DASEIN EXPOSED

A Quick trip Through Heideggerian Illiteracy
and the Ontological Inauthenticity of Dasein
(with colour coding to help)

                                   (A) VERBAL NOUN OR GERUND:
Being. This is version of  Being  indicated in white means: The state or fact of an object existing, or used to refer to   Being as the being of a being or beings (compare: Existence as the existing of existents)  

Remember (and this is the semantic trap that Heidegger fell into ) it is not the state or fact that an object exists that exists - it is the object and ONLY the object concerned that exists. 

The imagined dualism or so-called "Being of the object"  is just a recursive neurological acknowledgement or confirmation to the brain of the fact that there is such an object in the world as that which has already been perceived in the first place.

To speak of the fact , or to silently internalise and confirm that an object exists, or to report the worldly presence of an entity as  *its Being* - is not to constitute or instantiate the actual object of the ontological reference (called by linguists its denotatum) of its existential modality.

Dasein (being there) is a non-existent gerund or verbal noun. It is the human who exists there in the world  - not his *existence' or 'being'  The human being is the only being that exists - not the fact that he exists. Ask yourself whether 'dancing' or stamp-collecting exists, or it it only the dancers who execute the styalised movement and the stamp-collector and his stamps and albums that actually exist?


Both Being and Existence are non-existent dualisd ontological fantasies and wholly imaginary conceptualised instantiations of a sham worldly presence created  by the hapless Heidegger as the pure or entitive idea of the fact that the entity exists as a being. For a definition of being see (B)

                                                       (B) COMMON NOUN:
being.  This different version of the word being (note lower case) means a noun that denotes any or all members of a class. As in - an alien being, a human being, Angela was a being of absolute beauty,  etc.,  having the meaning of  a res extensa, or an an object, a material entity, a living thing that has (or can develop) the ability to act or function independently.This version of being is picked out in red.

                                                               (C). VERB:
Being. This version indicates or in a sentence points to the existential modality (the way or manner or mode in which an entity exists) The Tradition calls this the property of a entity being in an existential state - but not referring to the pure state or bald fact of existing (as described in (A) When it is used in the present continuous third person sense as in The cat is black is uses /is/ rather than /being/ which is the form it presents in the gerundialised examples which follow.

*Just being there with Dorothy was happiness enough for Stanley. Bill was blamed for being there at the time of the accident.* Nurse Williams, being there at the time of the crash was able to offer immediate medical help.

Here are some copuletic examples of  being  where the word acts as a device signalling the presence tense and  for indicating a predicate of the subject of a sentence:*Alice being short sighted did not help. Birmingham being a hundred miles from London made transport difficult.

Dasein is a gerundial phrase which is confused by the grammatically challenged Heideggerians with a common or proper noun. *Being there* obviously falls under the semantic and grammatical category of (A) as it is a gerund, abstract noun or verbal noun, originally derived from the third person continuous conjugation of (C)

                         Consider the quotation from Being and Time below.

Dasein revealed itself to be that being [1] which must first be elaborated in a sufficiently ontological manner if the inquiry is to become a lucid one. But now it has become evident that the ontological analysis of Dasein in general constitutes fundamental ontology, that Dasein consequently functions as the being [2] that is to be interrogated fundamentally in advance with respect to its Being [3] If the interpretation of the meaning of Being [4] is to become a task, Dasein [5] is not only the primary being [6] to be interrogated; in addition to this it is the being [7] that always already in its Being [8] is related to what is sought in this question. But then the question of Being [9] is nothing else than the radicalization of an essential tendency of Being [10] that belongs to Dasein itself, namely, of the pre-ontological understanding of Being.[11]


[1] Notice Heidegger reifies Dasein as a concrete being in the sense of a common noun as in (B)

[2] Again Heidegger crudely reifies (thingifies) being and thingifies and maps Dasein as a member of putative a class of beings called Dasein. (which from the manner in which it is employed here and elsewhere is obviously a word that remains the same in the plural as the singular.)

[3] Here Heidegger attaches the Being of the state or fact of existing to the gerundial being there of Dasein as a property (existential modality) of an existential modality which is the gerund being there (thus Dasein is ridiculously characterised here as the behaviour of a behaviour.)

[4] At this point Heidegger reverts to (A) The state or fact of existing, which it is important to remember is not a (B) and does not exist in itself.

[5] Here Dasein (being there) is blatantly concretised again. Heidegger is up to his old tricks of reification again thingifying human behaviour as a primary common being as per [B)

(6) An outrageous reification and conspicuously offensive thingification of *act as fact and fact* as a res extensa as the denotatum of a common noun.

[7] We finally arrive in a fantasy Munchhausen world, where the concretised experience of being there ( or being here) which, by virtue of its falsely attributed concrecity in [5] and [6] is said to relate to...yes...wait for it... its *Being* in...
[8] ...which it is being what it already is in... [5].

[9] Having organised as a result of this metaphysical masturbatory fantasy, Heidegger's tumescence begins to flop. He reintroduces the verbal noun version of (A) which is now characterised as...

[10] ...the tendency or pre-dispositional desire of the class of cognoscenti of beings known both collectively and individually as Dasein to uncover, reveal and return to an understanding of Being by Being before it was made a mess of by people who lack the Heideggerian genius of correct ontological/ontic discernment.


                                                  Conclusion
What has become crystal clear to me is the basic inability of Heideggerians to comprehend the ontological  inathenticity of the  Daseinic mechanism. The Nazi fanatic Heidegger's gerundial phrase Dasein is a concept which, due to its obfuscational ontological character, can only be clarified as to its meaning with patience and a good understanding of the subtle interchange between the various meanings of the word being.

Perseverance pays dividends, for it reveals the essential absurdity of Dasein and the Nazi Heidegger's utter craziness in constructing such  a Metaphysical Mad Hatter's Transcendentalist Teaparty.