UNIVERSITY OF ESSEX

SCHOOL OF PHILOSOPHY AND ART HISTORY (SPAH) AND

THE CENTRE FOR INTERDISCIPLINARY STUDIES IN THE HUMANITES (CISH)
UNDERGRADUATE ESSAY COVER SHEET
Academic Year: 2016-2017
Please ensure that you submit this coversheet along with you assignment via FASER.

YOUR NAME: Alicia Motta Irizarry

CLASS TEACHER'S NAME: Pavel Reichl

MODULE CODE: PY454-6-SP

MODULE TITLE: Phenomenology and Existentialism

WORD COUNT: 3,711 Words

ESSAY TITLE: Dasein’s Lack of Essence as the Possibility of Authentic Existence: Anticipatory
Resoluteness

In line with University Policy :

A mark of zero will be recorded for any piece of coursework submitted after the published
deadline. NO EXTENSIONS WILL BE ALLOWED. For the University’s Late Submission Policy,
please see http://www.essex.ac.uk/students/exams-and-coursework/late-submission.aspx

If you have worked closely with another student in the preparation of this essay then please state the
student’s name and essay number:
……………………………………………..
Declaration:
 I certify that the attached is all my own work. I understand that I may be penalised if I use the
words of others without acknowledgement.
 I have read and understood the Regulations and Procedures dealing with cheating. I understand
that this essay may be subjected to a web plagiarism checker.
 I understand the policy on the late submission of coursework operated by the University.

By submitting your essay on FASER, you are agreeing to the terms and conditions highlighted in
the declaration.

PLEASE CHECK THAT:

 your work is in double line spacing, that your pages are numbered and there is a margin on both sides
of the page; font is Arial or Times New Roman, font size no less than 11
 you have included a bibliography of all books and articles consulted;
 your work is correctly referenced, including any internet sources used, providing the web address;
 you have included your name, module code and essay title at the start of your essay
 you have included a word count at the end of your essay;
 you have kept a copy of your essay;
 you are familiar with essay requirements as set out in the relevant handbook.

For your information, the marking criteria is available on both the SPAH and CISH Websites, under ‘for

current students resources’ and the relevant student handbooks.

Alicia Motta Irizarry

PY454-6-SP

Dasein’s Lack of Essence as the Possibility of Authentic Existence: Anticipatory

Resoluteness

Martin Heidegger was a German, non-conventional philosopher, who was primordially

concerned with its Being. This concern, I argue, was due to a lack of something, or nothingness

which grounds Dasein as such. This nullity, is perhaps the source of the Being-guilty of Dasein.

When Heidegger explains that the “call of conscience” summons Dasein to be guilty, it is also

interpreted that it is summoning Dasein into its authenticity. Nonetheless, in the wanting to have

a conscience, one is only being partially authentic. Of course, Dasein is wanting to understand

itself in terms of his possibilities, but he cannot be authentic until he understands itself in terms

of his ownmost possibility, or the possibility that is mostly mine (only mine); death. Evidently,

death here is referred to as a possibility of achieving wholeness, not as the act of death, or as he

calls it demise. I referred to the ground of nothingness in which Dasein is built upon, to make a

claim that this nothingness is due to Dasein’s lack of essence as Dasein. The fact that each

Dasein is essentially different, cannot hold that Dasein as such has a true essence. This is

precisely, why I believe that Heidegger is so fond of becoming authentic, because by achieving

this authenticity one can choose to choose their own possibilities and understand itself in terms

of these possibilities that are not controlled by Das man or the “they-self”. To understand

authenticity one must understand the equiprimordiality of death and guilt, which later translates

to anticipatory resoluteness. Nonetheless, to understand this equiprimordiality one must lay bare

an ontological interpretation of anxiety and conscience, and their relation to Dasein as a Being-

towards-death that understands itself.

