in the face of itself (itself as authentic potentiality-for-being-itself).

Daesin’s fleeing from itself shows that Daesin must have some disclosedness; turning away discloses Daesin Being-there. Daesin’s falling into the They implies a fall from a disclosed Being-there.

The turning away of falling is a turning away from Daesin itself; falling is a turning towards entities in the world.

Being-there as Anxiety

Another essential component of Daesin’s being is Anxiety. In its Anxiety, Daesin is anxious of the possibilities of readiness-at-hand. Anxiety is not anxious of entities in the world. Fear, in contrast, is fearful of entities in the world.

Anxiety is indefinite; Daesin is not anxious of anything ready-at-hand, just the possibility of readiness-at-hand.

The possibilities of readiness-at-hand are still grounded in the world. Therefore, Being-in-the-world creates anxiety.

Daesin’s Being-anxious discloses the world as the world (it is a basic state of Being-in-the-world).

Being-anxious is indefinite anxiety as a state of mind or mood.

In Daesin’s indefinite Being-anxious of possibility, readiness-at-hand melts away from Daesin, as does the world (as readiness-at-hand) and therefore Being-with the Others. Daesin is left with itself in the anxiety of the possibilities of readiness-at-hand within the world.

Therefore, Anxiety takes away the chance of Daesin understanding itself in the They. Anxiety throws Daesin back upon its authentic potentiality-being-in-the-world; it individualises Daesin in its ownmost Being-in-the-world.

Anxiety allows the Being-free of Daesin to choose itself and take hold of itself. Daesin can be its Being-free-for authentic Being-there of itself in anxiety.

Anxiety allows disclosure of the world as primordial world and Being-in as individualised, pure and thrown potentiality-for being.

Anxiety frees Daesin from falling into the They.

The They tranquilise Daesin into self assuredness as Being-at-home. As Daesin falls, anxiety brings it back to its authentic Being-there from absorption in the world. This Not-being-at-home is felt as Uncanniness.

Uncanniness constantly threatens the lostness in the They. Falling threatens the feeling of uncanniness. Therefore, uncanniness and falling are in opposition. Not-being-at-home and uncanniness is more primordial than the They.

Every state of mind should be fully disclosed with the World, Being-in and Self. State of mind as anxiety is distinctive because it individualises and brings Daesin back from the They. Anxiety enables Daesin to be authentic as thrown Being-in-the-world.

Anxiety shows Daesin as having Being-in-the-world.

The fundamental ontological characteristics of Daesin are Existentiality (Being-there as anxiety in Being-in-the-world), Facticity (disclosedness of Being-in-the-world) and Being-fallen (Being-with the Others). These characteristics are woven into a structural totality.

Being-there as Care

Daesin’s being is an issue for it; Daesin has already compared itself in its being with what it can possibly be (in itself). Daesin can look ahead of itself. Anxiety determines Being-free for Daesin’s potentiality-for-being and its possibility of authentic being.

Because Daesin’s being is an issue for it in thrown disclosedness, Daesin can be ahead of itself in Being-towards its ownmost potentiality-for-being. This is Daesin’s Being-ahead-of-itself as Being-in-the-world (Daesin can postulate a possibility for itself and from this possibility look back at itself to disclose its ownmost Being-there).

Daesin has already been thrown into the world. Therefore, when its being is an issue for it, Daesin is Being-ahead-of-itself-as-already-being-in-the-world.

Daesin’s Being-in-the-world is also Being-with. Therefore, Daesin’s being is defined as Ahead-of-itself-being-already-in-the-world, as Being-alongside-entities-encountered-within-the-world.

This definition of Daesin’s being is called Care. In Care, Daesin can look ahead of itself and disclose its possibilities within the world (in its concern) and also disclose its possibilities in relation to other entities in the world (in its solicitude).

Care is Daesin’s Being-in-the-world and can be authentic or inauthentic.

The “itself” in Ahead-of-itself is Self and not They-self. Even when lacking anxiety in inauthentic Care, Daesin is still Ahead-of-itself and its being is still an issue for it.

Care is always before for Daesin’s Being-in-the-world in its concern and solicitude.

Willing is an example of Care. Something willed is for-the-sake-of-which for Daesin (fulfilling a possibility of Daesin for the sake of Daesin itself).

Willing has three constitutive components:

Disclosedness of for-the-sake-of-which in general (or Daesin’s Being-ahead-of-itself in possibilities)
Disclosedness of a “worldly” something that is of concern to Daesin (or Daesin’s Being-already in the world)
In its willing, Daesin projects itself with understanding towards the something in its concern

What is willed is already alongside a discovered world as a possibility of that world. This is interpreted first by the They. The They “levels off” the possibility of something willed into what is familiar, attainable and respectable. The They tranquilise Daesin to willing the “actual”, causing Daesin to will no new possibilities. Therefore, the They modify Daesin’s Being-towards one’s potentiality-for-being.

Willing can change into Wishing. Wishing occurs when Daesin lacks understanding of factual possibilities.

When the world is projected as a Wish-world, Being-in-the-world loses itself in what is at disposal (as readiness-at-hand) to Daesin. The Wish-world is never enough and creates hankering after wished possibilities. In this way, willed possibilities are closed off from Daesin.

Hankering can become addiction; Daesin is drawn or urged to only what is hankered after.

The urge in addiction seeks to crowd out other possibilities and is inauthentic.

In addiction, Care is modified by the loss of Ahead-of-itself (possibilities are closed off from Daesin) and becomes only Being-alongside-already.

Addiction and urge are rooted in Daesin’s thrownness.

The urge to live is grounded in Care and is authentic; it maintains Daesin as the Ahead-of-itself-being-already-in-the-world, as Being-alongside-entities-encountered-within-the-world.

The Being of Reality

Disclosedness is Daesin’s Being-in-the-world as World, Being-in and Self. In factical disclosedness entities within the world are discovered (in a certain way).

Because Daesin falls into the They, Daesin is diverted in its understanding of the world. This causes Daesin to interpret Being first from the being of entities within the world; readiness-at-hand is passed over. Entities are seen as things present-at-hand.

The “Being” of entities present-at-hand is conceived as Reality. Being is diverted into Substantiality. Like other entities within the world, Daesin itself is diverted into being present-at-hand. Being in general is conceived as (present-at-hand) Reality.

But (present-at-hand) Reality is only one way of Being among others (e.g. Daesin’s readiness-at-hand). This is the problem of Reality.

The Real is only accessible as entities within the world. Knowing is founded on the access to the Real and knowing is founded on Daesin’s Being as Care (as Ahead-of-itself-already-in-the-world-as-being-alongside-entities-within-the-world).

Since Daesin has Being-in-the-world as readiness-at-hand as Care, the question “is there a (present-at-hand) world?” makes no sense if asked by Daesin.

Because Being is understandable in Daesin as readiness-at-hand, Daesin can understand independence, in-itself and Reality only in comparison with readiness-at-hand (or itself).

Therefore, Reality is meant as the Being of entities present-at-hand within the world. Within-the-worldness is based on the Worldhood of the World, which, in turn, is based on Daesin’s Being-in-the-world as Care.

Entities have a “worldly character” due to Daesin’s Being-in-the-world as Care. Therefore, Being can be understood only as long as Dasein is. When Daesin does not exist the Being of independence or in-itself does not exist; entities within the world are then neither discovered or hidden.

Therefore, only if Daesin understands readiness-at-hand (and in comparison present-at-hand) do entities continue to have “worldly character” and have Being. Only through Daesin’s understanding do entities as entities become accessible.

The Being of Truth

· Traditionally truth has been seen as agreement of knowledge with the object. Agreement as truth is something as something and is “relational”. However, not every relation is an agreement (or true).

· One way of agreement is between the ideal content of judgement and the Real (present-at-hand) thing that is judged.

· Truth becomes explicit in knowledge when knowing demonstrates itself as true. Demonstration is the made visible of agreement. For example, a man has his back to a picture and he says the true statement (assertion) that the picture is hung at an angle. The assertion is demonstrated when the man turns round and perceives the picture at an angle.

· Asserting is a way of Being-towards the thing itself that is. Therefore, perceiving the thing demonstrates that the thing is the same entity as the asserted entity in one’s mind. The entity is pointed out by the Being (e.g. Daesin) that asserts. Being uncovers the entity towards which it is.

· Therefore, demonstration is Being-uncovering of the assertion. The entity is in the “how” of its uncoverdness. The assertion is true when it uncovers the thing in-itself.

· Being-true (or truth) is Being-uncovering. This is only possible by Daesin’s Being-in-the-world as Care. It is a way of Being for Daesin.

· Daesin’s circumspection as Being-in-the-world uncovers entities in the world. These entities are true in a second sense as that which has been uncovered (Being-uncovered). What is primarily true is the uncovering of Daesin (Being-uncovering).

· Uncoveredness of entities is grounded in Daesin’s disclosedness (as Care) of the world. With and through Care is uncoveredness possible. Therefore, Daesin’s disclosedness is the primordial phenomenon of truth. Daesin is “in the truth” since disclosedness is Daesin.

· Daesin’s state of Being:

o Disclosedness (in general) essentially belongs

o Thrownness belongs since it enables disclosedness (e.g. factical as entities in the world)

o Projection belongs as Daesin’s disclosure of Being-towards its Potentiality-for-being.

o Falling belongs as lost in the They (or the world)

· Authentic disclosedness is Daesin understanding itself in terms of the World/Others and its ownmost Potentiality-for-being. Truth is in a mode of authenticity. Therefore, the most authentic disclosedness of Daesin is truth of existence.

· When Daesin Falls in the They, it is in untruth. Daesin can be “in truth” (authentic disclosedness) or “in untruth” (lost in the They).

· Therefore, it is essential that Daesin appropriates (deseveres) what has been uncovered, defends it against Semblance and Disguise and assures itself again and again it is uncovered.

· Daesin in its Being-uncovering, first departs towards uncoveredness into semblance (to other things already uncovered) but still in disguise and then to snatching (in a kind of robbery) what is in an entity.

· Assertion (“as”) is founded on interpretation and understanding. All of these are founded on the disclosedness of Daesin. Truth is a distinctive character of Assertion since it is dependent on Daesin’s disclosedness.

· Daesin’s Being is Being-alongside entities within the world in Concern. Therefore, Concern is the Being that uncovers.

· Discourse is essential for disclosedness. Daesin, in Discourse, expresses itself as a Being-towards that uncovers entities (as Being-towards those entities).

· In Assertion, Daesin expresses itself about entities that have been uncovered. Assertion is the “how” of uncoveredness.

· What is expressed in Discourse contains and preserves that which has been uncovered. Therefore, entities don’t have to be primordially uncovered again and again in original experience.

· Assertion is the readiness-at-hand of an entity that is present-at-hand within the world. Even though founded on Daesin’s disclosedness, uncoveredness is still uncoveredness of something present-at-hand; it retains the relationship to something present-at-hand. Uncoveredness itself is also present-at-hand (as compared to the readiness-at-hand of uncovering).

· Therefore, truth is disclosedness as Being-towards uncovered entities (as the Being which itself uncovers) and an agreement between something present-at-hand within the world and uncoveredness as present-at-hand.

