happened when we returned to the customary meaning in order to gain direction regarding the meaning of οὐσία, there, “being-there?” This regression is nothing other than the overhearing of the speaking of natural being-there to its world, of the way the communication of being-there speaks with itself about beings that are there, of what being means in this natural intelligibility.
If we more explicitly give ourselves the task of apprehending basic concepts in their conceptuality, then we must come to a better understanding of what Aristotle understands by being-there, the being of humans in the world; of how he experiences being-there, in what sense of being he addresses it, interprets it. Only when we are assured of this, will we have a possibility of understanding the basic concepts in their raw, native character.64
64. See Hs. p. 351 f.