Our Lady of Peace College Seminary

San Isidro, Tarlac City

S. Y. 2017 – 2018

Martin Heidegger’s Concept of Death;

Being-Towards-Death and Being-Towards-Authentic Life

In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements in the Course A.B. Philosophy

Submitted to:
Rev. Fr. Ramon Christopher Molina
Dean of Studies

Submitted by:
Andrey Mark P. Cabuntocan
IV- Jubilarians

October 7, 2017

1|Page
Outline:

I. Introduction

II. Body

A. Biography of Martin Heidegger

B. Dasein

a. Dasein as Facticit

b. Dasein as Projection

c. Dasein as Discourse

C. Dasein as Being-in-the-World

a. Being-in

b. The World

D. Being with

a. Being with others

E. Heideggers Concept of Death

a. Empirical certainty

b. Existential Possibility

F. Being-towards-authentic life
a. What does it mean to be authentic?

Self-awareness is the cornerstone of authenticity

2|Page
 I. Introduction

It is to Heidegger that we owe the philosophical distinction between authentic and

inauthentic existence. Most of the time we are wrapped up in various ongoing projects, and

forget about death. But seeing our life purely in terms of the projects in which we are engaged,

we miss a more fundamental dimension of our existence, and to that extent, Heidegger says, we

are existing unauthentically. When we become aware of death as the ultimate limit of our

possibilities, we start to reach a deeper understanding of what it means to exist. For example,

when a good friend dies, we may look at our own lives and realize that the various projects

which absorb us from day to day feel meaningless, and that there is a deeper dimension to life

that is missing. And so we may find ourselves changing our priorities and projecting ourselves

towards different futures.

Death will always be a reminder that human existence will come to an end, that man is a

finite being. Death always humbles man in a realization that everyone is subject of it. Awareness

about death requires the human person to act in anticipation. Awareness of death would mean

that man should not ignore the meaning of existence in a given moment and treasure the

preciousness of life in order to live life to the full. According to Heidegger the anguished grasp

of the meaning of death as outermost possibility reveals my true essence to me. (Langan, 1959)

Because Dasein, knowing his destiny, can change his concrete decisions accordingly, this special

self-possession in the end renders me free to develop my essence as I will, within the limits

imposed by my essential finitude. (Langan, 1959) There is no room for us to be frightened by

death for all of us will be subject of it, and to be aware of death is to live authentically.

“Authenticity,” as defined about 13 years ago by psychologists Brian Goldman and Michael

3|Page
Kernis, is “the unimpeded operation of one's true or core self in one's daily enterprise.”

(Campbell, 2017)

At its root, authenticity requires self-knowledge and self-awareness. Meaning, authentic people

accept their strengths and weaknesses. They are accountable. They are connected to their values

and desires and act deliberately in ways that are consistent with those qualities. The aim of this

paper is to give emphasis on the concept of Martin Heidegger about death, that awareness of

death leads to a meaningful and authentic life. All being is a Being-Towards-Death, but only

humans recognize this. Our lives are temporal, and it is only once we realize this that we can live

a meaningful and authentic life. Being-Towards-Death as Being-Towards-Authentic Life.

4|Page
 II. Body

A. Heidegger’s Life (Fieser, 2008)

Martin Heidegger (1889-1976)

Even before Martin Heidegger published anything, his reputation as an extraordinary

thinker had spread among the students in the German universities. What was unusual about

Heidegger as a teacher was that he did not develop a “set of ideas” or a “system” of philosophy.

He produced nothing in the way of a neat structure of academic ideas that a student could

quickly understand and memorize. He was not interested so much in objects of scholarship as in

matters of thinking. He shifted attention away from the traditional concerns about theories and

books and focused instead on the concerns of thinking individuals. We are born in the world and

respond to all of our experiences by thinking. What Heidegger set out to explore was the deepest

nature of our thinking when we are thinking as existing human beings.