· “There is” truth only as long as (and as far as) Daesin is. Entities are uncovered in uncovering when (and as long as) Daesin is. Before Daesin there was no truth and after Daesin there will be no truth since Daesin’s disclosedness is needed to uncover entities.

· Once entities have been uncovered, they show themselves as they are already even before the uncovering.

· All truth is relative to Daesin’s Being. Therefore, “eternal truths” can be proved only if it is proved that Daesin is for all eternity.

· Truth is not subjective since truth is essential to Daesin’s Being-in-the-world and Daesin has no choice in uncovering truth in this way (Daesin is already thrown into the world).

· Truth is presupposed because Daesin is “in truth” in its essential disclosedness.

· Care as Ahead-of-itself is Daesin’s primordial presupposing; Daesin presupposes itself as having the attribute of disclosedness.

· We presuppose truth because Daesin must be and Daesin’s disclosedness must be in its thrownness.

Division Two

Being-as-a-whole

There is a need to understand in fore-having Daesin’s being in possibilities of authenticity (and inauthenticity) in totality. This is Daesin’s Potentiality-for-being-a-whole.

Daesin’s everydayness is between birth and death.

Daesin’s potentiality-for-being suggests that Daesin must not-yet-be something.

For as long as Daesin is, there must be something still outstanding in Daesin’s being. This includes Daesin’s “end”.

The end of Daesin’s Being-in-the-world is Daesin’s Being-at-an-end in death, which limits and determines the totality of Daesin.

Being-towards-death is a constitutive state of Daesin’s potentiality-for-being-a-whole.

Authentic potentiality-for-being is attested by conscience. Daesin wants to have a conscience.

Authentic potentiality-for-being-a-whole is a mode of Care as resoluteness.

Temporality is the primordial ontological basis for Daesin. Everydayness is a mode of temporality.

Daesin, with temporality, is and can be historical.

Daesin’s Care uses and reckons with temporality.

Being-towards-death

Care forms the totality of Daesin’s structural whole. The primary item of care is the Ahead-of-itself; Daesin exists for the sake of itself. As long as Daesin is, it comports itself towards its potentiality-for-being.

Ahead-of-itself shows that there is always something still outstanding in Daesin’s being. Therefore, the basic constitution of Daesin is something that is constantly still to be settled in Daesin’s potentiality-for-being.

Therefore, Daesin’s being is annihilated when its still outstanding is removed.

As long as Daesin is, it never reaches its wholeness.

Daesin gains wholeness when Daesin loses it Being-in-the-world. However, when Daesin gains wholeness in death it simultaneously loses its Being-there and loses the possibility of experiencing and understanding this wholeness. Daesin is denied in death its own understanding of wholeness of itself.

Being-with-others enables experiencing the wholeness in death of Others.

When someone has died, this person has Being-no-longer-in-the-world. The person still has being as Being-just-present-at-hand-and-no-more.

In the dying of Others, we experience a change-over of being from Being-there to Being-present-at-hand-and-no-longer-Daesin. The person is not lifeless but unalive and torn away from those who have remained.

Those who have remained do not experience authentic Being-come-to-an-end but are alongside it in concern. Death is experienced as loss in those that remain.

In Being-with-one-another-in-the-world Daesin can be represented by another and this is a thrown possibility in its potentiality-for-being. Daesin can be represented “in” something as concerning oneself with something.

In Daesin’s everyday concern one “is” what one does. Therefore, in representation Daesin can “be” another Daesin.

But representation breaks down when representing wholeness in Daesin’s coming to an end. No one can take Others dying from him; death for Daesin is in every case mine. Therefore, mineness and existence is needed for dying.

Ending is constitutive for Daesin’s Being-a-whole but cannot be represented. Therefore, dying of Others cannot be a substitute theme for Daesin’s totality since Daesin’s totality is in every case one’s own.

Daesin has a constant lack of totality that ends in death. This not-yet belongs to Daesin as long as it is.

This not-yet is a still outstanding as a being-missing. This implies that what is outstanding is still grounded in belonging.

Therefore, still outstanding is what belongs together but not-yet all together. Those yet to come together have unreadiness-at-hand but still have the possibility of readiness-at-hand.

Lack-of-togetherness gets “paid off” by a culmulative piecing together. Togetherness is a sum.

But Daesin must be not-yet since this belongs essentially. Daesin’s togetherness is elusive.

Daesin must be not-yet and must become. For example, an unripe piece of fruit goes towards its ripeness. This ripeness is not something-not-yet-present-at-hand; the fruit brings itself to ripeness. Therefore, ripeness is the fruits not-yet that is already included in its being.

Therefore, Daesin’s not-yet is already included in its being. Daesin in every case is already its not-yet.

Ripeness does not signify an end; in ripeness fruit fulfils itself.

In death, Daesin “fulfils its course” but in death Daesin’s possibilities are taken away. Therefore, even unfulfilled Daesin ends. Mostly, Daesin ends in unfulfillment having disintegrated and been used up.

Daesin is already its not-yet. Daesin is also its end. Therefore, death is not Being-at-an-end but Being-towards-the-end of Daesin. Dying is a way of being in which Daesin is towards its death.

Death is a way to be and Daesin takes this over as soon as it is. Being-towards-the-end is an essential component of Daesin’s thrownness.

Being-towards-the-end as Care

Daesin’s basic state is Care as Ahead-of-itself (existence), Being-already-in (facticity) and Being-alongside (falling). Therefore, death should be understood in terms of these basic characteristics of Daesin’s being.

Not-yet is something toward which Daesin comports itself. As a not-yet, death is something that stands before us as something impending. But there are many things that are impending for Daesin’s Being-in-the-world. Impendence is not distinctive of death.

Daesin’s death is the possibility of no-longer-being-able-to-be-there. When Daesin stands before itself as this possibility, it is fully assigned to its potentiality-for-being and its ownmost non-relational (as non-representative) and uttermost possibility.

Daesin cannot outstrip death.

Therefore, death is one’s ownmost, non-relational and not to be outstripped possibility. Death is a distinctive impending because of these characteristics.

If Daesin exists it has already been thrown into the possibility of death.

Anxiety in the face of death is anxiety “in the face” of potentiality-for-being which is one’s ownmost, non-relational and not to be outstripped. This anxiety is anxious about Daesin’s potentiality-for-being.

Therefore, Anxiety is a basic state of mind of Daesin as disclosedness of Daesin in its thrown Being-towards-its-end.

Dying is Daesin’s thrown Being-towards its ownmost potentiality-for-being that is non-relational and not outstripped.

Being-towards-the-end belongs essentially to Daesin’s thrownness and reveals itself in state of mind.

Most Daesins try to cover up or ignore its Being-towards-the-end.

Factically, Daesin is dying as long as it is. Daesin mostly does this by falling and fleeing in the face of its dying. Fleeing in the face of dying generates the feeling of uncanniness.

Therefore, uncanniness is fleeing in the face of one’s ownmost Being-towards-death.

Existence, facticity and falling characterise Daesin’s Being-towards-the-end. These characteristics are grounded in Care. Therefore, Care is the structural totality of Daesin.

Everyday Being-towards-the-end

· In Being-towards-death Daesin comports itself towards itself as a distinctive potentiality-for-being.

· But the self of everydayness is the They. The They expresses a public interpretation through idle talk.

· The They understand Being-towards-death as a constantly occurring mishap. The They interpret death as a non-threatening “one dies”, which is something proximally not yet present-at-hand. This “one dies” is “in no case myself” and therefore applies to “nobody”.

· Death is levelled off by the They and belongs to no one in particular. Daesin is tempted to cover up one’s ownmost Being-towards-death in a constant tranquilising.

· The They do not permit us courage for Anxiety in the face of death. Anxiety is turned into fear of death and the They say this fear is a weakness.

· The They alienate Daesin from its ownmost, non-relational and non-outstripped potentiality-for-being. Daesin falls into the They as a constant fleeing or evasion in the face of death. Death is seen as a “case of death” of Others.

· Despite everyday falling into the They, Daesin is always dying already since it is Being-towards-its-end.

Being-towards-death, Anticipation and Authenticity

In the every day concealment of death by the They, Daesin cannot be authentically certain of death. However, even when Daesin is lost in the They it is still certain of death.

To be certain of an entity, the entity is held for true as something true. Truth as uncoveredness is grounded in Daesin’s disclosedness.

Certainty is therefore grounded in truth and Being-certain is Being-disclosive as the Being of Daesin.

One mode of certainty is Conviction. In Conviction, Daesin lets the testimony of the uncovered thing be the sole determinant of understanding.

The adequacy of the holding-for-true is measured by the truth claim belonging to the entity; it is justified by the kind of being of the entity that is disclosed.

Therefore, the kind of truth and certainty varies in the different way entities are disclosed.

The certainty of every day understanding when Daesin is lost in the They is a covering up and an inappropriate holding-for-true.

The They say it is certain of death but to be certain of death Daesin in every case must be certain of its ownmost Potentiality-of-being in Being-towards-death.

Everyday certainty of death is grounded on the experience of dying of Others as empirical certainty. But empirical certainty avoids Daesin’s ownmost Potentiality-for-being.

Therefore, in falling Daesin is acquainted with death but not Being-certain of death.

The evasion in falling of Being-certain attests that death must be conceived as one’s ownmost, non-relational, not outstripped possibility. Evasion makes certain that which is evaded.

Therefore, the full conception of death is:

The end of Daesin
Daesin’s ownmost possibility
Non-relational
Certain and Indefinite
Not to be outstripped
Daesin’s Being-towards-its-end

Daesin’s end in death is conclusive and determinant for Being-a-whole. In Being-toward-the-end, the not-yet of Care is included in Daesin’s Being.
Being-towards-the-end is the “not-yet” that all others lie ahead of. However the not-yet of death is the last not-yet.

Authentic Being-towards-death does not evade Daesin’s ownmost, non-relational and non-outstripped possibility.

Being-towards-death is Being-towards a possibility (Being-out-for) as an actualisation. These possibilities are constantly encountered as ready-at-hand and present-at-hand.

Being-out-for annihilates possibility by making it available as a concernful actualisation. Even in actualisation, there is still something possible as an in-order-to.

Being-out-for something comports itself towards the possible and looks circumspectively away from the possible towards that for which it is possible (e.g. Daesin itself).

Being-towards-death is not actualised since this actualisation involves bringing about one’s demise, which deprives the ground for Daesin’s Being-towards-death.

Therefore, Being-towards-death is not actualised and not dwelt upon; it is disclosed as a possibility.

Daesin comports itself towards something possible by Expecting it. In Expecting, Daesin waits for the something to be actualised. Therefore, Being-towards a possibility (in Being-towards-death) is an Anticipation of this possibility.

Anticipation is a coming close to the possible. This coming close makes the possibility of the possible greater.

The closest closeness is Daesin’s Being-towards-death. However this is far from the actual since death as a possibility gives Daesin nothing to be actualised. Death is nothing Daesin could be. Therefore, death as a possibility is a measureless impossibility.

Being-towards-death is an anticipation of a possibility and therefore an anticipation of Daesin’s Potentiality-for-being. In Anticipation, Daesin discloses itself to itself as its uttermost possibility.

Therefore, Anticipation enables understanding of one’s ownmost Potentiality-for-being or Daesin’s authentic Being-there.