 Dasein in its everydayness is concerned with its Being-in-the-world and Being-in-the-

world-with-others. This way of living distracts Dasein and at the same time controls it. In

everydayness one is always in the “they-self”. This is the inauthentic self. Here one’s life

depends on the limited possibilities imposed by the they, or Das man. Heidegger explains,

“average everydayness can be defined as Being-in-the-world which is falling and disclosed,

thrown and projecting, and for which its ownmost potentiality of being is an issue, both in Being

alongside the ‘world’ and in its Being-with Others.” (Heidegger, 1962) This inauthentic Dasein

cannot be itself because its life is determined by its lostness in the ‘they’, and does not realize its

potentiality-for-Being. The reason for this is grounded in the fact that while lost in everydayness,

one is in a state-of-mind of tranquility. “The tempting tranquilization aggravates the falling.”

(Heidegger, 1962) This falling, Heidegger explains is like a downward plunge. It sucks Dasein

into inauthenticity and throws it into its world so it can project itself in terms of this world.

Heidegger argues that “this plunge remains hidden from Dasein by the way things have been

publicly interpreted, so much so, indeed that it gets interpreted as a way of ascending and living

concretely.” (Heidegger, 1962) Dasein is at home in its inauthenticity, at home in the publicness

of the world and in the world with others.

The first step to becoming authentic, one can argue, is precisely not-feeling-at-home in

the world. Heidegger calls this uncanniness. According to the philosopher, “Uncanniness brings

this entity (Dasein) face to face with its undisguised nullity.” (Heidegger, 1962) This being face

to face with its nothingness makes Dasein feel anxious. Anxiety is a state-of-mind characteristic

of Dasein. When it is anxious, it is not about anything in particular or anyone in particular, but

anxious about its world as such. It can be argued that in this uncanniness, “what the mood of

anxiety reveals, if I were to follow it, is that my world which I occupy myself with (the world of
the ready and present-at-hand) rests on nothing.” (Large, 2008) When Dasein realizes that its

world is grounded in nothing, as a Being who projects itself in terms of its world, he realizes that

its Being too, rests on this nothingness. This is the reason why Dasein feels the need to become

authentic. It feels the need to fill this nothingness, it understands that its Being is not whole.

Heidegger argues that for Dasein to achieve its totality, it must first become authentic.

Authenticity for Heidegger is filling this empty void. William Large argues,

“Authenticity for Heidegger… is facing the nothingness which is at the heart of your existence as

nothing and holding fast to it.” (Large, 2008) Authentic Dasein, is not anxious about its world

anymore, but being able to achieve its totality, filling in its groundlessness. This lack of

something, makes Dasein feel guilty. Nonetheless, this guiltiness, is not because Dasein did

something wrong, it arrives because it feels incomplete. Large explains, “Being guilty… in being

responsible for a double nothingness which lies at the heart of my existence, or as he (Heidegger)

describes it ‘Being the null basis of a nullity’.” (Large, 2008) He explains that this nothingness is

precisely what Das man covers up in the everydayness of the world. But how does this feeling

arrive in Dasein? “There must be, Heidegger says, something externally which forces Dasein out

of its self-satisfaction and comforts in the world.” (Large, 2008) This force, Heidegger

designates as the call of conscience.

This call is not exactly what one may suppose instantly. In fact, one can argue with

Large, that this call is not exactly an external force. According to Heidegger this caller is

indefinite. Nonetheless, he contradicts himself in this statement insofar as he explains that this

caller is in fact Dasein in its uncanniness, calling Dasein in its falling or inauthenticity and

summons itself to Being-guilty. Which according to Heidegger “signifies a calling-forth to that

potentiality-for-Being which in each case as Dasein, I myself am.” (Heidegger, 1962) When
falling into everydayness, Dasein gets forced by a downward plunge. The call of conscience,

calls-forth Dasein from this fallness, into guiltiness. Dasein is guilty in the very basis of its

Being. The fact that Dasein’s Being is care, it is essentially guilty. The problem is that

inauthentic existence avoids owning up to this guilt, and that is precisely why Dasein needs to be

called-forth from its falling. Nonetheless, this call does not exactly say anything in particular. In

fact, its primordial characteristic is silence or reticence. This call evidently has an ontological

foundation. One can argue that it is precisely the opposite of what we may think a call is. Instead

of delivering a message, what it does is silence the idle-chatter, which is the mode of discourse

that lies in everydayness. The call of conscience, is a type of discourse, but an authentic

discourse that Heidegger calls reticence. This call is authentic, but is Dasein authentic by

receiving the call of conscience?

