In Dasein, there is undeniably a constant ‘lack of totality’ which finds an end with death. This “not-yet” ‘belongs’ to Dasein as long as it is; this is how things stand phenomenally. Is this to be Interpreted as still outstanding? With relation to what entities do we talk about that which is still outstanding? When we use this expression, we view that which indeed ‘belongs’ to an entity but is still missing. Outstanding as a way of being missing is grounded upon a belonging-to. For instance, the remainder yet to be received when a debt is balanced is still outstanding. That which is still outstanding is not yet at one’s disposal. When the ‘debt’ gets paid off, that which is still outstanding gets liquidated; this signifies that the money ‘comes in’, or, in other words, that the remainder comes successively along. By this procedure, the “not-yet” gets filled up, as it were until the sum that is owed is “all together”. Therefore, to be still outstanding means that what belongs together is not yet all together. Ontologically, this implies the un-readiness-to-hand of those portions which have yet to be contributed. These portions have the same kind of Being as those which are ready-to-hand already; and the latter, for their part, do not have their kind of Being modified by having the remainder come in. Whatever “lack-of-togetherness” remains gets “paid off’ by a cumulative piecing-together. Entities for which anything is still outstanding have the kind of Being of something ready-to-hand. The togetherness is characterized as a “sum”, and so is that lack-of-togetherness which is founded upon it.
top of page
Search
Nevertheless, this lack-of-togetherness which belongs to such a mode of togetherness- is being-missing as still-outstanding-cannot by any means ontologically defining that “not-yet” which belongs to Dasein as its possible death. Dasein does not have at all the kind of Being of something ready-to-hand-within-the-world. The togetherness of an entity of the kind that Dasein is ‘in running its course’ until that ‘course’ has been completed is not constituted by a ‘continuing’ piecing-on of entities that somehow and somewhere ready-to-hand already in their own right.
That Dasein should be together only when its “not-yet” has been filled up is so far from the case that it is precisely then that Dasein is no longer. Being-true as Being-uncovering is how Dasein is its “there”. It is everywhere, yet nowhere; yet it is so everywhere, and yet nowhere is it. In this way, it becomes ‘for itself’ and becomes revealed as ‘itself’. This covering-up as a ‘disguising’ is both the most frequent and the most dangerous, for here the possibilities of deceiving and misleading are especially stubborn. Within a ‘system’, perhaps, those structures of Being-and their concepts- which are still available but veiled in their indigenous character, may claim their rights. For when they have been bound together constructively in a system, they present themselves as something ‘clear’, requiring no further justification, and thus can serve as the point of departure for a process of deduction.
bottom of page