Death is Daesin’s ownmost possibility. Therefore, Being-towards-death discloses Daesin’s ownmost Potentiality-for-being. In this way, Daesin is wrenched from the They.

Anticipation enables Daesin to resist its falling into the They.

Death as Being-towards-death individualises Daesin down to itself. It is the “there” of Being-there, which enables Daesin’s Being-alongside and Being-with Others.

Daesin is authentically itself as Being-its-self when it projects its ownmost Potentiality-for-being and not the They-self.

In Anticipating its non-relational possibility, Daesin is forced (by the very anticipating) into the possibility of taking over from itself its ownmost possibility.

Daesin is authentic when it does not evade the non-outstrippedness of death. Anticipation frees Daesin to accept its non-outstripped possibility. It also discloses to Daesin that all its possibilities lie ahead of the possibility of non-outstrippedness. This makes clear the edges of possibility and brings into view Daesin’s whole Potentiality-for-being.

Death as ownmost, non-relational and not outstripped possibility makes possible the Anticipation of Daesin’s authentic, ownmost Potentiality-for-being.

Therefore, authenticity is disclosed by Anticipation.

Death is just one’s own and holding death for true makes certain Daesin’s Being-in-the-world.

In Anticipation, Daesin makes certain its ownmost Being in its totality. Therefore, Daesin can be authentic only by Anticipation.

In anticipating the indefiniteness of death Daesin opens itself in anxiety to the constant threat to its own Being-there. Daesin is face to face with the “nothing” of the possible impossibility of its existence. Being-towards-death is essentially anxiety.

Anxiety is anxious about Potentiality-for-being and discloses the uttermost possibility of Daesin.

Anticipation utterly individualises Daesin to enable it to be certain of the totality of its Potentiality-for-being.

The Call of Conscience

Daesin’s authentic Potentiality-for-being needs to be attested to as authentic Potentiality-for-being-ones-self.

The “who” of Daesin is the self. However, Daesin’s everyday self is lost in the They. Therefore, I myself is mainly not the “who” of Daesin.

The They keep Daesin from taking hold of its Potentiality-for-being.

In this way, the They relieve Daesin of the burden of choosing its possibility. Therefore, Daesin makes no choices and is carried along in inauthenticity by the “nobody” of the They.

Daesin is brought back to authentic Being-ones-self by a modification of the They-self. In choosing to choose its own possibilities, Daesin makes possible its authentic Potentiality-for-being.

Since everyday Daesin is lost in the They, it must first find itself. Daesin must be “shown” to itself in its possible authenticity.

Authenticity is attested to by the “voice of conscience”.

Conscience discloses as a call.

Calling is a mode of discourse and appeals to Daesin’s ownmost Potentiality-for-being-its-self. This is done by summoning Daesin to its ownmost Being-guilty.

The call of conscience is a possible hearing and it unveils itself to Daesin. Daesin, in Resoluteness, wants to have a conscience and wants to choose its Being-ones-self.

The Being of Conscience

Through disclosedness, Daesin is in the possibility of being its “there”. Daesin is there for itself. Disclosedness discloses Daesin to itself in its Potentiality-for-being.

Daesin is already abandoned to its definite possibilities as thrown possibilities. This is disclosed to Daesin as a mood in understanding.

Daesin “knows” what it is capable of as either a projection of its ownmost possibilities or as being absorbed in the They in a public interpretation of things.

The presentation of possibilities is made possible by Daesin’s Being-with and listening to Others. When Daesin is lost in the They, it listens to the They-self and fails to hear its own self. Daesin listens away to the They.

This listening away is broken by arousing another kind of hearing through a call that is without idle talk, ambiguity and curiosity. This is the Conscience.

Discourse gives information about something. In conscience, the call talks about Daesin itself and enables Daesin to pay attention to itself. The call calls to the self of the They-self and therefore causes the They to collapse.

Taken strictly, the call of the conscience calls to “nothing”. Daesin is summoned to itself in its ownmost Potentiality-for-being. The call dispenses with utterances. The conscience discourses solely and constantly in the mode of keeping silent to force Daesin into reticence of itself.

What the call discloses is unequivocal and goes in only one direction towards Daesin itself.

Conscience as a Call of Care

The conscience summons Daesin’s self from the lostness in the They.

The call passes over what Daesin understands itself as but the call still reaches the self.

That which calls the call holds itself aloof from the way of becoming well known. The caller is solely absorbed in summoning Daesin to something.

In conscience, Daesin calls to itself. The call comes from Daesin yet from beyond Daesin.

Every Daesin already exists factically as already thrown into existence. The why of thrownness might be hidden from Daesin but the that-it-is has itself been already been disclosed to Daesin in its thrownness. The disclosedness of the “there” is a state of mind.

This state of mind brings Daesin more or less authentically face to face with the fact of that-it-is and its Potentiality-for-being.

However, for the most part Daesin flees from its thrownness into the They-self. This fleeing is felt as uncanniness.

Uncanniness is determinative for individualised Being-in-the-world and is revealed to Daesin as anxiety.

Anxiety is the most elemental way thrown Daesin is disclosed. Anxiety brings Daesin’s Being-in-the-world face to face with the “nothing” in the world as the possibility of readiness-at-hand. Daesin is anxious about its ownmost Potentiality-for-being.

The caller of the call of conscience is Daesin’s uncanniness, as the bare that-it-is in the “nothing” of the world (the possibility of readiness-at-hand).

The caller is therefore unfamiliar to the They-self and is felt as something like an alien voice that cannot be passed on in public.

Therefore, the call summons Daesin to its ownmost Potentiality-for-being as Care and is revealed in anxiety.

The call is uncanny in its keeping silent in public.

Daesin misunderstands its possibility as the caller of conscience. Uncanniness is the basic kind of Being-in-the-world. But in everydayness, uncanniness is covered by the lostness in the They. Out of the depths of this lostness, Daesin itself, as conscience, calls. Therefore, conscience calls from this lostness as an “it calls me” as a distinctive kind of discourse for Daesin.

Conscience manifests itself as a call of Care. As the caller, Daesin is anxious in its thrownness about its ownmost Potentiality-for-being. The one to whom the appeal is made is the very same Daesin. Daesin summons itself to its ownmost Potentiality-for-being as Care.

Conscience is a phenomenon of Daesin and is not external to Daesin.

Being-guilty and the Call of Conscience

· It is authentic when Daesin hears and understands non-relationally its own Being-appealed to in the call of conscience.

· The meaning of the call of conscience can be perverted into what is fitting and accepted by the They.

· The call of conscience “says” nothing that might be talked about and gives no information about events. It cannot be passed on in public.

· The call points forward to Daesin’s Potentiality-for-being and originates from the feeling of uncanniness.

· The caller that calls in conscience is indefinite.

· Uncanniness as thrown individualisation gets disclosed in the calling. In this way, Daesin gets called back to itself.

· The call is not ideal or universal. It is the call of individualisation and of that particular Daesin which hears the call.

· The call calls Daesin back in its calling forth.

· In general, the experience of conscience is seen as Guilt or possible guilt as a warning.

· Everyday common sense sees Being-guilty as a sense of “owing” or having debts as a way of Being-with Others.

· Being-guilty is also seen as a being responsible for or being the cause or author of something. This is Being-guilty without “owing”.

· Being-guilty as “owing” and “not owing” can be combined as “making oneself responsible”. This means taking on the responsibility for having a debt (e.g. breaking a law makes oneself punishable). This, in turn, means “coming to owe something to Others”.

· Being-guilty is a making oneself responsible for Others that are endangered in their existence or led astray or ruined.

· Being-guilty means owing something to Others. It has being-the-basis as a lack of something in Daesin or an Other. This lacking is a failure to satisfy some requirement of Being-with Others.

· Being-guilty as a breach of moral requirement is a kind of being that belongs to Daesin.

· Therefore, Being-guilty has the character of a “not” and has a being-the-basis as a nullity.

· Indebtedness is possible only on the basis of primordial Being-guilty.

· Daesin’s being is Care as Facticity (thrownness), Existence (projection) and Falling. As being, Daesin is something that has been thrown and brought to its “there” but not of its own accord.

· Daesin is a definitive form of Potentiality-for-being and is devoted to itself as itself. Therefore, thrownness is never released from its Being-its-self.

· As long as Daesin is, Daesin as Care is constantly “that-it-is”. Its existing is the basis of its Potentiality-for-being. Daesin as this thrown basis projects itself upon possibilities into which it has been thrown.

· The Self lays the basis for itself but never gets this basis in its power. Yet as existing, Daesin must take over its being-a-basis as Potentiality-for-being.

· Therefore, in its basis of existing as thrown Daesin constantly lags behind its possibilities. Daesin is existent from and as this basis.

· Being-a-basis means never having power over one’s ownmost Potentiality-for-being from the ground up. This possibility does not belong to Daesin’s thrownness.

· In Being its self, Daesin is released from its basis to be itself as Potentiality-for-being. Daesin is able to be as and from this basis. Therefore, as Being-its-self Daesin is its basis. Daesin is an entity whose being has to take over its being-a-basis.

· Potentiality-for-being is one possibility or another. It is constantly not one possibility. Nullity belongs to Daesin’s Being-free as the freedom to choose one possibility. This involves tolerating one’s not having chosen other possibilities.

· In Daesin’s thrownness there lies a nullity as the basis of the possibility of inauthenticity in falling.

· Therefore, Care, in falling, is permeated with nullity through and through.

· Care as thrown projection means being-the-basis of a nullity. Therefore, Daesin, as such, is Being-guilty if guilt is being-the-basis as a nullity.

· Being-guilty makes morality possible.

· The call of conscience gives primordial Being-guilty something to understand. The call is a call of Care.

· Therefore, Care is Being-guilty.

· Uncanniness brings Daesin face to face with nullity as Being-guilty and this belongs to Daesin’s possibility of its ownmost Potentiality-for-being.

· Daesin summons itself from its uncanniness towards its Potentiality-for-being. The appeal of the call of conscience calls Daesin forth to the possibility of taking over even the thrown entity it is. It also calls back to its thrownness as the null basis which it has to take up into existence.

· This calling-back in the calling-forth of existence gives Daesin to understand that Daesin itself is the null basis for its null projection in its Potentiality-for-being.

· Therefore, Daesin brings itself back to itself from lostness in the They. Daesin is guilty.

· In understanding the call, Daesin is in thrall of its ownmost possibility of existence. Daesin has chosen itself and makes possible its ownmost Being-guilty. In this way, Daesin is closed off from the They.

· What is chosen in understanding the call is having a conscience as Being-free for one’s ownmost Being-guilty.

· Therefore, understanding the appeal of the call means wanting-to-have-a-conscience. Daesin is ready to be appealed to as primordially coming to owe something.

· Daesin lets its ownmost self take action in itself in choosing its Potentiality-for-being.

· Any taking action is “conscienceless” as a null basis of a null projection. Daesin has in Being-with Others already become guilty towards them.

· Therefore, wanting-to-have-a-conscience becomes taking over of the essential consciencelessness. This taking over is where the possibility of being good subsists.

Everyday Interpretation of Conscience and Being-guilty

The conscience as a call gives no information but still discloses Daesin’s most primordial Potentiality-for-being as Being-guilty.

The call belongs to Daesin and attests to Daesin’s being as Potentiality-for-being.