One cannot be authentic until one understands this call. Dasein needs to let itself be free

for the call, so it can be called forth to its potentiality-for-Being. By becoming free for the call,

Heidegger explains that “its readiness for the potentiality of getting appealed to. In understanding

the call, Dasein is in thrall to its ownmost possibility of existence. It has chosen itself.”

(Heidegger, 1962) What does Heidegger mean by choosing oneself? When Dasein is lost in the

they, its possibilities are limited by the possibilities of the they, and it can never reach its true

potential. What Dasein choses is its conscience. According to Heidegger, “in the appeal, the

they-self gets called to the ownmost Being-guilty of the Self… ‘understanding the appeal’ means

‘wanting to have a conscience’.” (Heidegger, 1962) By wanting to have a conscience, Large

argues that Dasein is being appealed to understand its own finitude. The philosopher explains,

“Such an understanding, which is a particular kind of authentic possibility, Heidegger calls in

section sixty, ‘resoluteness’, whose German intentionally recalls disclosure.” (Large, 2008) But

what exactly is this resoluteness?

Heidegger explains that when Dasein is resolute, it is owning up to its guilt, caused by its

nullity. Richard Polt explains, “Resoluteness is a particular illuminating form of disclosedness. It

opens up the world clearly, and even allows authentic relationships to others – although

Heidegger has frustratingly little to say about this.” (Polt, 1999) What must be made clear is that

being resolute is not a complete separation from the world and never going back, but a way to

individualize oneself in the world, and project oneself in terms of one’s ownmost Being-guilty.

Heidegger makes all this clear by stating, “This distinctive and authentic disclosedness, which is

attested in Dasein itself by its conscience – this reticent self-projection upon one’s ownmost

Being-guilty, in which one is ready for anxiety – we call “resoluteness”.” (Heidegger, 1962)

Disclosedness can be in the truth as it can be in the untruth. However, here we are not arguing

about mere disclosedness but authentic disclosedness. Paul Gorner argues, “This authentic

disclosedness, involving understanding affectedness and discourse, Heidegger calls

resoluteness.” (Gorner, 2007) However, Gorner explains that this resoluteness can only exist in

decision, and this decision is towards a Situation.

Resolute Dasein is ready to take action in the world. Heidegger writes, “The existential

attributes of any possible or resolute Dasein include the items constitutive for an existential

phenomenon we call a “Situation” and which we have hitherto passed over.” (Heidegger, 1962)

The call of conscience summons Dasein into Being-guilty and so calls Dasein forth to this

Situation. Resoluteness is precisely the readiness to act in the concrete situation, as explained by

Gorner. Nonetheless, this Situation as Polt defines it, “is the authentic way of Being “there”, of

inhabiting the present.” (Polt, 1999) Now that we have unveiled Dasein’s authentic potentiality-
for-Being in its existentiell attestation, we must not forget the true purpose of this investigation.

The mere reason why Dasein feels the need to become authentic or resolute, lies in the

incompleteness of its Being. By being resolute, Dasein is barely whole and only partially

authentic. What Dasein understands in the call of conscience is precisely its finitude, its

mortality. Large, explains that in the ‘wanting to have a conscience’ “what it really means is to

exist as a mortal being who understands it is mortal.” (Large, 2008) This is why Heidegger

insists on an ontological existentiell interpretation of authentic Being-towards-death.

