Dasein Analytic

Dasein “being-there” is human reality. Heidegger examines the ontological structure of human existence. “Existentiel” (existenziel) refers to ontic objects. However, “Existential” (existenzial) refers exclusively to human existence. So the Dasein analytic is also an “existential analytic.” “Existence” (Existenz) is a particular kind of Being of Dasein. Dasein always “relates itself,” having a “capacity for self-relationship” and it is able to call itself into question—to examine its own existence. Dasein is not a substance and possesses no objective qualities, but rather is “possibility” that “projects itself,” and “choosing itself.”

Heidegger categorizes these three essential aspects of Dasein as the following: facticity, existentiality, and forfeiture (Verfallen)(“Martin Heidegger,” Encyclopedia of Philosophy, 1972 ed., Macmillan, vol. 3 & 4, p. 459). 

Facticity of Dasein (Being-in-the-world) means being thrown (Geworfen) into the world. This “world” is where all concern is grounded so it is not merely space, or an aggregate of all things. Other existentials are “Das Vorhandensein” (impersonal objects just being present), and with “Das Zuhandensein” (objects ‘to hand’ such as tools) one can see the beginnings of a theoretical socio-economic foundation. Dasein could not exist without the “not-self,” or the world, but there is interdependence between the two in that Dasein gives meaning to the world.

Dasein’s second aspect is existentiality. Heidegger is speaking of the authentic Dasein in Part I of “Being and Time,” that seeks to actualize its full possibilities by always becoming and fulfilling projects (Entwerf) meaningful to itself. Dasein is characterized as “mineness” along with others, “Das Mitsein” (“Being-with” other Daseins). Also, Dasein’s interaction with others shows “care,” or “concern,” (Fursorge) for other human beings—the beginnings of an ethical theory. “Care” is the last concept of the Dasein analysis.

As a point of similarity and interest, theologian Paul Tillich followed Heidegger’s writings closely and adopts “concern” as religious concern. He defined “ultimate concern,” as “The religious concern is ultimate; it excludes all other concerns from ultimate significance; it makes them preliminary...The word 'concern points to the existential' character of religious experience" (Paul Tillich, Systematic Theology Vol. I, Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1951,1957 & 1963, p.11-12).

The third aspect of Dasein is “Forfeiture” meaning the question of Being is forgotten because our focus is on everyday entities and cares:

“... ‘ontologically’ ... we forget ‘Being’ for particular beings. In a human sense, it means the scattering of the essential forward drive through attention the distracting and disturbing cares of everyday and of the things and people that surround us everyday. Thus, inevitably and continuously, the forward driving ‘I’ is sacrificed to the persistent and pressing ‘they.’ To the question ‘Who is human being?’ we must answer, ‘The indifferent and anonymous crowd –das Man...it is life with others and for others in alienation from the central task of becoming itself’ ” (“Martin Heidegger,” Encyclopedia of Philosophy, 1972 ed., Macmillan, Vol. 3 & 4, p. 460).

The Fallen (Verfallen)

What does it mean to be “Fallen,” and how is it different from “unfallen?” The same question can be asked about authentic Dasein and inauthentic Dasein--or making any kind of valuation at all for that matter. This question of valuations can be clarified by understanding the difference between “essence” and “existence.” This is an old saw of philosophy, but this distinction can bring to light how value judgments are made. Although the word “essence” my not be used explicitly in making value judgments, this concept can have various meanings which are often confused. Paul Tillich was a great philosophy teacher and has clearly explained the relationship between essence and existence with Martin Heidegger’s phenomenological theology in mind:

”Essence can mean the nature of a thing without any valuation of it, it can mean the universals which characterize a thing, it can mean the ideas in which existing things participate, it can mean the norm by which a thing must be judged, it can mean original goodness of everything created, and it can mean the patterns of all things in the divine mind” (Paul Tillich, Systematic Theology Vol. I, Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1951, 1957 & 1963, p. 202).

These various meanings make discussion about ethics difficult, as they are sometimes confused one with another as in the case of a logically derived universal essence--or undistorted true essence:

”Essence as the nature of a thing, or as the quality of which a thing participates, or as a universal, has one character. Essence as that from which being has “fallen,” the true and undistorted nature of things, has another character. In the second case essence is the basis of value judgments, while in the first case essence is a logical ideal to be reached by abstraction or intuition without the interference of valuations. How can the same word cover both meanings? Why has this ambiguity persisted in philosophy since Plato?”(Ibid., p. 203).