Born in 1889 in Germany’s Black Forest region, Heidegger received his preparatory

schooling in Constance and Freiburg. He was introduced to philosophy at the age of 17 when the

pastor of his church gave him Franz Brentano’s book On the Manifold Meaning of Being

According to Aristotle. This book, though difficult, made such impression on the young

Heidegger that it launched him on his lifelong quest for the meaning of Being, or “the meaning

that reigns in everything that is.” Along the way Heidegger was also influenced by Kierkegaard,

Dostoyevsky, and Nietzsche, from whom he discovered that some concerns of philosophy are

most creatively clarified by paying attention to concrete and historically relevant problems. At

the University of Freiburg, he began his studies in theology, but after four semesters he came

under the influence Husserl and changed his major to philosophy. Upon completing his

dissertation and some further advanced studies, Heidegger became Husserl’s assistant until he

was appointed in 1922 as an associate professor at the University of Marburg. Here, he pursued

5|Page
his studies in Aristotle, formulated a fresh interpretation on phenomenology, and was hard at

work on a manuscript that was to become his most famous book. To facilitate his promotion, his

dean at Marburg urged his to published this manuscript, and in 1927, deliberately leaving it

incomplete, Heidegger hurriedly published his book with the title Being and Time. One year

later, in 1928, Heidegger was chosen to be Husserl’s successor to the chair of philosophy at

Freiburg.

He was elected rector of the University in 1933, and for a brief period he was a member

of the Nazi party. In less than a year, in 1934, he resigned as rector and, for the next ten years,

taught courses critical of the Nazi interpretation of philosophy. He was drafted into the “People’s

Militia,” having been declared in 1944 the “most expendable” member of the Freiburg faculty.

The French occupying forces did not permit him to return to his teaching post until 1951, one

year before his retirement. Even after his retirement, he published several assays and

interpretations of the history of philosophy, including a two-volume study on Nietzsche (1961)

and his last work, The Matter of Thinking (1969). Heidegger died in 1976 in Freiburg at the age

of 86.

B. Dasein
I would like to start my paper by discussing what is Dasein? In German, Dasein is the

vernacular term for "existence", as in "I am pleased with my existence" (ich bin mit meinem

Dasein zufrieden). (Langan, 1959) The term Dasein has been used by several philosophers

before Heidegger, most notably Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel, with the meaning of human

"existence" or "presence". It is derived from da-sein, which literally means being-there/there-

being. (Langan, 1959) Dasein for Heidegger was a way of being involved with and caring for the

immediate world in which one lived, while always remaining aware of the contingent element of

that involvement, of the priority of the world to the self, and of the evolving nature of the self

6|Page
itself. (Langan, 1959) Dasein for Heidegger was a way of being involved with and caring for the

immediate world in which one lived, while always remaining aware of the contingent element of

that involvement, of the priority of the world to the self, and of the evolving nature of the self

itself. (Cultural, 2017) Dasein is found to have three main existential or basic structures shared

by every existential (i.e., specific and local) way of living: (Audi, 1999)

a. Dasein as Facticity

Dasein finds itself thrown into a world not of it choosing, already delivered over to the

task of living out its life in a concrete context. (Audi, 1999) This facticity of our lives is revealed

in the moods that let things matter to us in some way or other – e.g., the burdensome feelings of

concern that accompany being a parent in our culture. (Audi, 1999) When we are born we find

ourselves in the world as if we have been thrown here on a trajectory we have not chosen.

(Langan, 1959) We simply find that we have come to exist, in an ongoing world that pre-existed

us, so that at our birth we are presented with a particular historical, material, and spiritual

environment. (Langan, 1959) Thus, it is not us who choose to be here, we are not the one who

choose what life we want, we did not choose our parents, our brothers and relatives.

b. Dasein as Projection

In being-in-the-world, dasein as projection, plays an important role, for we can be able to

see and anticipate our destiny. As a Dasein we must know our limitations and we can only be

aware of our limitations through projection.

