In this paper, we try to establish a connection between Heidegger’s conception of authenticity and the Aristotelian σπουδαῖος. Through an exploration of Heidegger’s reference to authenticity, Aristotle’s concept of σπουδαῖος, and a reinterpretation of Heidegger’s reappropriation of certain Aristotelian concepts, such as αἴσθησις, πίστις and προαίρεσις, we wish to show that the authentic Dasein has assumed full responsibility of its role in life, and it has developed ontologically, in the same way a σπουδαῖος man acknowledges one’s full potentiality in purposeful (...) action. The σπουδαῖος as the authentic Dasein grasps the moment, gives rise to the occasion by directing one’s judgement towards the praxis, and comes to provide its own stance in the facticity of life. In fact, the σπουδαῖος, like an authentic Dasein, in a way, comes to reflect the synthesis between θεωρία and πράξις as well as an implicit effort for Dasein to uncover itself to the world and to allow the world to uncover to it. (shrink)

Charles Taylor called for a retrieval of the ethic of authenticity that has been distorted in modern notions of autonomy and self-fulfillment. Via exchanges with others who matter to us, he proposed that human identities develop through the use of rich language draped in shared horizons of significance. The fostering of these dialogical ties beyond purely instrumental purposes, along with the recognition of the human dignity in all, may avert the fallen ideal of authenticity. Nonviolent communication affords the skillful dialogue (...) with others cradled in a shared sense of significance and supports the development of a meaningful identity—one that is formed through the realization of what exists beyond the self. The purpose of this article is to argue that nonviolent communication facilitates the retrieval of the ethic of authenticity. Narratives from nursing students’ journals on the use of nonviolent communication skills will be used to support the argument. (shrink)

In this paper, I discuss, in a Heideggerian context, the possibility of de-subjectivizing the notion of the transcendental time-horizon and reinterpreting it as a formally indicated ‘whereto’ of releasement. The structures of the time-horizon depict the way beings unfold in the fullness of time in their alterity, and they orient the subject’s activity of ‘projection.’ What results is a field-oriented (as opposed to self-oriented) transcendental philosophy which would survive Heidegger’s critique of his own transcendental project, and which would avoid mystification. (...) I take three steps. First, I point out that the problematization of ‘transcendental Heidegger’ is based on the subjectivist interpretation of the time-horizon. I problematize a recent account in the subjectivist vein, arguing that it is neither indispensable, nor very plausible, nor the most illuminative of Heidegger’s work. Second, with the help of Dahlstrom, Golob, Engelland, Sheehan, and Vasterling, I gradually dissociate the notion of the horizon from subjectivism, the visual metaphor, and the assumption of an absolute ground. I suggest instead that the horizonality of the horizon be understood temporally, i.e., as an interplay of presencing and absencing where what matter most are the structures, themselves affected by time, which the transcendental field displays when beings unfold themselves within it. Third, I identify three of those structures when performing a de-subjectivizing reading of Heidegger’s interpretation of the threefold synthesis in Kant’s A-Deduction. These structures capture the way every being manifests itself, without themselves being necessarily grounded in the subject’s activity. This gives an example of how transcendental philosophy can clarify what the time-horizon is like while bracketing the question of its provenance. (shrink)

In this paper I take issue with Heidegger's use of the concept of death as a means of disclosing human finitude. I argue that Being‐towards‐death is inadequate to the disclosure of Dasein's thrownness which is necessary for the kind of authentic historizing that Heidegger describes and furthermore leads to a reading of authenticity which is preclusive of Being‐with‐Others, I suggest that this difficulty may be alleviated through increased attention to the opposite boundary of Dasein's existence, namely its birth. Although I (...) do not pursue the project here of conducting a phenomenology of birth, I suggest some directions for proceeding with that task, and I illustrate that a greater emphasis on Dasein's beginning will increase the richness of our understanding of our Being‐with‐Others. (shrink)