When Heidegger explains that in resoluteness one is ready for anxiety, one may argue, he

refers to authentic anxiety. A state-of-mind characteristic of Being-towards-death, just as guilt is

characteristic of resoluteness. Authentic Being-towards-death is grounded in resoluteness. Paul

Gorner explains, “In its resoluteness Dasein projects itself authentically onto possibilities of

Being but such authenticity is, as it were, at its most authentic when Dasein’s projecting of itself

onto concrete possibilities is underpinned by the projection of that possibility which is most his

own, viz. death.” (Gorner, 2007) Here death is not the act of dying that occurs at the end of life,

in fact, this is what Heidegger labels, demise. Death in Heidegger is not an actuality but a

possibility, moreover, its ownmost possibility. When Heidegger writes “ownmost” he means the

possibility that individualizes Dasein, for one cannot replace another in death. Yes, a person can

die, to save another, but eventually the other will reach its mortality. No one can experience this

possibility for Dasein. Dasein can be replaced in any possibility by other Dasein, like a job or a

relationship, for example. Some philosophers argue that Dasein cannot replace love, but love

includes loving another person, relates Dasein to another. The possibility of death, does not

relate Dasein to anyone but oneself, neither it can be replaced by anyone else. Being-towards-

death is Being-out-for a possibility that is distinctive of Dasein itself.

 Death according to Heidegger is Dasein’s “ownmost possibility, which is non-relational

and not to be outstripped, which is certain and as such, indefinite.” (Heidegger, 1962) This

ontical potentiality-for-Being, must be proved ontologically for it to be authentic. In authentic

Being-towards-death, “Being-towards” can also be “running forward” or “anticipating” this

possibility. In anticipation, one can argue, that what is being anticipated is Dasein’s finitude.

Anticipation is what characterizes authentic Being-towards-death. It does not ignore the fact that

death is non-relational, not to be outstripped, certain and indefinite. By anticipating death’s non-

relational character, Dasein individualizes itself, this is very important because one cannot be

authentic without eliminating the possibility of the they-self. It doesn’t evade the fact that death

cannot be outstripped. Only in anticipation one becomes free for one’s own death. Sean Ireton

explains, “In letting itself become free for an unsurpassable death as its utmost possibility,

Dasein is released from its lostness in the chance possibilities of the they.” (Ireton, 2007) In

anticipating the indefinite certainty of death, Dasein holds death for true and opens itself to the

constant threat, disclosed in the state-of-mind of anxiety, arising out of its own there. Heidegger

explains, “Being-towards-death is essentially anxiety.” (Heidegger, 1962) This state of mind, is

so primordial in authentic Dasein as it isolates one from the they-self, discloses its existentiality,

its potentiality for Being and the freedom of choosing itself.

This anxiety is revealed also, when Dasein understands the fact that insofar as it exists, it

is dying. Ireton explains, “Having been thrown into the world, Dasein is at the same time

delivered into the facticity of its death, which implies that it exists in a constant state of dying.”

(Ireton, 2007) This is precisely Dasein’s existential relation towards death. One can agree with

Ireton when he states that in Being and Time, it is implied that death, is in fact a phenomenon of

life. With this said, it is important that the characterization of authentic Being-towards-death as
projected existentially, is laid bare. Heidegger writes, “anticipation reveals to Dasein its lostness

in the they-self, and brings it face to face with the possibility of being itself, primarily

unsupported by concernful solicitude, but of being itself, rather, in an impassioned freedom

towards death – a freedom which has been released from the illusions of the “they”, and which is

factical, certain of itself, and anxious.” (Heidegger, 1962) This has made evident the ontological

possibility of an existentiell Being-towards-death which is authentic. Anticipation is, in fact,

authentic Being-towards-death. Heidegger explains that now “an authentic potentiality-for-

being-a-whole emerges, but only as an ontological possibility.” (Heidegger, 1962) Being-

towards-death implies an existential relation towards Dasein’s finitude. But does this mean that

we have understood this entity’s Being-as-a-whole?

Death is characterized as something outstanding, or the missing sum of a whole. Ireton

explains, “As long as Dasein is a Being, it can never attain its wholeness.” (Ireton, 2007) This

statement requires a temporal interpretation. Dasein’s being is futural, as it is always ahead-of-

itself. According to the author, “authentic Dasein’s essential orientation toward the future is

crystalized in the very expression of Vorlaufen (anticipation).” (Ireton, 2007) The basis of its

temporality, lies in the finitude of its existence. The future is finite, precisely because it is limited

by mortality. What this means is that Dasein cannot achieve wholeness in its life because its life

is not-yet complete. According to Heidegger, “In Dasein there is a constant ‘lack of totality’

which finds an end with death.” (BT, 286) Insofar as Dasein is living, it is not-yet at an end, not-

yet whole, implying that there is more to live. In authentic Being-towards-death, it gains a

perspective on its Being as a whole. Ireton writes, “By reckoning with its end at any conceivable

moment, it is able to anticipate the entirety of its existence.” (Ireton, 2007) However, for Dasein
to achieve its ownmost potentiality-for-being-a-whole, anticipating death is a just a mere step

that leads to the ultimate aim.

The answer to this dilemma may be anticipatory resoluteness. Heidegger explains that

“only when it ‘qualifies’ itself as Being-towards-death does the resoluteness understand the ‘can’

of its potentiality for Being-guilty.” (Heidegger, 1962) Basically, the only way to achieve true

authenticity is in the interconnection of death and guilt, and show how resoluteness is in fact

connected to death. This connection is primordial to understand the totality of Dasein.

Anticipation and resoluteness, separately lead to authenticity. However, if they are interpreted

ontologically and equiprimordially, they lead to “the phenomenon of the most primordial and

authentic truth.” (Heidegger, 1962) According to Polt, “He (Heidegger) argues that since

resoluteness is a recognition of guilt, and since the future dimension of guilt involves Being-

towards-death, resoluteness in its most developed form must involve anticipation (facing up to

mortality). (Polt, 1999) He explains that in the ultimate resoluteness, what Dasein is choosing, is

its “own fundamental capacity of existing in the face of death.” (Polt, 1999) Here, resoluteness is

the certainty of death. Resoluteness is only authentic and whole as anticipatory resoluteness.

Authentic existence is anticipatory resoluteness. Heidegger defines this concept in many

ways. He explains that “it is rather an understanding which follows the call of conscience and

which frees for death the possibility of acquiring power over Dasein’s existence and of basically

dispersing all fugitive Self-concealments.” (Heidegger, 1962) This understanding that follows

the call of conscience is precisely ‘wanting to have a conscience’ to understand one’s mortality.

When he says “frees for death the possibility of acquiring power over Dasein’s existence”, one

must understand that this existence is grounded on the nullity or nothingness of Dasein’s

essence. And this is precisely what is concealed from the Self by the inauthentic they-self.
 Anticipatory resoluteness is grounded in care. Heidegger defines the care structure as

“ahead-of-itself – Being-already-in (a world) as Being-alongside (entities encountered within-

the-world).” (Heidegger, 1962) The ‘ahead-of-itself’ as mentioned above, is characteristic of

anticipation as something futural. Heidegger argues that Being-ahead-of-itself, in an existential

manner, is Being-towards-the-end. According to Heidegger, “the existential phenomena of

death, conscience, and guilt are anchored in the phenomenon of care.” (Heidegger, 1962) He

argues that anticipatory resoluteness is the disclosedness of the meaning of the being of care.

This primordial truth that Dasein cares about the most, is precisely the nullity of its existence,

which is revealed to Dasein in authentic Being-towards-death.

This understanding is primordial when interpreting death as ‘the possibility of the

impossibility of existence.’ What Heidegger is implying in this statement is that death is the

ultimate nullity or nothingness of Dasein. Large argues, “Being guilty, in this sense, for

Heidegger, is being responsible for a double nothingness which lies at the heart of my existence,

or as he describes it, ‘Being the null basis of a nullity’.” (Large, 2008) As Dasein understands the

nothingness of its existence, one can argue, it can become anxious. The fact that Heidegger

writes, “The essence of Dasein as an entity is his existence.” (BT, 345), makes this situation even

more problematic. Is Heidegger implying that the essence of Dasein is nothing?

