Anschauen] its priority which noetically corresponds to the traditional ontological priority of objective presence. "Intuition" and "thought"* are both already remote derivatives of understanding. Even the phenomenological "intuition of essences" ["Wesensschau"] is based on existential understanding. We can decide about this kind of seeing only when we have obtained the explicit concepts of being and the structure of being, which only phenomena in the phenomenological sense can become.
The disclosedness of the there in understanding is itself a mode of the potentiality-of-being of Dasein. In the projectedness of its being upon the for-the-sake-of-which, together with the projectedness of its own being upon significance (world), lies the disclosedness of being in general.† An understanding of being is already anticipated in the projecting upon possibilities. Being is understood‡ in the project, but not ontologically grasped. Beings which have the kind of being of the essential project of being-in-the-world have as the constituent of their being the understanding of being. What we asserted earlier8 dogmatically is now demonstrated in terms of the constitution of the being in which Dasein, as understanding, is its there. In accordance with the limits of this whole inquiry, a satisfactory clarification of the existential meaning of this understanding of being can only be attained on the basis of the temporal [temporalen] interpretation of being.
As existentials, attunement and understanding characterize the [148] primordial disclosedness of being-in-the-world. In the mode of "being attuned". Dasein "sees" possibilities in terms of which it is. In the projective disclosure of such possibilities, it is always already attuned. The project of its ownmost potentiality of being is delivered over to the fact of thrownness into the there. With the explication of the existential constitution of the being of the there in the sense of thrown project does not the being of Dasein become still more mysterious? Indeed. We must first let the full mysteriousness [Ratselhaftigkeit] of this being [Sein] emerge, if only to be able to fail in a more genuine way in its "solution" and to raise the question anew of the being of thrown-projecting being-in-the-world.
In order to sufficiently bring even only the everyday mode of being of attuned understanding phenomenally to view, and if this is to be sufficient for the full disclosedness of the there, a concrete development of these existentials is necessary.
* To understand this as the "understanding" ["Verstand"], διάνοια, but not the "act of understanding" ["Verstehen"] from the understanding ["Verstand"].
† How does it "lie" there and what does beyng [Seyn] mean?
‡ This does not mean that being "is" ["sei"] due to the project.
8. Cf.§ 4.