The essay deals with the understanding of the two key concepts from Sein und Zeit (SZ) mentioned in the headline, including a debate on the issue of das Man in Inquiry: an Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy. It is noted that reading SZ involves being simultaneously written by the work in a process of reciprocity; this entails a questioning of alleged possession of this or any work, it having been made accessible to the public by its publication. Das Man, as a concept for inauthenticity, needs a counterpart for authenticity, which in SZ is provided by Eigentlichkeit, Self-ownership.This comes into existence via “being-towards-death”, where the caring being, as a being of possibilities, encounters its ultimate possibility death which is also the end of possibilities. The Inquiry debate, the main contenders of which were Hubert Dreyfus and Frederick Olafson, hinges on the question whether das Man should be understood primarily as “at bottom a deformation of Mitsein” (Olafson) or “the conformity necessary for the institution of collectively intelligible social practices (Dreyfus, in the words of his advocate in the debate, Taylor Carman). Both sides, however, give evidence of misreadings of SZ of a kind that call for an explanation. The proposal is that this could be given in an analysis of such a rhetoric of polemics that transforms SZ into a state of Vorhandenheit when making it an object of investigation by the contenders rather than such a tool for being-changed that is mentioned above. The relation between the two aspects of das Man, as oppressive know-all or as forms of established truth for Dasein, remains unsolved, however. At the end of the essay, das Man is understood primarily as established truth. It is argued that it should be seen as involved in a process of change as its immobility must be challenged by the living/dying, a challenge that is being recuperated into das Man in order to re-establish itself as undisputed truth and thereby changing it. This change involves technical developments, including the threat of these to the living.

In this paper I am going to examine and discuss Martin Heideggers concept ”Das Man” and the closely related ”Man-Selbst” as they appear in his work Being and Time. My main goal is to argue for a normative understanding of these concepts and the overall theory surrounding them, i.e., argue for a reading in which Being and Time is not understood merely as a descriptive investigation of fundamental-ontological existentials, but also as arguing for a certain way we ought to exist, or rather: arguing for that we ought not to be in the way of ”Man-Selbst.” In order to do this, however, I need to introduce some of the key concepts of the work, such as ”Dasein” and ”In-der-Welt-sein”, and this is what the first part of the paper is dedicated to. In the second part I examine the methodology in Being and Time and how it necessitates a special kind of semantics called "formal indication." In the third part I more closely examine the passages of the work in which the key concepts ”Das Man” and ”Man-Selbst” appear. In the fourth I will lay out my arguments for the normative reading. / <p>Läsår Höstterminen 2018</p>

Magistrinio darbo problematikos formulavimas vadovaujasi prielaida, jog dalis moderniosios filosofijos projektų formavosi kaip reakcija į Vakarų Europos mąstymo tradiciją, kurios formuojantį pagrindą sudarė filosofija. Dėl šios priežasties neatsiejamu šių projektų egzistavimo požymiu laikytina nuosekli filosofijos istorijos kritika, tuo pačiu pateikianti alternatyvius filosofijos supratimo orientyrus. Tokiu radikaliu filosofijos sąjūdžiu, XX a. laikomas egzistencializmas. Magistriniam darbui pasirinktos dvi filosofų figūros: Rosenzweigas ir Heideggeris. Abu filosofai kritiškai reflektavo filosofijos istoriją bei abu pateikė alternatyvius mąstymo projektus. Pagrindiniu Vakarų tradicijos kritikos bei naujo mąstymo suformulavimo svarbiausiu aspektu laikome fundamentalų „pirminių mąstymo prielaidų” perklausimą. Atlikęs tokį perklausimą bei taip atsiribojęs nuo „mąstymo metafizikos”, Rosenzweigas susikuria naujas prieigas prie tikėjimo problematikos. Panaudodamas Johano Wolfgango Geothes profenomeno sampratos bei savo mokytojo – Hermanno Coheno diferencialinės matematikos teorijos idėjas, jis pateikia trijų (metafizinio Dievo, metaloginio pasaulio ir metaetinio žmogaus) profenomenų aprašymą. Metaetinio žmogaus sąmonės struktūros gretinimas su „naujojo mąstymo” (tokį pavadinimą Rosenzweigas pats prisiskiria savo filosofijai) pirminėmis prielaidomis, atveda prie dialoginės (Zwiesprache) apreiškimo (Offenbarung) sąmonės struktūros aprašymo. Tik apreiškimo sąmonei atsiveria pirmapradė... [toliau žr. visą tekstą] / The formulation of theme in this paper is followed the assumption that a part of projects of modern philosophy were generated as a reaction to the tradition of Western Europe thinking, which was influenced by philosophy. That is the reason why coherent criticism of history of philosophy, in the same time giving the perception guides of philosophy, is considered as a concurrent attribute of that project existence. Existentialism of the 20th century is considered as such radical movement of philosophy. Two philosophical figures were chosen from this general context: Rosenzweig and Heidegger. Both thinkers made critical reflections on history of philosophy and both give the alternative projects of thinking. The fundamental reasking of „prime thought assumptions” is considered as an important aspect of main criticism of Western tradition and the formulation of new thinking. After this performed reasking and disassociation from “metaphysics of thought”, Rosenzweig creates new approaches to the faith theme. Using the prophenomenon perception of Johan Wolfgang Geothe and his teachers, Herman Cohen’s ideas about diferencial mathematics theory, he presents description of three prophenomenon (metaphysical God, metalogical world and metaethical man). The comparison of consequence’s structure of metaethical man with prime assumptions of “new thought” (this definition Rosenzweig attributes to his own philosophy) leads to description of dialogical (Zwiesprache) revelational (Offenbarung)... [to full text]