Conscience is a call of Care and comes from the uncanniness of Being-in-the-world. The call summons Daesin to its ownmost Potentiality-for-being-guilty. The appeal of the call is wanting-to-have-a-conscience.

Everydayness takes Daesin as something ready-at-hand to be concerned with. It is something that gets managed and reckoned up with. Therefore, life is a business whether or not it covers its cost.

In everydayness, conscience is misunderstood as critical, relative to a deed performed or willed, unrelated to Daesin’s being and is evil or good. This everyday interpretation must not be accepted but it cannot be disregarded.

Everyday interpretation gives the evil or bad conscience priority as Being-evil. The everyday experience of conscience has it turning up after the deed is done or undone. The voice of conscience points back to the event that loaded Daesin with guilt. This conscience remembers the guilt but does not summon Daesin.

The call of conscience does call back but beyond the deed which has happened to the Being-guilty of thrown Daesin. This Being-guilty is earlier than any indebtedness. At the same time, calling back calls forth to Being-guilty as something to be seized upon in one’s own existence.

Authentic Being-guilty only “follows after” the call (and not vice versa).

Bad conscience calls one back into one’s thrownness.

Good conscience is interpreted as a lack of bad conscience and not having the call of conscience turn up. Good conscience is experienced as nothing to reproach oneself with.

The lack of a bad conscience is experienced as a making certain the deed attributed to Daesin was not perpetrated by it. Daesin is seen as not guilty. Therefore, Daesin emerges from the possibility of being appealed to in conscience.

This certainty is a tranquilising suppression of one’s wanting-to-have-a-conscience and one’s ownmost and constant Being-guilty. Therefore, good conscience is not a conscience phenomenon at all.

Bad conscience is orientated by good conscience leading to the everyday interpretation of balancing guilt and innocence.

Warning conscience points towards the deed that has been willed and seeks to preserve Daesin.

The warning as a check on what Daesin has willed is only possible because the call is aimed at Daesin’s Potentiality-for-being. Daesin understands itself as Being-guilty.

Warning conscience regulates moment by moment Daesin’s remaining free from indebtedness to Others. Therefore, the warning calls to the common sense of the They.

Therefore, everyday experience of conscience has no acquaintance with anything like getting summoned to Being-guilty.

The call of conscience fails to give any practical injunctions solely because it summons Daesin to its ownmost Potentiality-for-beings-its-self. The call is neither positive or negative but does call to the most positive of Daesin (its Potentiality-for-being).

Conscience is a call that calls forth into Daesin’s factical Potentiality-for-being-its-self at the time of the call. Authentically hearing the call brings oneself into factical taking-action.

The everyday interpretation of conscience is made from the limited way Daesin interprets itself in falling.

The Call of Conscience and Resoluteness

Conscience attests to Daesin’s ownmost Potentiality-for-being and the attestation comes from and is Daesin itself.

Conscience calls forth and summons Daesin to Being-guilty.

The call is heard in understanding as an appeal. This is a mode of Daesin’s being.

Authentic understanding of the call is wanting-to-have-a-conscience. This lets one’s ownmost Self take action in itself and of its own accord in its Being-guilty. This represents authentic Potentiality-for-being which Daesin itself attests.

In wanting-to-have-a-conscience, Daesin is disclosed in an understanding of its ownmost Potentiality-for-being.

Disclosedness is discourse, state-of-mind and understanding.

Understanding is projecting oneself upon the ownmost factical possibility of having Potentiality-for-being-in-the-world. This is understood only by existing in this possibility.

Understanding the call of conscience discloses Daesin own uncanniness and its individualisation. Uncanniness is disclosed by the state-of-mind of Anxiety.

The Anxiety of conscience brings Daesin face to face with its own uncanniness. Therefore, wanting-to-have-a-conscience is a readiness for Anxiety.

The call is disclosed as a primordial kind of discourse for Daesin. But there is no counter-discourse to what the conscience has said or to plead one’s cause.

But hearing the call understandingly denies oneself any counter discourse if the hearing appropriates the content of the call unconcealedly.

The call is a constant Being-guilty to allow the Self to be brought back from idle talk of the They.

The mode of discourse of wanting-to-have-a-conscience is Reticence.

Anyone who is silent must have something to say. The appeal of the call gives Daesin itself to understand its ownmost Potentiality-for-being is a keeping-silent.

Only in keeping silent does the conscience call, thereby allowing Daesin authentically to have something to say. The call originates from the soundlessness of uncanniness. The summons of the call calls back into the stillness of itself.

Only in reticence is this silent discourse understood in wanting-to-have-a-conscience. Reticence takes words away from common sense idle talk of the They.

Disclosedness of Daesin in wanting-to-have-a-conscience is Anxiety as state-of-mind, discourse and understanding as a projection of oneself upon one’s ownmost Being-guilty.

As reticence, this distinctive and authentic disclosedness is attested in Daesin itself by its conscience and is called Resoluteness.

Resoluteness is reticent self-projection upon one’s ownmost Being-guilty as ready for Anxiety.

Resoluteness is a distinctive mode of Daesin’s disclosedness. Daesin is in truth (as the truth of existence) as Resoluteness. This is truth as authentic truth.

Whenever “there” is disclosed its whole Being-in-the-world (as world, Being-in and Self as “I am” this entity) is equally disclosed.

Whenever the world is disclosed entities within-the-world are discovered already as ready-at-hand and present-at-hand.

Discoveredness is based on the disclosedness of the world. If the current totality of involvements in the world is to be freed it requires significance that is understood beforehand.

In understanding significance, Daesin submits itself circumspectively to what it encounters as ready-at-hand.

Any discovery of a totality of involvements is a for-the-sake-of-which and is based on understanding of significance as disclosedness of the current world.

For-the-sake-of can be seeking shelter, sustenance and livelihood as possibilities of Daesin.

Thrown into its “there”, every Daesin is factically submitted to a definitive world, its “world”. This is guided by Daesin’s lostness in the They. To this lostness, one’s ownmost Daesin can appeal as Resoluteness.

Therefore, authentic disclosedness modifies disclosedness in the way the world is discovered and Being-with Others into the definitive character of Daesin’s ownmost Potentiality-for-being-its-self.

Resoluteness as authentic Being-one’s-self brings Self into its current concernful Being-alongside what is ready-at-hand. It pushes Daesin into solicitous Being-with Others.

Resolute Daesin frees itself for its world and can become the conscience of Others. Only by authentically Being-their-selves in resoluteness can people authentically be with one another (not with ambiguity, jealous stipulations or talkative fraternizing in the They).

Resoluteness exists only as a resolution as disclosive projection and determination of what is factically possible at the time.

The indefiniteness of every thrown Potentiality-for-being belongs to Resoluteness.

Daesin as care is determined by facticity and falling. Daesin can therefore be in truth and in untruth; resoluteness can appropriate untruth authentically. Daesin is in Irresoluteness when lost in the interpretation of They as They-self.

The Resolutions of Resoluteness are dependent upon the They since Resoluteness gives authentic transparency to Daesin as a reaction to the They.

Situation, as “to be in a situation”, is grounded in the “there” of disclosed Resoluteness. Situation is only through Resoluteness and in it.

The current factical involvement-character of circumstances discloses itself to the Self. This happens only when the involvement-character is resolved upon the “there” as which that self, in existing, has to be.

Accidents befall from the with-world and the environment. This can only be a befalling from Resoluteness.

For the They, situation is something that is closed off. The They only know the “general situation” and Daesin loses itself in “opportunities” closest to the They.

Resoluteness brings the being of “there” into the existence of its situation. It delimits authentic Potentiality-for-being which the conscience attests.

The appeal of the call of conscience calls forth into the situation.

Conscience makes Daesin possible for itself in its factical existence by attesting its ownmost Potentiality-for-being.

Therefore, as resolute, Daesin is already taking action.

Resoluteness is authenticity of Care itself.

Therefore, Resoluteness is Being-guilty as self-projection in which one is reticent and ready for Anxiety. This forms the basis for Daesin’s authentic Potentiality-for-being-a-whole.

Authentic Potentiality-for-being-a-whole and Temporality

Authentic Being-towards-death is Anticipation. Authentic Potentiality-for-being in attestation is Resoluteness.

Anticipatory Resoluteness is a description of Authentic Potentiality-for-being-a-whole. It liberates Daesin for its uttermost possibility of existence.

Daesin is different from everything present-at-hand or real. Daesin has self-subsistence of an existing self as Care.

Temporality is experienced in a primordial way in Daesin’s Authentic Being-a-whole as Anticipatory Resoluteness.

The Temporality of Anticipatory Resoluteness is a distinctive mode of Temporality.

Temporality has different possibilities and ways of Temporalizing itself (e.g. the authenticity and inauthenticity of Daesin).

Anticipatory Resoluteness

Resoluteness is reticently projecting oneself upon one’s ownmost Being-guilty and exacting Anxiety of oneself.

Being-guilty belongs to Daesin’s Being as a null Being-the-basis of a nullity.

Wanting-to-have-a-conscience resolves upon Being-guilty.

Taking over “Guilt” in Resoluteness is authentically accomplished when Resoluteness, in its disclosedness of Daesin’s Being-guilty, is something constant. This is only made possible if Daesin discloses “right to its end” its Potentiality-for-being.

Daesin’s Being-at-an-end implies Being-towards-the-end. This is Being-towards-the-end which understands or Anticipation of death.

Therefore, Resoluteness becomes authentically what it can be in the Anticipation.

Resoluteness harbours in itself authentic Being-towards-death as a possible modality of its own authenticity.

Resoluteness is letting oneself be called forth to one’s ownmost Being-guilty.

Being-guilty has a possibility of being authentically or inauthentically guilty.

“Guilty” is only in its current factical Potentiality-for-being. Being-guilty belongs to the Being of Daesin. Being-guilty is understood as Potentiality-for-being-guilty.

Resoluteness projects itself upon Potentiality-for-being-guilty. It is a primordial possibility of Daesin.

But Daesin’s primordial being towards its Potentiality-for-being is Being-towards-death as Anticipation. Anticipation discloses possibility as possibility.

Therefore, only as anticipating does resoluteness become the primordial being towards Daesin’s ownmost Potentiality-for-being.

When Daesin is resolute, it takes over authentically the fact of its existence. Daesin is its null basis of its own nullity. Death as a possibility is the impossibility of existence. It is the utter nullity of Daesin.

Daesin, as Care, is the thrown null basis for its death. Nullity is revealed to Daesin in authentic Being-towards-death.

Only on the basis of Daesin’s whole Being does anticipation make Being-guilty possible.

Care harbours in itself both death and guilt equiprimordially.

Therefore, only Anticipatory Resoluteness understands Potentiality-for-being-guilty authentically, wholly and primordially.

The call of conscience, when understood, reveals the lostness in the They.

Resoluteness brings Daesin back to its ownmost Potentiality-for-being-its-self.

Being-towards-death is death as Daesin’s ownmost possibility. This makes Daesin’s Potentiality-for-being transparent and authentic.

Call of conscience individualises Daesin down to its ownmost Potentiality-for-guilty. It discloses the Anticipation of death as non-relational.

Therefore, Anticipatory Resoluteness lets Potentiality-for-being-guilty as ownmost non-relational possibility be struck wholly into conscience.

Daesin is determined by its ownmost Being-guilty before and after indebtedness. Wanting-to-have-conscience is ready for the appeal to Daesin’s ownmost Being-guilty.

Constant and prior Being-guilty shows priority only in the possibility which is not to be outstripped.

When in Anticipation, Resoluteness is caught up in the possibility of death in its Potentiality-for-being. Daesin’s authentic existence is no longer outstripped by anything.

As resolute, Daesin is revealed to itself in its current factical Potentiality-for-being. Daesin is this revealing and Being-revealed.

In Being-certain, Daesin maintains oneself in what resoluteness discloses. Daesin gives to itself its current factical situation and brings itself in that situation.

Resoluteness cannot become rigid as regards the situation. As disclosure, Resoluteness must be held open and free for the current factical possibility. Therefore, the certainty of Resoluteness holds itself free for the possibility of taking it back.

Authentic Resoluteness resolves to keep repeating itself and is constantly free for Daesin’s Whole-potentiality-for-being.

In its death, Daesin must “take back everything”.

Since Resoluteness is certain of death in Anticipation, it attains certainty which is authentic and whole.

Daesin is co-certain of the irresoluteness of the They. Anticipatory Resoluteness is also open to lostness in the They.

The indefiniteness of ones ownmost Potentiality-for-being is first made manifest in Being-towards-death.

Anticipation brings Daesin face to face with the constant but indefinite certainty when its possibility will become an impossibility.

Anticipation also brings Daesin face to face with its being thrown into the indefiniteness of its “limit-situation”. When Daesin is resolved on its “limit situation”, Daesin gains its authentic Potentiality-for-being-a-whole.

The indefiniteness of death is disclosed as Anxiety. The “nothing” of Anxiety unveils the nullity by which Daesin in its very basis is defined. The basis is itself as thrownness into death.

Daesin’s Potentiality-for-being-a-whole is Daesin as resolute. Resoluteness is authentic and wholly what it can be only as Anticipatory Resoluteness.

Daesin’s Selfhood and Circular Being-in-general

Daesin’s Anticipatory Resoluteness, as its authenticity and totality, must be wrested from falling Daesin. Daesin tends to cover up Anticipatory Resoluteness when lost in the They.

Therefore existential analysis must guard against everyday interpretation, complacency and tranquilised obviousness.

Interpretation of Self belongs to Daesin’s Being. In Daesin’s circumspective-concernful discovering of the world the concern gets sighted too. Daesin understands itself as possibility even when interpreted from the They. In concern, somehow Daesin’s existence is understood too.

Any question of Daesin’s Being is already prepared by the kind of Being which Daesin has.

Projection of Daesin upon its authentic Potentiality-for-being-a-whole is not something left to our discretion.

Is not everything already illumined by the light of a “presupposed” idea of existence?

In every case I am myself the entity called Daesin. I am so as a Potentiality-for-being for which to be this entity is an issue.

Daesin understands itself as Being-in-the-world and encounters entities as ready-at-hand and present-at-hand.

Daesin has already understood itself however mythical or magical that interpretation is.

But, the precise grasp of existence is as Care. The substance of man is existence.

Therefore understanding Being-in-general means understanding the Being belonging to Daesin. However, doesn’t this presuppose Being-in-general and becomes a circular argument?

Understanding is that which is to be interpreted and puts into words for the first time; it decides if an entity is seen as it is. Understanding has the state of Being which has been disclosed in projection.

A circle cannot be avoided since Daesin as Care is already ahead-of-itself. As Being, Daesin has already projected upon the definitive possibilities of its existence. In this projection, Daesin has already projected something like existence and Being.

Common sense demands the “charge of circularity” but this misunderstands understanding. Entities can only be experienced factically only when their Being has already been understood.

Talking of a circle is a failure to see that understanding makes up a basic kind of Daesin’s Being and Being is constituted as Care. Denying the circle reinforces the failure.

Daesin has circular Being.

A worldless “I” presupposes too little and Life with only occasional regard to death is too short sighted.

By exhibiting Anticipatory Resoluteness Daesin is brought face to face to its authentic totality.

“There is” Being only in so far as truth “is” as primordial and authentic. This truth must guarantee understanding of the Being of Daesin and Being-in-general. The most basic truth is the disclosedness of the meaning of Daesin’s Being as Care.

Selfhood and Care

Care is the basis of Daesin’s whole. Daesin, as Care, is ahead-of-itself as not-yet and as something still outstanding in Being-toward-the-end.

Call of conscience summons Daesin towards its ownmost Potentiality-for-being as Anticipatory Resoluteness. This includes authentic Potentiality-for-being-a-whole.

Care is a condition for the possibility of Daesin’s Potentiality-for-being.

How can Daesin exist as a unity in the ways and possibility of its Being? Daesin can be a unity only if Daesin is itself this Being in its possibilities (i.e. in each case I am this entity).

“I” seems to “hold together” the totality of the structural whole of Daesin. The I/Self is the supporting ground as substance or subject.

If Self belongs to the essential attribute of Daesin and Daesin’s essence lies in existence, then I-hood and Selfhood must be conceived existentially.

Daesin’s everyday interpretation of Self is saying “I” as an expression of itself about “itself”. With “I” Daesin has itself in view. “I” is regarded as something utterly simple and stands for me and nothing further. It is also regarded as not attributable to others.

Therefore, “I” is the absolute subject as the same persisting something in simplicity, substantiality and personality.

“I” is a bare consciousness accompanying all concepts.

Kant takes “I think” as a form of apperception which clings to every experience and precedes it.

Saying “I” is saying “I think”.

“I think” is “I bind together” and is the formal structure of representing as such. Therefore “I” is a logical subject.

It is ontically impossible to reduce “I” to a substance.

“I” as “I think” is “I think something”. This something is an entity within-the-world and presupposes the world (the world is absent from Kant’s definition of “I”). Therefore the world co-determines the state of Being of “I”.

Therefore, “I” is I-am-in-the-world. In saying “I” Daesin expresses itself as Being-in-the-world.

The everyday interpretation of Self sees “I” in terms of world or They-self and not in terms of itself. Everyday “I” is therefore inauthentic.

When Daesin is absorbed in the everyday multiplicity and rapid succession of that which one is concerned, the Self of Self-forgetting “I am concerned” is seen as something simple, constantly selfsame but indefinite and empty. Daesin in the everyday “I” gets overlooked.

As Care, Daesin is ahead-of-itself. Similarly, “I” is the entity for which the issue is the Being of the entity that it is. Therefore, with “I” Care expresses itself.

For the most part Care expresses itself as “I” in a fugitive way under the loud voice of the “I” of the They-self.

Selfhood is possible only in one’s authentic Potentiality-for-being-ones-self in Daesin’s Being as Care.

The constancy of Self in steadiness and steadfastness is the authentic counter-possibility to the non-self-constancy of falling in the They.

Self-constancy is Anticipatory Resoluteness.

Daesin is authentically itself in primordial individualisation of reticent Resoluteness which exacts Anxiety of itself. This is something that keeps silent.

Therefore, Being-ones-self does not keep saying “I”. In its reticence, Daesin is that thrown entity as which it can authentically be.

Self that is unveiled by reticence of resolute existence is the Being of the “I”.

Therefore, Care is a constitution of Daesin’s self-constancy (including Being-fallen into non-self-constancy). Care as a structure includes selfhood and is Daesin’s totality.

Temporality

Daesin becomes essentially Daesin in authentic existence as Anticipatory Resoluteness.

Meaning is the understandability of something that maintains itself.

“Meaning” signifies “upon-which” of primary projection conceived in the possibility as that which it is. “Upon-which” discloses the sort of thing that makes understanding possible.

The “upon-which” of projection is disclosing that which makes possible what has been projected.

The meaning of Care is the projection which guides and underlies the interpretation of Daesin. It discloses Daesin’s “upon-which”.

What is projected is the Being of Daesin and is disclosed as authentic Potentiality-for-being-a-whole. This is the “upon-which” that has been disclosed and projected and makes possible Being as Care.

Therefore, the meaning of Care makes possible the totality of the structural whole of Care.

Meaning is the “upon-which” of primary projection of the understanding of Being.

Being-in-the-world is disclosed to itself and understands the Being of that entity which it itself is. The Being of entities discovered within-the-world is the “upon-which” of projection.

If entities “have meaning” they become accessible in their Being. This Being, as projected upon its “upon-which”, is what “really” has meaning.

Entities have meaning only because Being which has been disclosed beforehand becomes intelligible in the projection of that Being (i.e. the “upon-which” of that projection).

Daesin can be authentically or inauthentically disclosed to itself in regards its existence. Daesin grasps its Being as factical Potentiality-for-being and as a Being which is an issue for Daesin.

The meaning of this Being makes Care possible. It is what makes up the Potentiality-for-being and the self-understanding of Daesin itself.

That which was projected in primordial existential projection of existence is Anticipatory Resoluteness. This is Being-towards one’s ownmost, distinctive Potentiality-for-being.

This is only possible if Daesin comes towards itself in its ownmost possibility and if Daesin exists.

Letting-itself-come-towards-itself is a distinctive possibility of future-as- coming-towards.

Being-towards-death is possible only as something futural. Daesin in its ownmost Potentiality-for-being comes towards itself.

Anticipation makes Daesin authentically futural and is only possible because Daesin as Being is always coming towards itself. Daesin is futural in its Being in general.

Anticipatory Resoluteness understands Daesin in its Being-guilty. One takes over Being-guilty as being the thrown basis of a nullity.

Taking over thrownness is Daesin being authentically as it already was. This is only possible because futural Daesin can be its ownmost as-it-already-was. This is Daesin’s “been”.

Daesin is I-am-as-having-been. Daesin comes towards itself futurally in a way that comes back.

As authentically futural Daesin is authentically as “having-been”.

Anticipation is coming back understandingly to one’s ownmost “been”. Daesin only as futural can be authentically as having-been. Having-been arises from the future.

Anticipatory Resoluteness discloses the current situation of the there in taking action. Daesin is circumspectively concerned with what is factically ready-at-hand.

Resolute Being-alongside what is ready-at-hand in the situation encounters what has presence environmentally. This is possible only by making such an entity present. Only as Present as making-present can resoluteness let itself be encountered by that which it seizes upon in taking action.

In coming back to itself futurally, resoluteness brings itself into the situation by making-present.

Having-been arises from the future. The future is in the process of having-been and releases from itself the present.

Unity of the future makes-present the process of having-been. This is Temporality.

Only in so far as Daesin has the character of Temporality is authentic Potentiality-for-being-a-whole of Anticipatory Resoluteness made possible for Daesin itself. Therefore, Temporality is the meaning of Care.

Everyday understanding of ‘time’ is derivative and arises from inauthentic Temporality. ‘Future’, ‘Past’ and ‘Present’ arises from the inauthentic way of understanding time.

Daesin’s totality of the Being of Care is ahead-of-itself-already-being-in-the-world-as-being-alongside. Therefore, the primordial unity of the structure of Care lies in Temporality. Ahead-of-itself is grounded in the future and Being-already-in is the having-been made known.

Ahead includes a ‘before’. Ahead and before are as future as the sort of which make it possible for Daesin such that its Potentiality-for-being is an issue.

In its ‘already’ Daesin is already something that has been thrown. Only because Care is based on having-been can Daesin exist as the thrown entity which it is.

As long as Daesin factically exists it is never past but it is always as already having been as I-am-as-having-been.

‘Past’ is no longer present-at-hand. Therefore, Daesin, in existing, is never present-at-hand arising and passing in the course of time.

Daesin never ‘finds itself’ except as thrown fact. In the state of mind that finds itself, Daesin is assailed of itself as an entity which it still is and already was. Daesin constantly is as having-been.

The structure of Care as temporal meaning is before, already and also Being-alongside which falls. Making-present is the primary basis of falling and remains included in the future and having-been. It is a mode of Temporality.

Temporality makes possible the unity of Existence, Facticity and Falling and constitutes the totality of the structure of Care.

Temporality ‘is’ not an entity at all but it temporalizes itself. This makes possible the multiplicity of Daesin’s mode of Being.

Future, having-been and present show characteristics of towards-oneself, back-to and letting-oneself-be-encountered-by.

Temporality is the primordial ‘out-side-of-itself’ in and for itself.

Future, having-been and present are ecstasies of Temporality.

The ordinary understanding of time is a pure sequence of “nows” without beginning or end. The ecstatical character of primordial Temporality is levelled off by this but is still grounded in the possibility of a definite kind of temporalizing.

In the ecstasies of Temporality, future has priority in the unity of authentic Temporality.

Primordial and authentic Temporality temporalizes itself in terms of authentic future in such a way as having-been futurally that it awakens the present.

Care is Being-towards-death and Anticipatory Resoluteness as authentic being towards the possibility of Daesin’s utter impossibility. Daesin is thrown into death. Therefore, Daesin exists finitely.

Authentic future is temporalized by Temporality and makes up the meaning of Anticipatory Resoluteness as finite.

Primordial future is a future that closes one’s Potentiality-for-being. The future itself is closed to one.

Time is primordial as the temporalizing of Temporality and makes possible the structure of Care. Temporality is ecstatical and temporalizes itself out of the future. Primordial time is finite.

Care emerged from disclosedness of the being of the there, as Being-in-the-world. This is the basic state of Daesin.

Being-in-the-world is a phenomenon of the world and can be ready-at-hand and present-at-hand in the environment. This constitutes within-the-world-ness.

Structure of worldhood is in significance; understanding belonging to disclosedness. In this way, understanding protects itself as the potentiality-for-being for the sake of which Daesin exists.

Temporal Interpretation of Everyday Daesin

· The structure of disclosedness involves understanding, state of mind, falling and discourse. This forms the basis of the temporality of Being-in-the-world and the foundation of the spatiality of Daesin.

· Temporality of disclosedness is in resoluteness or the authentic disclosedness of Daesin; Daesin can be its very “there” in Care (understanding, state-of-mind, falling and discourse).

· Every understanding has its mood and every state of mind is one in which one understands. Understanding of a state of mind is falling. One kind of temporality unites these in there structure.

· Understanding is the being of the “there”. Daesin can develop different possibilities of seeing/looking around/or just looking. All explanation uncovers understandingly that which one cannot understand. It is rooted in Daesins primary understanding.

· Understanding is projecting towards a potentiality-for-being for the sake of which any Daesin exists. In disclosed potentiality-for-being, Daesin knows understandingly what it is capable of and maintains itself in possibility. Therefore, ignorance is deficient projectedness.

· Understanding is coming-towards-oneself as future; the project is futural. Daesin throws itself into future as possibility. Daesin is understandingly in the way it can be.

· However, everyday Daesin remains irresolute. Therefore, temporality does not temporalize itself constantly out of authentic future.

· Temporalizing of future takes various forms. Authentic future as anticipation; Daesins ownmost potentiality-for-being wins itself from an inauthentic future. Daesin is constanty ahead-of-itself but inconstantly anticipatory in its possibility.

· Inauthentic understanding concerns oneself in everydayness; Daesin understands itself as They-self. Inauthentic future has the character of awaiting. Daesin is awaiting its potentiality-for-being. Expecting is founded upon awaiting and is a mode of future which temporalizes itself authentically as anticipation.

· Understanding is primarily futural but is also having-been and present.

· Inauthentic future as awaiting is a specific way of Being-alongside, a waiting-towards.

· A mode of authentic temporality is authentic resoluteness in present. Resolution discloses the situation. In resoluteness present is held in future and in having been. Therefore, present held in authentic temporality is authentic itself. It is “a moment of vision” as an ecstasis or resolute rapture; it is not a “now”. Now belongs to time as within-time-ness and is present-at-hand.

· In the “moment of vision” is authentic present or waiting-towards; to encounter “in a time” as ready-at-hand or present-at-hand.

· Making-present is irresolute and not a moment of vision. Making-present is falling into the “world of ones concern”. Therefore, making-present is understanding that temporalizes itself. In contrast, moment of vision temporalizes itself in terms of authentic future.

· Inauthentic understanding temporalizes itself as awaiting which makes possible; awaiting as having-been.

· In anticipation, Daesin brings itself again forth into its ownmost Potentiality-for being. Authentic Being-as-having-been is repetition. Therefore, inauthentic projection is possible only because Daesin forgets itself in its ownmost thrown Potentiality-of-being. The ecstasis/rapture of forgetting is a backing away in the face of ones ownmost “been”; Daesin is closed off from itself.

· Therefore, having forgotten is inauthentic having-been. Only in such forgetting can anything be retained by concernful making-present which awaits. What is retained are entities encountered within-the-world other than Daesin.

· Remembering is only possible on that forgetting. Having-forgotten “discloses” the horizon into which Daesin is lost. Awaiting which forgets and makes-present is the unity of inauthentic understanding. It closes off authentic Potentiality-for-being and is a condition of irresoluteness.

· Understanding is a state of mind. In understanding the “there” is disclosed or closed off by a mood. Having a mood brings Daesin face to face with thrownness and is disclosed in “how one is”. Therefore, being-thrown is finding oneself in some state of mind. State of mind is based upon thrownness, I am the entity that has been thrown.

· Mood as bringing Daesin face to face with thrownness or that-it-is constantly is as having been. It is the ecstasis of “been”.

· Understanding is grounded primarily in future as a state of mind that temporalizes primarily in having-been. Moods temporalize themselves.

· Things with character of turning up and disappearing in fleeting manner belongs to the constancy of existence.

· Moods brings one back to something.

Temporality of fear

Fear is an inauthentic state of mind. Fearing in the face of something threatening is detrimental to Daesin’s Potentiality-for-being. Fearing discloses something threatening in everyday circumspection. Letting-something-come-towards-oneself is fear of future and having-been.

Fear is awaiting; what is threatening comes back to concernful Potentiality for being. Only if ecstatically open can that which threatens be awaited right back to the entity which I am.

Awaiting which fears is afraid “for itself”.

When Being-in-the-world is threatened, Daesin is concerned for its Potentiality-for-being and backs away in bewilderment, forgetting oneself and thrownness is closed off.

Bewilderment is based on forgetting. Daesin clings to the possibility of self-preservation and evasion that is already discovered beforehand. There is no definite possibility, Daesin leaps from one possibility to the next.

Bewildered making-present is the first thing that comes to mind when forgetting Daesin is in fear. Daesin is in a jumble of hovering possibility. Therefore, the temporality of fear is forgetting which awaits and makes-present.

Temporality of anxiety

Anxiety is a basic state of mind and brings Daesin face to face with thrownness in uncanniness. Like fear, it is something in the face of which one is anxious and about something one is anxious. Fear and anxiety coincide in Daesin.

Anxiety is not encountered as something definite. The world in which I exist becomes sunk in insignificance. Anxiety is anxious of “nothing” in the world, only its possibility. Concernful awaiting finds nothing to understand. Understanding “nothing” of the world is anxiety.

What anxiety is anxious about in-the-face-of and what it is anxious about is already “there” in Daesin itself.

Therefore, anxiety is inauthentic future of awaiting.

Anxiety discloses the insignificance of the world as the impossibility of projecting oneself upon Potentiality-for-being. However, it does light up authentic Potentiality-for being. Therefore, anxiety is anxious about naked Daesin as something thrown into uncanniness; it brings back pure that-it-is of ones ownmost individualised thrownness as something possible that can be repeated.

State-of-mind of anxiety is having been and bringing oneself face to face with repeatability as the specific ecstatical mode of anxiety. Anxiety is held onto when brought back to thrownness, unlike the bewilderment of fear; it brings one into a mood for possible resolution, to make a moment of vision at the ready. Anxiety takes Daesin all the way back to its naked uncanniness, back from its “worldly” possibilities to the possibility of Potentiality-of-being.

Fear is occasioned by entities environmentally within-the-world while anxiety comes from Daesin itself and its Being-in-the-world.

Anxiety from Daesin is future and present and temporalizes out of Being-as-having-been as repeatability.

Anxiety is from the future of resoluteness and fear is from the lost present.

Other moods are founded upon ones-having-been. For example, hope is founded wholly upon future, unlike fear. Daesin who hopes takes himself with him into his hope. This is only possible if Daesin is related to the thrown ground of itself.

Temporality of curiosity

Understanding and moods are futural and having-been. Falling as the third structure of care is the temporal meaning in present. Falling is idle talk, curiosity and ambiguity.

Curiosity is Daesins Potentiality-for-seeing. Seeing as awareness of ready-at-hand and present-at-hand which is encountered bodily and grounded in present.

Curiosity seeks to only see in order to see and have seen; it is making present that is entangled with itself. It craves the new or something not yet seen. It is futural in an inauthentic way and craves such a possibility as something actual. Therefore curiosity is making present that seeks to run away from the awaiting. The present arises and leaps away from awaiting which belongs to it.

Curiosity looks away to what is coming next; this is the not-tarrying of curiosity. Making-present does not leap away from the awaiting but is a detaching or distraction. Leaping-away is a ecstatical modification of awaiting; awaiting leaps after making-present.

When awaiting leaps after, making present is abandoned more and more to itself; this makes present for the sake of the present and entangles itself in itself. Therefore, distracted not-tarrying is never-dwelling-anywhere.

Not-dwelling-anywhere is the opposite to the moment of vision and is a being-there that is everywhere and nowhere.

In “leaping away” of present one also forgets increasingly. Curiosity holds by what is coming next and forgets what has gone before.

When making-present leaps away it is a ecstatical tendency that seeks to temporalise itself out of itself. When Daesin entangles itself this has ecstatical meaning.

In making-present something new in curiosity Daesin still understands itself but is alienated from its ownmost Potentiality-for-being. It tranquilises and leaps away. Curiosity fabricates something new.

The leaping away of present is finite. Daesin flees in the face of its thrownness. The present leaps away from its authentic future and having-been. Therefore, Daesin comes to its authentic existence by taking a detour through the present.

The throw of Daesin’s being thrownness does not come to stop because Daesin is now “there”; Daesin gets dragged along in thrownness. As something thrown into the world, it loses itself in the “world”.

Present as getting taken along never arrives at any other ecstatical horizon of its own accord, unless it is brought back from lostness by a resolution; the current situation and limit situation of being-towards-death. This is disclosed by a moment of vision which is held on to.