Dasein is always already taking some stand on its life by acting in the world. Understood

as agency, human existence is ahead of itself in two senses: (1) our competent dealings with

familiar situations sketch out a range of possibilities for how things may turn out in the future,

and (2) each of our actions is contributing to shaping our lives as people of specific dasein if

7|Page
future directed in the sense that the ongoing fulfillment of possibilities in the course of one’s

active life constitutes one’s identity(or being). (Audi, 1999)

Thus to say that Dasein is being-toward-death is to say that the stands we take (our

understanding) define our being as totality. The essence of Dasein has been discovered to lie in

its ability for self-extension in time by free projection beyond the here and now toward a future

that is not yet. (Langan, 1959) This freedom is possible because Dasein alone of all finite things

is capable of grasping the whole stucture of his self-extending being. (Langan, 1959) Thus,

Dasein is limited and only through projection that he can know his end. Because Dasein is at

once self-penetrating and limited, the key to his understanding his own self extension lies in his

grasping the outer limit or end of the process which his own liberty unfolds. (Langan, 1959) In

other words, now that the unity of the ekstatic structural unity has been discovered, there arises

the discovering its limits by discovering its end.

C. Dasein as Being-in-the-World

Heidegger said that dasein is an entity which, in its very being, comports itself

understandingly towards that Being. (Heidegger, 1963) He said, in saying this we are calling

attention to the formal concept of existence. (Heidegger, 1963) Dasein exist. (Heidegger, 1963)

In saying this he is not talking about abstract ideas, but something very direct and immediate.

Thus what Heidegger wanted to give emphasis on the study of dasein as being-in-the-world.

a) Being-in
What is meant by being –in? In this question Heidegger is convinced that we are inclined

to understand this Being-in as being in something. (Heidegger, 1963) Looking at this statement I

am also convinced that we are really being in something, for there is something that exist from

nothing, we exist because of something, we are something that should exist into something. Just

8|Page
like what Heidegger said that we are not talking here about abstract ideas, but about something

very direct and immediate, (Heidegger, 1963) Thus what we are talking here is a concrete being.

Man is not an isolated existence, but an existence that is related to a given world. Being-in

presents to us that Dasein is existing not of its own entity but the term itself expresses a wider

understanding of the existing connotations of the relationship that surrounds man. He continues

with his claim that it is an existence of an encounter of man to other being. Therefore, it is clear

that being in something means an encounter to other being.

Being-in, on the other hand, is a state of Dasein’s being; it is an existentiale. So one

cannot think of it as the Being-present-at-hand of some corporeal Thing (such as human body) in

entity which is present at hand. Nor does the term “Being-in” mean a spatial relationship of this

kind. ‘In’ derived from “innan”- “to reside”, “habitare”, “to dwell” ‘In’ signifies “I am

accustomed,” “I am familiar with”, “I look after something” it has the signification of “colo” in

the senses of “habito” and “diligo.” The entity to which being-in in this signification belongs is

one which we have characterized as that entity which in each case I myself am. (Heidegger,

1963)

The quotation above presents an idea of what being-in means as understood as an

existentiale. We see above the emphasis on the word ‘In’ which plays an important role in being-

in, it talks about our role in this world. We do not just exist but rather there are other dasein to

dwell with specifically to dwell in the world.

b) The World
In our discussion on being-in we have said that Being-in as being in something, thus to be

specific this something refers to the world, since we are talking here about what is real and

concrete. It is important to understand being in, in the context of Being-in-the-world. Heidegger

said that being-in-the-world shall be made first visible with regard to that item of its structure

9|Page
which is the world itself. (Heidegger, 1963) Heidegger’s discussion of being always referred to

human being in the world, to being as it relates to and discloses human existence. Thus, he said it

would only mean that the relation of dasein is always a relation with humanity in the context of

the world, and a world only occurs in relation to dasein. Therefore it is clear that we can only

understand dasein in the context of being-in-the-world. Heidegger said that dasein is thus

absorbed in the world; the kind of being which it thus possesses and in general the being-in

which underlies it, is essential in determining the character of a phenomenon. (Heidegger, 1963)

With this it raises the question, what can be meant by describing ‘the world’ as a phenomenon? It

means Heidegger said, to let us see what shows itself in entities within the world. (Heidegger,

1963)

