in its being precisely as being-possible. This pertains to every being with the being-character of living (see ὄργανον—δύναμις), and each one differently according to the type of genuineness of living. In the case of human being-there: ζωὴ πρακτική μετὰ λόγου, being is determined by πρᾶξις, i.e., ontologically by προαίρεσις, ἕξις προαιρετική, ἀρετή; the ability to have being-possibilities at one’s disposal. (In the case of the θρεπτικόν: being-nourishing, rules regarding nourishment and feeding). Conceptuality is a legitimate possibility of living (existence—scientific research!), this being-possible as being-possible, having-the-possibility-for . . . , as such is, according to its being-sense, related to an also-other, a contrary-to-it. Being-possible as for is only from out of the against and the against-which is always, at the same time, the out-of-which of being-possible for . . . , such that the latter is at the disposal of the former. Being-there is, as being-possible, such a thing in this double-sense. The against-which is not another, but is precisely itself, specifically, such that being-possible, as that out of which ἕξις is (ἕξις as πῶς ἔχομεν πρός) constitutes the average and everyday being of being-there.
Conceptuality, in accordance with the three aspects, is a determinate being-possible of being-there in the two-fold sense.
On §24
α) The Out-of-Which, From-Which as the Against-Which It Can Be Cultivated
With the determination of this out-of-which, we attain what is characteristic of the mode-of-being-there—of the average—of what was shown in 1. above. At the same time, the occasion to get a more acute ontological understanding of the three aspects of conceptuality out of the being-character of being-there, and to shift it back toward a basic phenomenon of being-there (fore-character), and thereby to make evident (interpretedness) the uniformity of the three aspects.
Being-there is, as being-in, determined by λόγος, which means, however, that everydayness is pervaded and protected [?] by talk, the spoken: word-thinking and second-hand telling, repeating, book-learning, “the newspaper.” In relation to the three aspects of conceptuality, this means the following.
1) Beings in their there, the world of dealings and of consideration, in each case already determined thus and so, are encountered in it and in the look, in the same being-in. The apprehension of living itself is already there. Approaching the world, one grows into a tradition of speaking, seeing, and interpreting—from a world thus encountered, apprehended, interpreted. Being-in-the-world is in each case a having-the-being(world and living)-thus-and-so. This already-thus-having, regarding world and living as already had in such a way, is terminologically fore-having.
2) The guiding claim: In the same way, a determinate customary sense of being (being—non-being: mode of appropriation of the fore-having, cultivation