Temporality of discourse

The disclosedness of there is articulated by discourse. Discourse does not temporalise itself in any definite ecstasis but addresses itself to the environment by making-present. Discourse in itself is temporal because it is grounded in ecstatical unity of temporality.

Understanding is grounded primarily in future in anticipation of waiting. States of mind temporalise themselves in having-been by repetition or having forgotten. Falling temporalises itself in present in making-present or moment of vision.

Therefore understanding is present in process of having-been. State of mind is future which is making present. Present leaps away from a future in every ecstasis; temporality temporalizes itself as a whole. Ecstatical unity is grounded in care as existence, facticity and falling.

Temporality of Being-in-the-world

Temporality temporalizes itself as future and is makes present in process of having been. It also discloses entirety of Being-in-the-world as being-in and world.

Ecstatical unity of temporality is the unity outside of itself as future, what has been and future and is the condition for the possibility of an entity which exists as its “there”.

An entity with “being-there” is cleared. In the clearedness of Daesin, it is “open” and “bright” for itself as defined by Care. Therefore, full disclosedness of “there” is grounded in Care.

Ecstatical temporality clears the “there”. Being-there is rooted in temporality and makes possible Being-in-the-world as concernful being-alongside the ready-at-hand within-the-world; which is grounded in Care and temporality.

Temporality of circumspective concern

In concernful being-alongside the world, equipment totality (equipment ready-at-hand) is dealt with as involvement; an involvement which something has in something.

Being-alongside discovers circumspectively in concern by letting something be involved. This is projecting an involvement understandingly and is a concern based on Care.

Letting something be involved is handling an item of equipment and is a “towards-which”; equipment is useable or in use.

The temporal structure of awaiting is an awaiting towards-which. Concern comes back by itself to the thing it is involved. Awaiting and retaining of that which is involved is made possible in ecstatical unity by manipulative way in which equipment is made possible.

Letting something be involved is a unity of retention which awaits; it makes possible absorption of concern in its equipmental world as letting-things-be-involved.

A specific kind of forgetting is essential for temporality and letting something be involved. The Self forgets itself if lost in the world of equipment

Making present which awaits and retain is needed for Daesin’s navigation in being-with-one-another in its public environment. Circumspection encounters ready-at-hand as that entity which it is.

When something cannot be used, making present which awaits and retains is held up and exhibited afterwards as damage.

Making present awaits the towards-which and is held alongside equipment when it is used in such a way that towards-which and in-order-to is encountered for the first time.

Un-ready-at-hand is discovered circumspectively when we miss it; it is a deficient mode of present, a making-unpresent of something that is expected to be there. This is grounded on awaiting the object. Possibility of one’s getting surprised by something is based upon ones not-awaiting

The temporal structure of resigning oneself to something is a non-retaining which awaitingly makes present. It’s a mode of taking in ones reckoning that which one cannot cling to. Not reckoned with is not forgetting; it gets retained in its unsuitability as ready-at-hand.

Concern is never pure making-present and arises from retention which awaits. This retention which awaits allows Daesin to know its way about even an alien world.

Circumspective concern can be modified to theoretical discovery of present-at-hand within-the-world. This gives possibility of Daesin existing in the way of scientific research. Science as Being-in-the-world discloses entities of being. Science is not the holding back of manipulation since experiments involve manipulation.

Circumspection is an involvement-relationship of context of equipment which is ready-at-hand. It is subordinate to equipment totality of current equipment-world. A totality of involvements is always the start of factical concern. The survey of totality of involvements illumines concern; its light is from Daesin’s Potentiality-of-being for the sake of which concern exists as care.

Concernful circumspection brings ready-at-hand closer to Daesin as interpreting what has been sighted; this is called deliberating, the “if-then” (e.g. if this is to be produced, then some means will be needed).

Circumspective deliberation illumines Daesin’s current factical situation in the environment with which it concerns itself, it never affirms itself. Making present is envisaging as a mode of circumspective deliberation by catching sight of what is needed but un-ready-at-hand.

Therefore, circumspective making present is grounded in the retention of the context of equipment that is awaiting as a possibility. What is laid open in awaiting and retaining is brought close by making present or envisaging. If it operates in the if-then, the “if” must refer to something.

Only to extent that Daesin, in awaiting possibility (towards-which), comes back to towards-this, (by retaining something ready-at-hand) does making present bring it explicitly closer.

Deliberation which brings closer in making-present is in conformity with the kind of being that belongs to that which is brought close. It lets that which something has an involvement been seen circumspecticely as this very thing.

Present is rooted in future and having-been and is a condition for the possibility that what has been projected in circumspective understanding is brought closer by making present. Present conforms to awaiting and retaining. “As” is grounded in unity of temporality. “Is” gives expression of something as something.

When we are using a tool, for example a hammer, circumspectively we can say the hammer is too heavy or too light; we can still give expression to concernful deliberation (e.g. it is hard to manipulate). It also means that entity before us has weight and a property of heaviness. Therefore, the entity is no longer spoken in awaiting or retaining as equipmental totality and its involvement relationships. The hammer has mass. The entity is a corporeal thing subject to laws of gravity; too heavy or too light no longer has meaning. Ready-at-hand becomes present-at-hand.

Theoretically grasping entities within-the-world/within physical nature overlooks the tool character of the entity and its place. An entities place becomes a world-point and a spatio-temporal position; entities are released from confinement of ready-at-hand. For example, nature is mathematically projected and only as thus projected can facts be fixed. Entities are discovered in a way which entities can be discovered; this involves prior projection of their state of being.

Thematizing frees entities within-the-world by delimitizing the subject area, so they can throw themselves against a pure discovering and become objects. Therefore, objectifies is a distinctive kind of making-present and is discoveredness of present-at-hand.

Awaiting of this discoveredness is based in resoluteness by projecting Daesin towards its Potentiality-for-being in the “truth”.

Daesin must transcent the entities thematized and the presupposed objectifying.

World must have been disclosed to Daesin since Daesin has Being-in-the-world; this is grounded in temporality whether it is theoretical or practical.

Problem of the transcendence of the world

Circumspective concern is understanding of the totality of involvements. This is based on prior understanding of in-order-to, towards-which, towards-this and for-the-sake-of. The interconnectedness of these is significance and their unity is world.

In what way must world be if Daesin is able to exist as Being-in-the-world?

Daesin exists for-the-sake-of Potentiality-of-being of itself. In existing Daesin has been thrown for the sake of itself. Daesin understands itself for-the-sake-of-itself as some current in-order-to. That inside which existing Daesin understands itself is “there” along with its factical existence. Daesin is its world existingly.

Daesin’s being is Care. The ontological meaning of Care is temporality. In the disclosedness of the “there” the world is disclosed.

Possibility of world lies in the fact that temporality as ecstatical limit has something like a horizon. Ecstasis is the whither to which one is carried away. This whither is a horizonal schema. In this schema, Daesin comes to itself futurally for-the-sake-of-itself and Daesin is disclosed to itself in a state of mind that is thrown as what-has-been. The schema is present in being alongside and making-present as in-order-to.

Unity of horizonal schemata of future, present and having been is grounded in ecstatical unity of temporality.

Horizon of temporality determines the whereupon of disclosedness. Being-there is Potentiality-for-being and is projected in the horizon of the future. Being-already is disclosed in horizon of having-been. That which one concerns itself is disclosed in horizon of present. This makes in-order-to connected with for-the-sake-of.

This implies on the basis of the horizonal constitution of ecstatical unity of temporality belongs to Daesin (each case its own “there”), something like a world that has been disclosed. In so far as Daesin temporalizes itself, a world is too. Daesin is essentially “in a world”. Therefore, if no Daesin exists, no world is “there” either.

The world is already presupposed in being-alongside, thematizing of present-at-hand and objectification as ways of Being-in-the-world. The world is transcendent, it is already ecstatically disclosed in terms of entities within-the-world within the horizons of its ecstasies. This is not left to Daesin discretion as thrown.

Significance relationships determine structure of the world and no a network of forms which worldless subject has laid over some kind of material. Rather, factical Daesin understanding itself and its world ecstatically in limit of “there” comes back from these horizons to entities within them. Entities are encountered by making them present within-the-world. World is already “further outside” than any object can ever be.

Daesin must be considered temporal and spatial. Temporality is meaning of the being of Care. Therefore, Daesins specific spatiality must be grounded in temporality. Daesin can only be spatial as Care and as existing as factically falling. Daesin is never present-at-hand in space; Daesin takes space in. In existing, Daesin has already made room for its own leeway and determines its own location. It comes back from the space it has made room for to the place it has reserved.

Daesin’s making room for itself is constituted by directionality and deserverance; a self-directive discovery of something like a region. “Whither” for possible belonging somewhere of equipment which is ready-at-hand environmentally and which can be placed.

Coming across equipment is handling it or moving out of the way. In this, some region has already been discovered. Concernful Being-in-the-world is directive or self-directive. Belonging somewhere has a relationship to involvement; involvement context of equipment one concerns oneself within the horizon of a world that has been disclosed.

Self-directive discovery of a region is grounded ecstatically in retentive awaiting “hither” or “thither”. Therefore, making room for one’s self is a directional awaiting of a region, a desevering of ready-at-hand and present-at-hand. Therefore, out of a region discovered beforehand, concern comes back deseverantly to that which is closest.

Because Daesin as temporality has a ecstatio-horizonal in its being, it can take along with it a space for which it has made room and can do so factically and constantly. Therefore, “here” of its current factical situation never signifies a position in space butt signifies a leeway of the range of equipment totality with which it is closely concerned. Leeway is opened up directionality and deseverance.

Bringing close makes possible a kind of handling and being-busy; “absorbed in thing one is handling”. In such bringing close is the essential structure of Care as falling made known. Bringing close and falling “in the present” is a forgetting which always leaps after the present and forms the constitution of falling.

Bringing close of making present forgets “yonder” and loses itself in itself. Observation of entities within-the-world commences in making present. An illusion arises “at first” of only a thing is present-at-hand and in a space in general.

Only on basis of its ecstatical-horizonal temporality is it possible to break into space. World is not present-at-hand in space, yet only within a world does space let itself be discovered.

Ecstatical temporality of Daesin’s spatiality makes it intelligible that space is independent of time and Daesin’s “dependence” on space

Everydayness is the average way of existing and the way Daesin maintains itself “every day”. It’s how Daesin lives unto the day in being-with-one-another and the comfortableness of the accustomed. It is that which will come tomorrow is eternal yesterday; everything all one and the same; determinative for Daesin even when “They” not its hero; publicly manifest way to be; way for Daesin to evade dull suffering

Temporality and historicality

The meaning of being requires understanding of being and this belongs to Daesins state of being. This requires primordial understanding of temporality as the primordial condition for the possibility of Care.

Being-towards-the-end or death is just one of the ends by which Daesin’s totality is closed around. The other end is “beginning” or “birth”. Therefore, the entity “between” birth and death is Being-a-whole.

So far, the analytic has only faced forward towards death and missed Being-towards-the-beginning.

Daesin stretches along between birth and death; this is the connectedness of life which Daesin maintains itself constantly. It consists of a sequence of experiences “in time”, including the actual (experience present-at-hand in the current now), the no longer and the not yet actual.

