Can an entity like a car be (literally, not metaphorically) Dasein?

Or does Dasein's comportment mean that what we are comported towards is not Dasein?

What about abstract entities like e.g. love. Can love be Dasein?

  • sorry if this is an impossibly ignorant question... seems like hammers can "have" dasein. not sure what the difference is
    – user6917
    Mar 30 '16 at 6:32
  • I think we have dasein relative to hammers. When they are not ready-at-hand, we have to actually exist as beings who wish to use hammers. When they come to hand, we disappear into the act of using them. We are doing something more than being, and our experience thins out to contain less 'being'. Time flies when you are having at least as much fun as carpentry is?
    – user9166
    Mar 30 '16 at 18:16

"Dasein" is a German noun derived from the verb "dasein". The latter means simply "to exist". It is used in daily speech without any philosophical connotation.

As a technical term "Dasein" denotes "human existence" in the context of existentialism. The term is used by Heidegger. He contrasts it with "vorhanden sein = to be available". While objects are available (vorhanden sein), only humans can exist (dasein) because they are conscious of their situation.

Hence in the context of existentialism a car cannot "exist". It can only be available.

  • And as Heidegger is thinking in ontologic terms here, abstract concepts as love do neither have Dasein nor Vorhandensein, if I understand correctly? A source/quote could perhaps help to clarify.
    – Philip Klöcking
    Mar 30 '16 at 10:55
  • @PhilipKlöcking You can subjectively remove the psychological experience of Dasein by concentrating on a problem, or an emotion e.g. a political issue, or a love affair. So I would suggest that those must have Vorhandensein. Infatuation, in particular, can lose Vorhandensein, no? It does not vanish, (as it would were it to lose Dasein) it just stops working for you. At least in this sense, I think that means ideas are tools as much as hammers are.
    – user9166
    Mar 30 '16 at 22:34
  • @PhilipKlöcking you need some references. ask a philosopher says "hammers don’t occur naturally, they are made with intention, and so the concept of Dasein must embrace them, not for their sake, but for the sake of conscious creatures. Accordingly Man + Hammer have a common Dasein"
    – user6917
    Mar 30 '16 at 22:56
  • just to say, for this reason i have downvoted....
    – user6917
    Mar 31 '16 at 0:13
  • @MATHEMETICIAN For which reason? Do you mix my answer and the discussion with Philip? - Nevertheless, according to Heidegger's use of the term Dasein there is no common Dasein of Man + Hammer: Man has Dasein and Vorhandensein, while the hammer has only Vorhandensein.
    – Jo Wehler
    Mar 31 '16 at 6:27

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy