dasein

Within the framework of Aristotelian ontology, being is understood as a result of two vectors: determinacy (actuality) and indeterminacy (potentiality). In this paper, we aim to clarify the specific meaning of Dasein's determinacy, which Heidegger refers to as "facticity" (Faktizität), within this ontological context. We will demonstrate that Dasein's facticity is ontologically-existentially crystallized in its Befindlichkeit (dispositional attunement) and ontically-existentiell in its Gestimmtheit (moodedness). We then endeavor to map out the general coordinates of moods through the specific case of "fear" (Furcht) and explore the intrinsic connections between facticity, thrownness (Geworfenheit), and understanding (Verstehen). This will allow us to delineate the semantic field of Dasein's facticity as a conceptual network centered on moodedness. In the first part, we outline the facticity of Dasein within the framework of an Aristotelian ontology centered on potentiality and actuality as a paradigm for understanding the determinacy of Dasein. In the second part, we show that the facticity of Dasein manifests ontologically-existentially in 'attunement' and ontically-existentiell in its 'mood.' In the third part, to achieve a general structure of moods, we focus on Heidegger's analysis of the phenomenon of 'fear' in order to derive the general coordinates of moods from it. In the fourth part, for a deeper understanding of the structure of facticity, we examine the intrinsic connection between attunement, understanding, and thrownness. Finally, in the fifth part, we endeavor to enumerate the general characteristics of moods and delineate a diagram of the semantic field of Dasein's facticity.

In the fundamental ontology, "being in" is one of the main focuses of Heidegger's words. This word takes meaning with its complement, the world. Martin Heidegger, a German philosopher and phenomenologist, begins the analysis of the meaning of dwelling in his advanced thought of everydayness being-in-the-world and he links it with other concepts in his later treatises. In this article, the author shows the meaning of dwelling from Heidegger's point of view and how it can happen in the age of the world picture, using a library method and in a descriptive-analytical way. By studying Heidegger's works, we can conclude that from the general concept of dwelling, Being aspects and nothingness aspects can be understood, which can be generalized to the concepts of being-in-a-space and being-in-Da. The first syllable, which means being dwelling, has the ability to face " Being ", and the second syllable, which is nothingness dwelling, although it is elusive and does not come into contact, it is "Da" and seeks " nothingness ". This latter aspects of dwelling can be called.

In this article, we are trying to deal with the characteristics of Dasein in Heidegger's book Being and Time in a specific and concrete way. In his book, Heidegger wants to show how man accesses Being / Sein. First, he raises the question of being and then says that everything is in the circle of being and asks himself, from which entity should we begin to know being? His answer is to start the knowledge of existence from the existence that questions existence. He calls that Dasein. The reason why Heidegger chose the term “Dasein” instead of man is to save man from the narrowness of previous definitions of man (such as Aristotle's rational animal or Cartesian thinking substance, etc.). He examines his intrinsic and real characteristics, such as sense of situation and understanding, i.e., finding new possibilities; language, which according to Heidegger is the house of being; and also refers to ability and unpredictability. He emphasizes that man as a subject does not have an unchangeable and fixed nature. Each Dasein is personally an incident that temporalizes itself according to the future. Dasein is not pre-determined by nature. He is a historical Dasein who identifies himself with his own self (mienneté) and explains his every behavior to the future. No matter what state a person reaches, he can still appear in other forms. He always has a pas encore (not yet). The fundamental character of Dasein is a condition of already “Being-in-the-world”—of already being caught up in, involved with, or committed to other individuals and things.

The matter of death has been and is always one of the greatest and major questions of the man. “What is death and how we can escape from or even having philosopher's stone” have been always one of the important subjects in the literature. The matter of death had and has also certain position in philosophy. Hence, this philosophical issue has been emerged in different forms in literary and artistic works. Samuel Beckett as one of the founders of absurdism in theater literature has coped to this important philosophical matter in his works. This article tries to review Heidegger’s perusal of the death matter in the play of “Endgame” by Beckett. In this research, the content of anguish and its relation with the matter of death in the play of Endgame which is resulted to prolonged ennui and absurdity has been reviewed on the strength of Heidegger’s opinions. Whereas, in this article the point is Endgame play with the theme of death, we should say the Heidegger’s philosophy could make us clear the philosophical sights of Beckett about death in this play. This matter could not just help the audiences of Beckett theater to better understand his hidden philosophy in his theater works, but could be a clear practical example to understand the phenomenological meaning of death from the Heidegger’s opinion. This article has been written by citing to librarian resources and references.

This study focuses on Karl Jaspers' view of human beings and the processes they go through until they realize their existence by reaching self-consciousness. The author uses the conceptual analysis research method of interpretation and concept expansion to clarify Jaspers' concepts of human existential states and tries to provide a better understanding of human existence. According to Jaspers, man's orientation to himself, grasping his existence, and becoming conscious of his existence is a process that goes towards “Existenz”. This process has a hierarchical structure in itself. Jaspers speaks of four different types of human existence: “Dasein”, “collective consciousness”, “spirit” and “Existenz”. After completing these levels of existence, the man comes to the stage of “Existenz”. This process is completed by special signs, such as freedom, communication, and border situations, which Jaspers has called “signs that illuminate existence”. However, it is only possible for a person to come to a true state of existence and to realize himself through the “Transcendent”.

The meaning of life is one of the most important concepts in the history of philosophy, which has preoccupied many philosophers. In modern era, the traditional concept of meaning has lost its credibility due to the explosion in every field of knowledge and technology, and subsequently, the migration of the Gods. Martin Heidegger, as the most important philosopher of the Twentieth Century, focused his attention on the meaning of life in modern thought in the absence of metaphysical Gods. In the first period of his intellectual gestation, he sought to dream up a meaning for life by rejecting any kind of idealistic approach based on the concept of his fundamental ontology.  Therefore, the aim of this study was to analyze the hermeneutic phenomenology of Dasein in order to get  a  better understanding of the meaning of authentic existence, which is the main mission of  early Heidegger's philosophy. Heidegger's thought and his fundamental ontology focused on the human beings as Dasein. Heidegger believed that the truth of existence could be understood by  Dasein because the existence could be observed in the human beings. Accordingly, to obtain the meaning of life, Heidegger unravels the mystery of the fundamental structures of Dasein which are related to each other, including being-in-the-world, fear and the consciousness of death using his hermeneutic conception of language. He concluded that Dasein could obtain an authentic life as a meaningful life using the consciousness of death of and freedom from the Daesin's domination through free choices. However, Heidegger believed that the will is not  the only solution, and also  we should always open up the new perspective in this regard  that existence itself provides for us.

Heidegger in Being and Time represents death as the culmination of Dasein in his life possibilities and considers it as a criterion in defining the totality of Dasein, its suspension of being and its stretching from birth to death, a problem that apparently has no connection with the Christian tradition. However, the explanation of death, especially in Section 48 of his magnum opus, refers to a humanistic conception of death in the late Middle Ages which was first introduced by the Czech poet Johannes von Tepl in the 15th-century poem The Plowman from Bohemia (Der Ackermann aus Böhmen). Heidegger’s particular use of a quotation from this poem in explaining Dasein’s death in Being and Time on the simultaneity of Dasein’s birth and death builds upon the humanist interpretation that Johannes presents in his poem. Johannes’ Christian humanism in rendering the relationship between humanity and death was not only gave a new interpretation of death in line with late Medieval philosophy but also played a significant role in the development of humanist thought at the beginning of the European Renaissance. Exploring Heidegger's use of Johannes’ poem in processing the concept of Dasein’s death not only makes it possible to better understand this phenomenon but also reads Heidegger's non-religious philosophical framework in defining Dasein in light of Christian humanism.

Despite being one of the most important achievements of humanity and having significant potential for educating societies, the school, due to the inappropriate behaviours and structures imposed on it, has lost its ability to play its role fully and is considered by a pessimistic group of thinkers to be an ineffective or even sometimes ineffective institution. It seems that the main reason for such perceptions is the lack of a correct understanding of the phenomenon of school. Utilising Heidegger's thoughts is a way to pay attention to school as a phenomenon so that while putting aside the prevailing structure of schools, we do not fall into the path of radicalism and deschooling society - as Ivan Illich put it - but rather take the school out of the scientific institution and define it as a social institution deschooling the school. It is the deschooling of the school itself that can actualize the true capacities of the school. From Heidegger's point of view, as long as the school is considered a scientific institution, it takes away the opportunity for students to speak, while the school is a place for learning to think, by providing the opportunity for students to speak. The school is an arena, an arena where the school and the teacher, by creating the opportunity for students to learn and speak, play the most important role in giving authenticity to their lives.

In the upcoming research, relying on the descriptive-analytical method, we are trying to answer the question that does the Heidegger's phenomenology of religious life have an epistemological infrastructure? It seems that the basis of the phenomenology of Heidegger's religious life is based on the understanding of Dasein from the reality of religious life and gaining awareness of the essence of religious life based on the mechanism of Dasein's understanding. Investigating the role of human existence (= Dasein) in reaching the truth of religious life in the form of Heidegger's phenomenological approach to religious life is the main motivation of the researcher, which introduces us to the epistemological basis of Heidegger's phenomenology. Based on the evaluation, Dasein is a conscious agent in confronting religious life, and the knowledge that is produced in this way is a certain knowledge that depends on the essence of religious life through the understanding mechanism of Dasein.

School as an institute that is formed to teach people how to encounter problems during life, deserves further attention. Because it determines the path of many people and the being-in-the world and has a matchless role in making them ready for performing their duties to themselves and their society. But it seems that many basic and effective subtleties related to schools have been underestimated and covering them has been ignored though longish time passed since the establishment of new schools. The researcher thinks that not defining and not expressing important philosophical concepts like place, time, learning and social essence cause a phenomenon that divests students of amazing existence. School shouldn’t have been considered a dogmatic and inflexible place in which there is no opportunity for student's estimate. The concept of a place of school should have been expressed as a consideration of students, students' relation with their city and their society, and generally their relation with their era. Here instead of common questions, we should ask "Where is the school?"

The question of time has always been one of the greatest questions of philosophers and physicists throughout history. Undoubtedly, every philosophical thought is manifested in different forms in literary and artistic works, and among them there are writers and artists who use philosophy as the basis of their works. Samuel Beckett is one of the most influential writers in shaping the school of thought of Absurd Theater, which has its roots in philosophy. This article purports to examine and express the issue of time in the play Waiting for Godot using the ideas of Martin Heidegger. Martin Heidegger looks at the question of "time" from an ontological point of view and in his divisions, he considers "time" in both original and non-original forms for Dasein (existence). As in the play Waiting for Godot, the most important action of the play "the issue of time" is the characters' conflict in the form of two Dasein. Thus, according to Heidegger's definition of the original and non-original "time" with which Dasein is involved in life, "time" was examined as the most important element in the play Waiting for Godot. To achieve this analysis, it was first necessary to provide an exhaustive definition of "time" in the philosophical thought of Heidegger and the philosophers before him, and then by examining the issue of wait and its meaning in Heidegger's "time", the play Waiting for Godot and the characters' continuous wait were interpreted. Analytical research has been used in this study and by examining Heidegger's thoughts and Samuel Beckett's the play Waiting for Godot, and using descriptive-analytical method, it has been tried to find the common ground between Beckett's thought on writing and performing the scenes of this play and Heidegger's philosophical thoughts to shed new light on its analysis and conducting.

Paying attention to the issue of the death of authenticity and alienation of man is one of the most important issues that contemporary man is dealing with ignorning it causes that according to Heidegger; The desert is getting wider every day and the gap between self-being and alienation becomes uncontrollable. In order to understand and face this issue logically, in the present research, the meaning and why of alienation from the point of view of two prominent thinkers of the Islamic world and the West, Allameh MuhammadTaqi Ja’fari and Martin Heidegger, were discussed in a comparative manner. The research shows that for Allameh Ja’fari self-estrangement is divided into two types, positive and negative, and positive self-estrangement means placing the "self" in the path of its logical evolution, and negative self-estrangement means exclusive attention to the animal dimension and neglecting the origin and resurrection. they know and from Heidegger's point of view, losing one's understanding of one's existence and the meaning of one's world, being under the control of previous plans, becoming a passive existence, not trying and seeking to understand the meaning of existence, and also becoming a static being and passive; It takes a person out of the orbit of authenticity and true self-being and enters a space called "alienation from oneself".

The twentieth-century prominent political thinker, Hannah Arendt, has gone through a very different course from his master, Martin Heidegger, in presenting her viewpoints on the correlation between political action (praxis) and overcoming totalitarianism. Applying a phenomenological analysis of history, she surveys the human condition from the pre-Socratic era to now in order to illuminate this correlation. As a political existentialist, Arendt presumes that the privation of true political philosophy throughout the history of Western metaphysical tradition is the consequence of trivializing the necessity of action in general and praxis in particular compared to the centrality of speculation in post-Socratic tradition, especially Platonic school. According to Arendt, pre-Socratic Polis is the ideal political community, where the uniqueness of individuals -represented through their speech and action- is celebrated while being with "the others"; however, speculation in seclusion has become far more authentic than action in public after Socrates' trial. No need to mention Heidegger’s influential impact on Arendt's critical approach to Western metaphysical tradition; however, she emphasizes the disclosure of the actors’ “who” through action and speech in the public sphere, contrary to Heidegger’s disclosure of Dasein as “Aletheia” or the revelation of the truth. To phrase it, Arendt is switching over “being” to “appearance” which is manifested in action and speech in her thought. Her emphasis on man’s presence and his interaction with the others in the plurality of the public sphere to liberate from the crisis of twentieth-century totalitarianism and alienation stands in contrast to the extravagant egoism and solipsism of Heideggerian Dasein that have been recognized and criticized by Arendt herself. The one which is albeit known as being-in-the-world according to Arendt, but it is considered as inauthentic if being presented in the plurality of Mitsein (being-with), having an “Idle Talk” with them and consequently falling into everydayness. Therefore, Dasein prefers to remain an “ideal self” in isolation and seclusion according to Arendt.Arendt maintains that Heidegger's observation of Dasein as an "ideal self" is no way dissimilar to the post-Socratic man of speculation, who is engaged in noetic thinking in his privacy, the attitude that has diminished action in favor of reflection all through the Western metaphysical tradition. Mentioning the crisis of the twentieth-century totalitarianism in Nazi Germany, Stalinist Soviet Union and the Eastern Bloc, Arendt critically assumes that ontological egoism and solipsism have eliminated politics and successively prepared the ground for the rise of the mentioned crisis, whereas totalitarianism seeks atomized and disjointed societies. Applying a descriptive- analytic methodology, the present research attempts to compare Arendt's and Heidegger's standpoints towards the above concern and elucidates Arendt's criticism of Heidegger in clearing the crisis of totalitarianism. It also adverts Arendt's solution to exhaust the mentioned crisis, "love of the world", which creates the necessary impulsion and stimulus to overcome solipsism and triggers acting in public sphere, according to Arendt.

The lack of success in many civil engineering projects often results from a failure to grasp the concept of scale in design and planning. Understanding active environmental indicators and their impact is vital for determining scale. In the field of architecture and urban governance, "scale" encompasses various quantitative and qualitative aspects, which are diverse and complex, posing a significant challenge for comprehension. This raises the question: How can a designer effectively incorporate quantitative and qualitative measurements in the design environment, reflecting the project's scale, throughout the design process? Most scale errors occur when transferring the designer's vision from a mental image or sketch onto paper to match the actual dimensions of the physical structure in the external environment. While the designer (architect, urban planner, policy maker) may easily sketch on paper, the external environment is subject to invasion, occupation, and irreversible changes, which can lead to its degradation or enhancement. This issue prompts a philosophical investigation into how our limited human understanding can connect meaningfully with the vast external world. The research methodology is qualitative and practically oriented, aiming to present findings through logical reasoning grounded in hermeneutics and the concept of scale

Heidegger has provided some innovative interpretations regarding several topics particularly in relation to human existence. His views about human beings are comparable to those of Mullā Ṣadrā in certain respects. One of them is their belief in man’s transcendence and existential width. Both thinkers maintain that man is not an entity imprisoned in itself; man, who is the source of many possibilities and is aware of them, is subject to “becoming” and can become what they are not at the present time. In other words, man can go beyond the existing situation and attain transcendence. Although there is a similarity in this regard between the thoughts of these two thinkers, it should be considered that in Mullā Ṣadrā’s ontological system, the human soul, owing to its essential immateriality, always enjoys a perception and understanding of its identity as connected to an unlimited being and infinite truth. The human soul, which entails the whole limits of being in itself, tries to grant meaning to its existence through gaining proximity and similarity to that infinite truth in the course of traversing its out-of-itself stages. The soul’s developmental journey for reaching the ultra-rational stage also continues after death. By contrast, in Heidegger’s ontological system, truth is based on Dasein, whose being real indicates that it is the only existence in the world. It also means that, without being connected to a mysterious and transcendent power, Dasein always possesses a pre-knowledge of everything that comprises the world and continually perceives things with no cover at highest levels of clarity. Therefore, Dasein relies on itself in transcendence, the continuation of which is motivated by actualizing its existential possibilities until it dies. Death is the last existential possibility of Dasein upon which it attains its end.

This research has put the negation of the rule of necessity and the principle of causality in Kant’s practical philosophy and post-Kantian theology to the test of Islamic philosophy by a citation method. According to this research, concepts such as transcendental creation, transcendental negation, dialectic, Dasein (existence) and the idea are the watchwords that are the common boundary between the two theological sects of Mu'tazilism (Arabic: المعتزله al-muʿtazilah or اعتزال iʿtizāl) and Ashʿarism (Arabic: الاشعریه: al-ʾAshʿarīyah, or Ashʿarī) in Islamic theology and two currents of liberal theology and dialectical theology are in Christian theology, and these currents have been inevitably led to the negation of the rule of necessity and the principle of causality, which had no result other than the entering of the imagination of composition in the essence of God, accepting the notion of “the existence of Ajwaf” (Arabic: وجود اجوف , hollow existence) and preventing Sharia (Arabic: شریعه, Romanized: sharīʿa) law in favor of free will. This was the immediate consequence of the separation of philosophy from the defensive apologetics or the subordination of philosophy to the defensive apologetics in theology according to this research. Returning to the early philosophical order under a monotheistic worldview and subordinating the defensive apologetics to metaphysical philosophy is the suggested solution of this research to solve the issue.

The acquaintance of each human being with his own “Self” and its understanding always preoccupies human mind, because the answer to this question gives meaning to human life. This essay which has been authored using qualitative method and based on a fundamental analysis seeks to give an answer to the what-ness of human nature from the point of views of two renowned philosophers in Islamic world and western world. Mulla Sadra and Heidegger have both spoken of man and the related issues. Heidegger discusses man in order to know Being while Mulla Sadra intends to being with human knowledge in order to understand God as the Absolute Existence and the Truth of Existence. According to Mulla Sadra, human truth is not knowable because of some reasons and thus, what the philosophers state do not reflect his truth though can express human properties. He offers two types of essential definitions of man. In first definition, following the classic philosophers, he defines man as the rational anima and In the second definition, in the wake of the mystics, he founds his own essential definition of man on principles doctrines and Man as the Central Element of All Existential Spheres. But Heidegger in his analysis of man refers to two points, first, our main question of man should not be concerned with human nature, rather we should ask of “human who-ness”; it is in this case that we have asked a question of human existence. Secondly, defining man as the rational animal though is not an incorrect definition by no means can be appropriate for expressing human nature. According to Heidegger, human nature lies in his existence (Da-sein). Man is the only being who has the state of “ex-sistence”, i.e. open toward Being. Thus, man is the place where Being reveals itself. It seems that what Heidegger has expressed regarding the “who-ness” of man and the property that distinguishes him from other entities as compared to the definition offered by Mulla Sadra is just concerned with one aspect of human being and for this reason, it does not contain all human features and the definition is not of the whole human existence.

A Comparative Study of the Meaning of Life from the Perspective of Allameh Tabatabai and Martin Heidegger One of the common concerns of Allameh Tabatabai and Martin Heidegger has been the meaning of life and the meaning of life for them is the purpose of life. Each has responded to it according to their own intellectual foundations. Allameh proves the purposefulness of the created world, including man, through the attribute of God's wisdom. He believes that living in the light of belief in God and adherence to morality and human behavior makes sense But from Heidegger's point of view, what makes Dasein meaningful is being in the world.   Contrary to Allameh, Heidegger believes that man himself creates values ​​and that no external criteria can be set for values. He divides Dasein into genuine and non-genuine based on attention to death and liberation from the domination of others. Both philosophers believe in the meaning of life, with the difference that Allameh believes that man discovers the meaning of life    But Heidegger says Dasein falsifies the meaning of life. Both philosophers believe in the meaning of life, with the difference that Allameh believes that man discovers the meaning of life, but Heidegger says that Dasein forges the meaning of life and Allameh's intellectual basis is to prove the meaning of the Qur'an and human nature, while Heidegger Heidegger's intellectual basis is Dasein's conscience and death

n most of his writings about the influence of Husserl’s views on his thought and his indebtedness to his works. He considers the clarification of his philosophical meaning to be the main problem of Phenomenology and characterized his work in terms of Phenomenology in the style of “thinking with Husserl against him”. On the other hand, intentionality doctrine, which is Brentano’s great and important legacy, is the main part of Husserl’s Phenomenology. Intentionality means that consciousness is focused on something and every thought or idea is directed towards something. By transcending the issues of consciousness, Heidegger’s intentionality ties it to lived experience and transforms it into “life toward something”. This article is an analytical account of Heidegger’s critique and rethinking of Husserl’s intentionality; and discusses how Heidegger, according to the works of his master in his lectures and writings about intentionality, extends his ontological circle, and also thinks against him while his progress is in line with Husserl’s plan. The result of Heidegger’s rethinking is to replacement the Dasein by consciousness and intentionality, the path to understanding Dasein’s being-in-the-world. Accordingly, in order to develop Heidegger’s method, intentionality explains Husserl’s narrative as “being-with”, and emphasizes the understanding of intentionality based on the transcendence of Dasein’s role.