¶ 4. The Ontical Priority of the Question of Being
Science in general may be defined as the totality established through an interconnection of true propositions.1 This definition is not complete, nor does it reach the meaning of science. As ways in which man behaves, sciences have the manner of Being which this entity-man himself- possesses. This entity we denote by the term "Dasein". Scientific research is not the only manner of Being which this entity can have, nor is it the one which lies closest. Moreover, Dasein itself has a special distinctiveness [12] as compared with other entities, and it is worth our while to bring this to view in a provisional way. Here our discussion must anticipate later analyses, in which our results will be authentically exhibited for the first time.
Dasein is an entity which does not just occur among other entities. Rather it is ontically distinguished by the fact that, in its very Being, that Being is an issue for it. But in that case, this is a constitutive state of Dasein's Being, and this implies that Dasein, in its Being, has a relationship towards that Being-a relationship which itself is one of Being.2 And this means further that there is some way in which Dasein understands itself in its Being, and that to some degree it does so explicitly. It is peculiar to this entity that with and through its Being, this Being is disclosed to it. Understanding of Being is itself a definite characteristic of Dasein's Being. Dasein is ontically distinctive in that it is ontological.3
Here "Being-ontological" is not yet tantamount to "developing an ontology". So if we should reserve the term "ontology" for that theoretical inquiry which is explicitly devoted to the meaning of entities, then what we have had in mind in speaking of Dasein's "Being-ontological" is to be designated as something "pre-ontological". It does not signify simply "being-ontical", however, but rather "being in such a way that one has an understanding of Being".
That kind of Being towards which Dasein can comport itself in one way or another, and always does comport itself somehow, we call "existence" [Existenz]. And because we cannot define Dasein's essence by citing a "what" of the kind that pertains to a subject-matter [eines sachhaltigen Was], and because its essence lies rather in the fact that in each case it has its Being to be, and has it as its own,4 we have chosen to designate this entity as "Dasein", a term which is purely an expression of its Being [als reiner Seinsausdruck].
1 '... das Ganze eines Begründungszusammenhanges wahrer Sätze ...' See H. 357 below.
2 'Zu dieser Seinsverfassung des Daseins gehört aber dann, dass es in seinem Sein zu diesem Sein ein Seinsverhältnis hat.' This passage is ambiguous and might also be read as: '... and this implies that Dasein, in its Being towards this Being, has a relationship of Being.'
3 '... dass es ontologisch ist'. As 'ontologisch' may be either an adjective or an adverb, we might also write: '... that it is ontologically'. A similar ambiguity occurs in the two following sentences, where we read 'Ontologisch-sein' and 'ontisch-seiend' respectively.
4 '... dass es je sein Sein als seiniges zu sein hat ...'