One of the questions in metaphysics, that many philosophers are trying to resolve, is the

question of the world. Scientist are very much disposed with the search of the world,

phenomenally. It is also important to look at the world in ontological perspective. As Heidegger

writes:

Worldhood is an ontological concept, and stands for the structure of one of the

constitutive items of Being-in-the-world. But we know Being-in-the-world as a way in which

Dasein’s character is defined existentially. Thus worldhood itself is an existentiale. If we inquire

ontologically about the ‘world’, we by no means abandon the analytic of Dasein as a field of

thematic study. ‘Ontologically,’ ‘world’ is not a way of characterizing those entities which

dasein essentially is not; it is rather a characteristic of Dasein itself. This does not rule out the

possibility that when we investigate the phenomenon of the world we must do so by the avenue

of entities within-the-world and the being which they possess. (Heidegger, 1963)

10 | P a g e
 The point of Heiddeger in describing the world is that we cannot really describe the

world phenomenologically done, but rather anthological explanations will be needed. Heidegger

states that the task of describing the world phenomenologically is so far from obvious that even

if we do no more than determine adequately what form it shall take, essential anthological

clarifications is needed. In this discussion it is also important to look at the different kinds of

phenomena that are signified and of the way in which they are interconnected.

1. “World” is used as an ontical concept, and signifies the totality of those entities which

can be present-at-hand within the world. (Heidegger, 1963)

2. “World” functions as an ontological term, and signifies the Being of those entities

which we have just mentioned. And indeed ‘world’ can become a term for any realm

which encompasses a multiplicity of entities: for instance, when one talks of the

‘world’ of a mathematician, ‘world’ signifies the realm of possible objects of

mathematics. (Heidegger, 1963)

3. “World” can be understood in another ontical sense—not, however as those entities

which Dasein essentially is not and which can be encountered within-the-world, but

rather as that ‘wherein’ a factical Dasein as such can be said to ‘live’. “World” has

here a pre-ontological existentiell signification. Here again there are different

possibilities: “world” may stand for the ‘public’ we-world, or one’s ‘own’ closest

“world” designates the ontological-existential concept of world hood. World hood

itself may have as its modes whatever structural wholes any special ‘worlds’ may

have at the time; but it embraces in itself the a priori character of world hood in

general. We shall reserve the expression “world” as a term for our third signification.

11 | P a g e
 If we should sometimes use it in the first of these senses, we shall mark this with

single quotation marks. (Heidegger, 1963)

D. Being-with
a. Being-with-others
After discussing Being-in and the world, it is now important to interpret Dasein with others.

The Dasein cannot be understood independent with the others. Dasein is necessarily a public

being. Dasein is already and always with others. (Heidegger, 1963) Thus in the interpretation,

and in order to understand being, it should be in the context of, the Dasein with others. Because

we have said that Being-In is Being in something therefore it is a priori that we are absorbed by

this something and this something has something to do with others (other Dasein). In philosophy

of man it is stated that, indeed no one can tell who you are, only yourself can tell who you are,

but the people around you can somehow tell something about you which is very helpful in the

understanding of who you are. Same as through in understanding the Dasein-with we can only

understand Dasein-with others.

Heidegger asserts that the world of Dasein is a world (Mitwelt) Being-in is Being-with

others. (Heidegger, 1963) Their Being-in-themselves within-the-world is Dasein-with

(Mitdasein). One of our discussions says that Being-in-the-world means being in something and

being something means an encounter to other being. Heidegger said that in characterizing the

encountering of others, one is again still oriented by that Dasein which is in each case one’s own.

(Heidegger, 1963) Thus in understanding Being-with others does not mean that you will isolate

the “I”. As Heidegger said even in this characterization does one not start by marking out and
12 | P a g e
isolating the “I”. Heidegger continuous in saying that by “others” we do not mean everyone else

but me-those over against whom the “I” stands out. (Heidegger, 1963) Thus it is clear now that

Being-with expresses that we are Being-with others in the world. Hubert L. Dreyfus says that:

“The world of Dasein is a with-world and being-in is nothing else but being with others.” Being

with-others illuminates the Being of Dasein in the world.

