II. 3 353
Being and Time

lead us to authentic Being-towards-death? How are we to conceive the connection between wanting to have a conscience and Dasein's existentially projected, authentic potentiality-for-Being-a-whole? Does welding these two together yield a new phenomenon? Or are we left with the resoluteness which is attested in its existentiell possibility, and can this resoluteness undergo an existentiell modalization through Being-towards-death? What does it mean 'to think through to the end' existentially the phenomenon of resoluteness?

We have characterized resoluteness as a way of reticently projecting oneself upon one's ownmost Being-guilty, and exacting anxiety of oneself. Being-guilty belongs to Dasein's Being, and signifies the null Being-the-basis of a nullity. The 'Guilty!' which belongs to the Being of Dasein is something that can be neither augmented nor diminished. It comes before any quantification, if the latter has any meaning at all. Moreover, Dasein is essentially guilty—not just guilty on some occasions, and on other occasions not. Wanting-to-have-a-conscience resolves upon this Being-guilty. To project oneself upon this Being-guilty, which Dasein is as long as it is, belongs to the very meaning of resoluteness. The existentiell way of taking over this 'guilt' in resoluteness, is therefore authentically accomplished only when that resoluteness, in its disclosure of Dasein, has become so transparent that Being-guilty is understood as something constant. But this understanding is made possible only in so far as Dasein discloses to itself its potentiality-for-Being, and discloses it 'right to its end'. Existentially, however, Dasein's "Being-at-an-end" implies Being-towards-the-end. As Being-towards-the-end which understands—that is to say, as anticipation of death—resoluteness becomes authentically what it can be. Resoluteness does not just 'have' a connection with anticipation, as with something other than itself. It harbours in itself authentic Being-towards--death, as the possible existentiell modality of its own authenticity. This 'connection' must be elucidated phenomenally.

By "resoluteness" we mean "letting oneself be called forth to one's ownmost Being-guilty". Being-guilty belongs to the Being of Dasein itself, and we have determined that this is primarily a potentiality-for-Being. To say that Dasein 'is' constantly guilty can only mean that in every case [306] Dasein maintains itself in this Being and does so as either authentic or inauthentic existing. Being-guilty is not just an abiding property of something constantly present-at-hand, but the existentiell possibility of being authentically or inauthentically guilty. In every case, the 'guilty' is only in the current factical potentiality-for-Being. Thus because Being-guilty belongs to the Being of Dasein, it must be conceived as a potentiality-for-Being-guilty. Resoluteness projects itself upon this potentiality-for-Being


Being and Time (M&R) by Martin Heidegger