Existentialism

PHIL 525: Existentialism

Exegetical Paper Opportunity #3 of 4 Heidegger

Below is a paper topic for Heidegger. I have intended the first two to be something like the opening paragraphs to a paper. (you may use them this way, or not, or tweak them). Also included are clarifying instructions for the topic. Whatever way you proceed, be sure to address the themes identified.

The existential analytic of Dasein has shown it to be a Being-in-the-world, whose being is a Being-toward-death.The interpretation of Being-in-the-world revealed ways Being is disclosed for,and disclosive of,Dasein. Dasein’s comportments in the world are aligned in advance by “Equipmentality” and “The They;” this thrownness thematizes beings in certain ways which at once articulate Dasein’s “Projection.”Beings are further revealed and concealed by Dasein’s own state-of-mind in taking up its thrown projection.

The discovery of Dasein’s asa thrown projection is also the self-understanding of Dasein’s inauthenticity – its goals and values are not its own. Because Dasein’s very being is to be thrown, inauthenticity is its beginning and being. Only in the analysis of Dasein as a Being-toward-death do we see the nature and possibility of something like authenticity: a certain way of engaging our inauthenticity, yet never escaping it.

Write a paper where you lay out the elements of Dasein’s Being-in-the-world and Being-toward-death. Be sure to explain the ways Being is always already disclosed for Dasein, and what this means for Dasein’s inauthenticity. What does it mean that death is Dasein’s “ownmost possibility,” and what does this have to do with the possibility of authenticity. You might want to pint out the role of the phenomenological reduction in bringing to bear this point of view.

Length – this will be a matter of style. Perhaps it is best to ask yourself this question: “Am I done?” If the answer is yes, then the page requirement is established. I won’t weigh them, I will read them, but often too short means that the paper is one or all of the following: not thorough, incomplete explanations, not properly supported.

Some things to keep in mind.

1) You should have a thesis. I should be able to know what to expect in the paper by the end of the first page.

2) Use textual support. Said another way: show, don’t tell. Part of what is important is that you demonstrate your point.

3) This needs to be your own work, not someone else’s.

My evaluation will happen according to the following criteria:

1) How well you have supported your understanding of the issues. Do you have the ideas figured out well? Is this supported by the text thoroughly? Have you clearly demonstrated why the quotes you brought up are important to your point?

2) Is the point of your paper clear? That is to say, do all the points you have brought up help address an overarching idea? Is the demonstration of this thesis well-reasoned? Have you demonstrated a clear idea that is responsible for itself?

3) General writing issues. Is the writing clear, mistake free, and readable?