Daesin traverses a span of time granted it between the two boundaries; the “actual” only in the now and hops through a sequence of “now” of its own time. Therefore, Daesin is temporal.

In spite of constantly changing experiences Daesin’s Self or selfsameness persists; it is present-at-hand “in time” but “unthinglike”.

Daesin stretches itself along. Its being is constituted in advance as a stretching along.

Factical Daesin exists as born and as born it is already dying as being-towards-death. Daesin’s between and ends are as Care; as Care Daesin is the between. The possible basis for the totality of Care is in temporality.

The specific movement in which Daesin is stretched along and stretches itself along is Daesin’s historizing. Daesin’s self-constancy is a way of being of Daesin and is grounded in a specific temporalizing of temporality. Daesin’s historicality is its existing, in Care, as authentically or inautentically historical. Daesin exists historically only because it is temporal in the very basis of its being.

Daesin must also be called “temporal” as being “in time” since it uses clocks etc; this is time as within-time-ness. Therefore, historicality and within-time-ness both stem from temporality.

The Past belongs to an earlier time but is still present-at-hand “now”. History is a derivation of the past and is a context of events and effects that draws on through “the past”, the “present” and the “future”. The totality of events which change in time is human culture and not nature. A specific historizing of existent Daesin which comes to pass in time is the “past” in our being-with-one-another.

The “past” of equipment is what is past in the world in which they belonged as a context of equipment and ready-at-hand and used by concern Daesin who-belonged-to-the-world; that world is no longer but what was formally within the world is still present-at-hand. A world is only in the manner of existing Daesin which factically is as Being-in-the-world.

Daesin can never be past defined as now no longer present-at-hand because Daesin is never present-at-hand. If Daesin is, it exists. If Daesin no longer exists it is not past but having-been there.

What is primarily historical is Daesin. Entities other than Daesin are secondarily historical. What we encounter within-the-world is world history. Daesin factically has its history because the being of Daesin is constituted by its historicality.

The being of Daesin is defined as Care and Care is grounded in temporality. Resoluteness is the projecting if oneself on ones own being-guilty which is reticent and ready for anxiety. This is authentic as anticipatory resoluteness as Potentiality-for-being in the face of death to take over in its thrownness the entity it is itself. As thrown, Daesin has been delivered over to itself and its Potentiality-for-being as Being-in-the-world.

Daesin exists factically with Others and the self becomes lost in the “They”; it understands itself in the “average”.

Resoluteness in which Daesin comes back to itself is in terms of the heritage which that resoluteness, as thrown, takes over. Therefore, in coming back resolutely to ones thrownness is a handing down to oneself of the possibility.

The more authentically Daesin resolves the more it anticipates death to understand itself unambiguously in terms of its ownmost distinctive possibility; it chooses and finds the possibility of its existence, this happens less by accident.

Therefore, in being free for death, Daesin pushes existence into finitude and brings Daesin into simplicity of its fate. This is Daesin’s primordial historizing; Daesin hands itself down to itself in authentic resoluteness or what it has inherited and yet choosen.

Fateful Daesin as Being-in-the-world exists as Being-with-others. Its historizing is co-historizing and is determinative for it as destiny. Fate is a powerless superior power that puts itself ready for adversities. It is the power of projecting oneself upon ones own being-guilty and doing so reticently with the readiness for anxiety. Fate requires state of being of Care and temporality.

The being of an entity is futural and having-been; it can by handing down to itself the possibility it has inherited take over its own thrownness and be in a moment of vision for “its time”. Only authentic temporality at the same time finite makes possible fate or authentic historicality.

Resoluteness which comes back to itself and hands itself down becomes repetition of the possibility of existence that has come down to us. Repeating is handing down explicitly and is a going back into the possibilities of Daesin that has-been-there. It makes a reciprocative rejoinder to the possibility of that existence which has-been-there and is made in a moment of vision. It is also a disavowal of that which is “today” and is working itself out of the “past”.

Repetition is a mode of resoluteness which hands itself down as fate. Authentic being-towards-death is the finitude of temporality and is the hidden basis of Daesin’s historicality; it can take itself over in its history by repeating. Therefore, historizing which lies in anticipatory resoluteness is Daesin’s “authentic historicality”.

Inauthentic historicality is world-history; it is with others in everydayness and encounters equipment, work, “affairs”, undertakings, incidents and mishaps. With Others Daesin encounters them in activity, one is “in the swim” with it oneself. Daesin discusses the activity, combats it, retains it and forgets it. Primarily, it is what is getting done, what is “going to come of it”; it computes the progress of individual Daesin.

Historizing of history is the historizing of Being-in-the-world. Daesin’s historicality is historicality of the world. This belongs to the temporalizing of temporality. With historical Being-in-the-world what is ready-at-hand and present-at-hand have been incorporated into the history of the world.

Equipment and work have “fates”. Buildings and institutions have “history”; they are world-historical, based on a world of entities within-the-world. World-historical is already “objectively” there in historizing of existing Being-in-the-world without it being grasped historicality.

Daesin in falling understands its history first world-historically. It is experienced present-at-hand and is interpreted as something present-at-hand which comes along, has presence and disappears.

Inauthentically existing Daesin, to come to itself, must first pull itself together from dispersion and disconnectedness that has come to pass. The self’s resoluteness against inconstancy of distraction is the steadiness which has been stretched along. This is the steadiness with which Daesin as fate “incorporates into its existence birth and death and its “between”; Daesin holds them as incorporated in a moment of vision for what is world-historical in its current situation.

In fateful repetition of the possibilities that have been, Daesin brings itself back to what already has been before. When its heritage has been handed down to itself, its “birth” is caught up into its existence in coming back to the possibility of its death. Existence may then accept the thrownness of its there.

Resoluteness is loyalty of existence to its own self in readiness for anxiety. Loyalty is revering a sole authority which free existing can have; revering repeatable possibilities of existence.

Steadiness comes from temporality of repetition which futurally is in the process-of-having-been, a temporality that has already been stretched along.

In inauthentic historicality the fate that is stretched along is hidden. In the inconstancy of the They-self, Daesin makes present its “today” in awaiting the next new thing and forgetting the old one. The They evades choice and cannot repeat what has been; it only retains the “actual” and is lost in the making present of today; it understands the past as present.

The temporality of authentic historicality, in the moment of vision of anticipatory resoluteness, deprives “today” as present and weans one from the conventionality of the They.

History is the recurrence of the possible.

If Daesin’s being is historical, then every science (including historiology) is in the grip of Daesin’s historizing and historicality. That which is familiar prescientifically in Daesin as discovered Being-in-the-world is projected upon the being which is specific to it. This is thematizing, where the realm of entities is bounded off.

Historiology is possible because Daesin is historical and has-been-there. World-history also has-been-there if Daesin is no longer; it is a possibility which has been factically existent and no something universal. World-history is based on fateful repetition and the possibility of existence which has-been-there.

History has interpretedness which belongs to it, which also has a history. There are 3 types of historiology; monumental, antiquarian and critical. All are adumbrated in the historicality of Daesin.

As historical, Daesin is possible because of its temporality as coming back resolutely to itself by repetition; it is open for the monumental possibilities of human existence. In preserving existence of has-been-there it is also antiqurian. Daesin temporalises itself in future and having-been which is united in the present. In authentic historiology “today” is deprived of present. Authentic historiology is critical of present and therefore founded on temporality and being as Care.

Temporality of Within-time-ness

All historizing runs its course “in time”. Everyday understanding of Daesin (and also natural events) are within-time. Daesin regulates itself according to within-time-ness. It is Daesin’s way of “reckoning with its time”.

Daesin’s being is an issue for it and is ahead of itself as Potentiality-for-being. It is considered before anything else.

Something is to happen “then”, something else “beforehand”, something “now”. The “then” is awaiting or now-not-yet. “Now” is making present. “Beforehand” is now-no-longer. Making-present is important and temporalises itself in the unity of awaiting, retaining and forgetting that does not await. It temporality ensares itself in present or “now”; now-no-longer becomes “earlier”, then is “later on” and now is “today”.

Every then is then-when, now-no-longer is now-no-longer-when and now is now-that. They therefore have datability in time that is being-alongside the ready-at-hand and is based on making-present. Making-present which interprets itself as “time” is based on temporality and assigning a time.

In datability, Daesin is already disclosed to itself as Being-in-the-world and of entities within-the-world. Awaiting which makes present understands the until-then. It has its time as “in-between” or during-this or meanwhile. Awaitingly by concern is more thens. Therefore, until-then is from-then-till-thens and is embraced in the primary then.

Enduring is the “during” when one awaits and makes present. This lasting is the time which manifests in temporality interpretation of itself.

This time is a span. Making present in its awaiting and retaining lays “out” a “during” with a span; it is disclosed as its historical ecstatically stretched along. Every “now”, “then” and “now-no-longer” with its datability-structure has span.

Concern which awaits, retains and makes present allows itself so much time and assigns itself time. The more Daesin forgets itself in everydayness the more this “allows” is covered up.

Daesin’s time which it allows itself has gaps in it but is still stretched along. In this Daesin “has” its time.

Inauthentic never “has” time. Authentic always has time, which is held as future.

Disclosed “there” is grounded in Daesin’s own temporality as ecstatically stretched along. A time is allotted to Daesin only because Daesin, as factically thrown, can “take” its time and lose it.

Time has been given a public character. Since Daesin’s Being-in-the-world includes Being-with-others time is the “there is” of the “They”.

Because Daesin is temporal, time is already made public; Daesin directs itself according to it in time reckoning. Daesin’s thrownness makes public time in the reckoning. Public time is time “in which” ready-at-hand and present-at-hand within-the-world are encountered. Entities with a character not like Daesin have within-time-ness and this is the basis of “public time”.

Being-in-the-world needs the possibility of sight. In its thrownness Daesin is surrounded by day and night. Day gives the possibility of sight and night takes it away. Day gives its time; then, when it dawns. The sun dates the time which is interpreted in concern. Day becomes a measure of time.

Daesin historizes from day to day. This is time by dating and is based on the sun, which is available environmentally for everyone and a publicly available measure. It forms the basis of a clock. Clocks are possible because of the temporality of Daesin.

Time is time for something and can be appropriate or inappropriate for-the-sake-of-which of Daesin’s Potentiality-for-being.

Time as datable, spanned and public belongs to the world; called world-time.

Looking at the time on a clock is a saying “now” as making present. As measuring it is a stable standard that is present-at-hand as multiple “nows”.

Spatial Daesin has temporality and datability and is bound up with its location and temporality.

World time has the same transcendence as world because both are based on temporality and is encountered just as immediately as the physical.

Making present temporalises itself in the retention which awaits. It retains the now-no-longer by making present; in the “now”, one is open for the horizon of the earlier. It also awaits the then by making present; in the “now” one is open for the horizon of the later.

Time is what shows itself in making present and what is counted in clocks; it is counted as “nows”. Now-times are co-present-at-hand. The sequence of “nows” is already vanishing and every now is selfsame. Also, now is always an undividable now. Now, in itself, is infinite and as such ignores Daesin.

The “They” never dies since death in each case is mine. Therefore, the “They” say there is always time. Public time is for everyone and therefore nobody.

Temporality is the primordial structure of Daesin’s totality of being as Care

Notes on Heidegger's "Being and Time"

No comments:

Post a Comment