Essence as the logically derived universal of Dasein appears in time as flawed and standing in judgment by the law which judges by the standard of Dasein’s undistorted essence:

”The answer to both questions lies in the ambiguous character of existence, which expresses being and at the same time contradicts it—essence as that which makes a thing what it is (ousia) has a purely logical character; essence as that which appears in an imperfect and distorted way in a thing carries the stamp of value. Essence empowers and judges that which exists...Where essence and existence are united, there is neither law nor judgment. But existence is not united with essence; therefore, law stands against all things, and judgment is actual in self-destruction”(Paul Tillich, Systematic Theology Vol. 1, Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1951, 1957 & 1963, p. 203). 

One would think of the “law stands against all things” as the Old Testament law, but Tillich means here all laws.

The word “existence” can also have various meanings, but Heidegger is concerned with the existing Dasein that is less than its essential nature:

”Existence also is used with different meanings. It can mean the possibility of finding a thing within the whole of being, it can mean the actuality of what is potential in the realm of essences, it can mean the ‘fallen world,’ and it can mean a type of thinking which is aware of its existential conditions or which rejects essence entirely, Again, an unavoidable ambiguity justifies the use of this one word in these different senses. Whatever exists, that is, ‘stands out’ of mere potentiality, is more than it is in the state of mere potentiality and less than it could be in the power of its essential nature“ (Paul Tillich, Systematic Theology Vol. I, Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1951, 1957 & 1963, p. 203). 

We can view Part I of Being and Time as Heidegger applying a phenomenological reduction of the undistorted essential being of Dasein. In Part II of Being and Time the same phenomenological analysis is applied to the finite existence of Dasein as distorted being—as das Man, or Fallen (Verfallen).

Dasein can fall into the existential state of “das Man,” at any time.  The inauthentic “das Man,” has no true self, but rather is just the average person of the crowd: anonymous, impersonal, and dehumanized. The unauthentic Dasein rejects freedom and responsibility to escape the burden of being a true self and instead seeks to mimic the stable identity of the world of objects. However, Dasein still has an apprehension of “being there” (Befindlichkeit) which is a basic mood (Stimmung) existential. The sense of “being there” is also the sense of “thrownness,” and “abandonment” (Geworfenheit). “Das Man” is very aware of its own finite being and eventual death. However, this same sense of “thrownness” offers the possibility of “comprehension” (Verstehen) of the purpose of its own existence. “Das Man” has the choice of either “comprehending” its own self-relations and possible projections to become an authentic free being, or make itself into a dehumanized object in a world of objects. “Das Man” chooses non-identity in a world of things, entities, and objects; however, the feeling of abandonment persists. The “fallen” Dasein staunches this anxiety by engaging in meaningless “chatter,”(Gerede), or “curiosity,” (Neugier) jumping from one topic to another always seeking what is new, but only superficially. Another attempted antidote of the “fallenness,” existential is “ambiguity” (Zweideutigkeit) which is the inability to distinguish between authentic and unauthentic, between the genuine and fake. This could be a social group that only talks in hearsay, but is perceived as knowledge while they live in a peer pressure bubble as their reality. Another existential is “dread” (Angst). Fear, or phobias have an object (insects, heights, ect.), but dread has no object--just a general mood of being-in-the-world. Again “das Man” can choose its real self in a world that it feels homeless.

Authentic Dasein

“Conscience” is always speaking to Dasein to choose the real self; conscience is Dasein calling to itself to remain authentic. Although conscience is part of the structure of Dasein, the call to authenticity is often attributed to some entity outside, or beyond itself. Nevertheless, the voice of conscience brings Dasein to face its own possible existence in the mood of dread to accept its state of abandonment. These three existentials compose the existential of care. Dasein comprehends itself as possibility and accepts its “guilt” of being finite and will face eventual certain death (non-being). Within the thrownness of existence, Dasein projects itself into the future in dynamic realization of its own possibilities known to itself and accepts the responsibility that existential freedom brings...while doing all this with Care.