E. Heidegger’s Concept of Death

There is a very brief way of framing how Heidegger approaches an understanding of

death: since death is not something we can experience (live through), there is really nothing at all

to say about death itself. In this sense, death is not -- it does not exist for an individual to

experience. But since death, in the sense of the termination of all possible experience is

inevitable, a given fact of human existence, we can say a great deal about the attitudes

we do have, as well as the attitudes we ought to have, about this quintessential aspect of human

existence. We can say that what is important is not "death itself," but dying, the manner in which

the human being lives as it aims toward death. Death, as our being toward it, is the focus of

Heidegger's analysis. The old saying that as soon as we are born we are old enough to die,

Heidegger notes, is not something we can ignore -- for how we live in light of this fact makes all

the difference. (Heidegger, 1963)

Given this above frame, however, we must be careful not to confuse Heidegger's analysis

with ordinary "sayings" or formulations of everyday speech. Heidegger develops a special

language in the analysis of Dasein. In what follows, it will be necessary to assume some

familiarity with Heidegger's special terms. Otherwise, we will be faced with the problem of

building Heidegger's system from the ground up. As an example, let us apply Heidegger's

language to the problem frame we just described. The attitudes we have toward death need to be

13 | P a g e
understood in Heidegger's language as "understanding attunements." (Heidegger, 1963) These

are types of future-oriented awareness that also contain a heedfulness or emotional investment.

The type of understanding attunements we can have, that derive directly from the primordial

structure of Dasein are existential possibilities. But these possibilities can take on an abstract or

theoretical aspect because the given facts of our existence limit our possibilities. The

understanding attunements that we can actually live through are existential possibilities. Those

existential modes of life which adequately express and reveal the true structure and possibilities

of human existence are authentic, while those modes which cover these over are inauthentic.

Hence, Heidegger's problem is to investigate Dasein primordially, yielding an existential analysis

that will in turn establish existential possibilities of our being toward death.

Heidegger claims in his book Being and Time; that the dasein attains

possibility of Being-a-whole, and the being towards death in such a way a hindrance in the life of

philosophizing. (Heidegger, 1963) Martin Heidegger says; “That the death defines the limit of

Dasein’s existence. Thus, structuring ontologically.” Henceforth, dasein has the capability to

know death as an empirical certainty and Existential possibility.

a. Empirical Certainty

“Dying is but not a matter of symptoms, but of actually being in process of dying,” we

speak dying not due to the person’s disease but actually we might know he may die because of

the condition of his being, the weakness. In such thing person will die not because of the disease

but he may die because, it is a reality to die. Just like what Heidegger said, “as soon as a man

comes to life he is at once old enough to die.” Death never chooses anyone, not on its status in

life, or in age, we will all die, that is certain. It is a matter of you owes death as a treasure.

“Death is certain for Dasein as soon as it is.” Being is born to die. Even though, death is a

14 | P a g e
reality, it is still not predictable. You are certain to die, but you are uncertain on how, when,

where, and why you die. Heidegger asserts “we cannot compute the certainty of death by

ascertaining how many cases of death we encounter.” It is given that Dasein will die, and it is an

empirical certainty. Dasein is finite and temporary, however if the Dasein will die particularly it

is still a matter of existential possibility and how it will occur.

b. Existential Possibility

After discussing that dasein may encounter death in empirical certainty, Heidegger also

writes “death must be understood as a possibility in the way we comfort ourselves towards it.

Dasein will surely experience the possibility of death. As Heidegger writes; “it gets lifted right

out of the possibility of experiencing this transition and of understanding it as something

experienced.” It was in the dasein’s free will on how he will face death. I such a way how dasein

will act on his death. Heidegger uses the term possibility to indicate what Dasein can be, or

become. Free will of the Dasein as a tool to determine the possibility of his death.

F. Being-towards-authentic-life
Certainly we should not brood over death in order to be authentic. Nor should we actively

await it, as if it were an event. Rather, an authentic being toward death must make it

understood as possibility, cultivated as possibility, and endured as possibility in our relation to

it." (Heidegger, 1963) The proper relation to death is essentially a self-relation that discloses

Dasein to itself and deepens and intensifies the structure of care. It is essential to this relation that

we understand death as possibility. Heidegger calls this authentic mode anticipation, which

literally connotes running ahead. Anticipation means confronting by actively revealing,

disclosing, death as possibility. This is an authentic mode because it is appropriate to the very

15 | P a g e
being of Dasein: "Being toward death is the anticipation of a potentiality of being of that being

whose kind is anticipation itself." (Heidegger, 1963) In Dasein's disclosing of itself to itself in

anticipation, certain phenomenological results come to the fore that Heidegger simply describes

rather than proves. Compressed for brevity, these include the following. (1) Death individualizes

Dasein, revealing that being-with others ultimately fails when one's inmost potentiality of being

is at stake. Dasein, in facing death is thereby freed from "the they." (Heidegger, 1963) (2) In

becoming free from the inauthentic modes of the they, Dasein becomes freed for one’s own

death. Further, Dasein comes to understand its own death, as imminent and not to be bypassed,

opens up all the possibilities lying before it as possibilities to be taken up freely, apart from the

influences of the they. (3) In taking up the certainty of death, Dasein confronts a form of

certainty that belongs to something not of the order of objectively present things. This certainty

is in regard to Dasein itself, it understands itself to be of this "other" order of things. (4) Dasein

does not ignore either the certainty or the indefiniteness of death. In anticipation, Dasein holds

itself "in passionate, anxious, freedom toward death.” (5) In being freed from the they, and

individualized in death, Dasein is able to understand "the potentialities of being of the others"

and existing existentially "as a whole potentiality of being". (Heidegger, 1963) In other words,

the recognition of individual death does not separate us from each other, but forms the basis for

authentic human interaction through mutual regard.

a. What does it mean to be Authentic? (Campbell, 2017)

“Authenticity,” as defined about 13 years ago by psychologists Brian Goldman and

Michael Kernis, is “the unimpeded operation of one's true or core self in one's daily enterprise.”

At its root, authenticity requires self-knowledge and self-awareness. Authentic people accept

their strengths and weaknesses. They are accountable. Thus, understanding our weakness and

16 | P a g e
imperfection makes us authentic in the way that we acknowledge death as the end of our being

human in this world. Authenticity is about being genuine and real, says Mike Robbins, a

corporate trainer and the author of Be Yourself, Everyone Else Is Already Taken. Being real and

genuine in the sense that we accept our death with full understanding and with full heart. It

allows us to connect deeply with others because it requires us to be transparent and vulnerable.

“It is important because it liberates us from the pressures of always trying to be something else,

always trying to be perfect,”

b. Self-awareness is the Cornerstone of Authenticity (Campbell, 2017)

Authenticity starts when you set the intention to be genuine. Then, there must be an

awareness of what that looks and feels like, and a willingness to act in accordance with your

genuine nature even when it feels vulnerable. When you live with this kind of self-awareness,

decisions are easier because you are free to choose things that move you closer to your values.

You are able to stand, because you can accept your humanity. You can also embrace your talents

and abilities. Authenticity may also require you to make unpopular decisions or to acknowledge

aspects of yourself that you’d rather hide away, but in the end it allows you to live a more open,

honest and engaged life. This seemingly intangible quality of authenticity, then, has very tangible

outcomes. Authentic people feel better, according to research by Kernis, Goldman and others.

They are more resilient, less likely to turn to self-destructive habits for solace. They tend to be

purposeful in their choices and more likely to follow through on their goals. If, instead, you find

yourself feeling fragmented, unhappy, bored, stressed, stuck or uninspired, it could be a sign

that you aren’t acting authentically. That’s something you can change right now.