Now, it can finally be argued that this nothingness that lies at the heart of one’s existence

is the reason one can be authentic. In the state-of-mind of anxiety, the call of conscience

encourages Dasein to comport itself towards its own possibilities. But one can only do this

because one’s essence is nothing. Heidegger argues that Dasein’s essence is its existence. This is

because what makes Dasein, Dasein is existence. However, one cannot own up to one’s own

possibilities because its existence is nothing, but because its essence is nothing. The fact that a
table can be red or white, big or small, round or square, does not eliminate the fact that it is a

table and it serves a specific purpose. Even if they look different their essence is the same. They

are all ready-to-hand in the same way. That is not likely in Dasein, each one is essentially

different, and that is precisely why I argue that Dasein as an entity which I myself am, does not

have an essence as such. When Large writes, “What individuates me is nothing.” (Large, 2008),

he is not stating that nothing can individualize me, but that my lack of essence is the fact that I

can be myself in the world, be authentic from other Dasein.

One may ask, where is the connection to all these concepts? How is anticipatory

resoluteness connected to the nullity of my essence? Ireton writes, “Dasein projects itself from

its ground of nullity for as long as it exists – that is, unto its end.” (Ireton, 2007) Being-guilty

reveals the null basis of my nullity, thus “as an authentic understanding of guilt (revealed to in

the call of conscience), resoluteness thus simultaneously becomes a “being-towards-the-end-that-

understands”, which is precisely the definition of Vorlaufen: an anticipatory understanding of the

constant threat of one’s existence.” (Ireton, 2007) A threat that is revealed in the state-of-mind of

anxiety. Polt also argues a connection between these concepts, “Conscience asks us to own up to

guilt. It asks us to make our actions our own and thus to exist authentically. Owning up to guilt,

like facing mortality, is connected to anxiety.” (Polt, 1999) Here lay bare all the concepts that

constitute the totality of anticipatory resoluteness. Nonetheless, this phenomenon of authentic

truth is (exists) on the ground that Dasein has no essence. If Dasein had an essence, the chance of

being authentic would be non-existent.

In conclusion, inauthentic Dasein is thrown into the world of the “they-self”. Dasein

realizes this, when it is uncanny. Uncanniness is reached in the state-of-mind of anxiety. Only in

this state one can hear the reticent call of conscience that summons Dasein to Being-guilty.
Resoluteness is the most authentic form of disclosedness, a self-projection upon one’s ownmost

Being-guilty. What is understood in the call, is Dasein’s finitude (mortality) or its Being-

towards-death. Authentic running-towards-death is anticipation, which is the only way Dasein

can be authentically resolute. Being-towards-death authentically is being anxious in anticipating

one’s finitude. According to Heidegger, resoluteness is authentic Being-one-self, which is always

guilty. However, Dasein cannot reach its ultimate authenticity unless these two ways of being are

interconnected. Anticipatory resoluteness is Dasein’s ownmost authentic existence. This double

concept is grounded in care, insofar as death, conscience, guilt and anxiety are all grounded in in

it as well. Thus, anticipatory resoluteness is the disclosedness of the meaning of care. This

ultimate authentic existence can only be attained due to Dasein’s lack of essence. The nullity of

Dasein’s existence is revealed in the understanding of both, Being-towards-death and Being-

guilty. Therefore, anticipatory resoluteness could not be attained without a full existential

interpretation of the equiprimordiality of anxiety (death) and conscience (guilt).

Word Count: 3,711

Bibliography:

1. Heidegger, M. (1962) Being and Time, translated by J. Macquarrie & E. Robinson, 1st

Ed., Blackwell Publishing

2. Ireton, S. (2007) An Ontological Study of Death: From Hegel to Heidegger, 1st ed.,

Pitsburg: Duquensne University Press, pp. 229-280

3. Large, W. (2008) Heidegger’s Being and Time, 1st ed., Indiana: Indiana University

Press, pp. 66-83

4. Polt, R. (1999) Heidegger an Introduction, 1st ed., New York: Cornell University

Press, pp. 76-94

5. Gorner, P. (2007) Heidegger Being and Time an Introduction, 1st ed., Cambridge:

Cambridge University Press, pp. 105-152