17 | P a g e
 III. Conclusion

When Heidegger asks about the meaning of being, he is not asking about abstract ideas, but

about something very direct and immediate. In the opening pages of his book, he says that the

meaning of our being is must be tied up with time; (Heidegger, Being and Time) we are

essentially temporal beings. When we are born, we find ourselves in the world as if we had been

thrown here on a trajectory we have not chosen. We simply find that we have come to exist, in

an ongoing world that pre-existed us, so that at our birth we are presented with a particular

historical, material, and spiritual environment. We attempt to make sense of this world by

engaging in various pastimes for example; we might learn philosophy or theology, attempt to

find true love, or decide to build ourselves a house.

Through this time consuming projects we literally project ourselves towards different

possible futures; we define our existence. However, sometimes we become aware that there is an

outermost limit to all our projects, a point at which everything we plan will come to an end,

whether finished or unfinished. This point is the point of our death. In his book Being and Time

we can observed that Heidegger’s technical vocabulary is famously difficult to understand, but

this is largely because he is attempting to explore complex philosophical questions in a concrete

and non-abstract way; he wants to relate our actual experience. To say that; the furthest horizon

of our being is death, is to say something about what it is like to live a human life. The only

proof that an individual understands existence is the understanding and acceptance of death.

While a child can understand the physical need for food, the known consequences of not eating

are limited to hunger and illness. Death is a complex concept, beyond the grasp of an immature

existence.

18 | P a g e
 The moment one accepts death is the point when essence is brought into focus. Knowing that

life is finite reinforces the importance of all further decisions. Poor choices result in the

"Existential Guilt" of failure. For the existentialist, the worst of natural sins is a failure to define

the self-using free will. Guilt cannot be avoided, however, because all individuals fail to take

some action, to make some choices." Understanding Being-towards-death is a manifestation that

you accept that you are finite and temporal to this world and with this understanding we are

accepting the fact that we are just human being created by a supreme being. With this it is

obvious that when you are able to accept and understand your immortality it will lead you to

freeing yourself from misery and distress, and it will lead you to an authentic living and

authentic life, that is being-towards-authentic life. I would like to end this with this simple essay

about death that explains how should we live in this world; that is to live life that matters because

we are finite and temporal, the only thing that people will remember us is the things that we have

done in this world.

Whether you are ready or not,

someday your life will come to an end.
There will be no more sunrises, no minutes, hours or days.
All the things you collected,
whether treasured or forgotten, will pass to someone else.
Your wealth, fame, and temporal power will shrivel to irrelevance.
It will not matter what you owned or what you were owed.
Your judges, resentments, frustrations, and jealousies will finally disappear.
So, too, your hopes, ambitions, plans, and to-do lists will expire.
The wins and losses that once seemed so important will fade away.
It won’t matter whether you were beautiful or brilliant,
even your gender and skin color will be irrelevant.
So what will matter? How will the value of your days be measured?
What will matter is not what you bought, but what you built; not what you got, but what you
gave. What will matter is not your success, but your significance. What will matter is not what
you learned, but what you taught.
What will matter is every act of integrity, compassion, courage, or sacrifice that enriched,
empowered, or encouraged others to emulate your example.
What will matter is not your competence, but your character.

19 | P a g e
 What will matter is not how many people you knew, but how many will feel a lasting loss
when you are gone.
What will matter is not your memories, but the memories that live in those who love you.
What will matter is how long you will be remembered, by whom, and for what.
Living a life that matters doesn’t happen by accident. It’s not a matter of circumstances, but of
choice. Choose to live a life that matters. (Anonymous)

20 | P a g e
References:

Anonymous. (n.d.). Live a Life that Matters. 1114 Quezon City: M. M. Philippines.

Audi, R. (1999). The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy. Cambridge: Cambridge University

Press.

Campbell, P. (2017, September 14). Learn How to Truly be Yourself. Retrieved from Learn How

to Truly be Yourself: http://life.gaiam.com/article/5-ways-live-authentic-life

Cultural, N. (2017, September 15). Wikipedia. Retrieved from Wikipedia:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/

Fieser, S. E. (2008). Socrates to Sartre and Beyond: History of Philosophy. New York: McGraw

Hill Inc.

Heidegger, M. (1963). Being and Time. London: SCM Press Lt.

Heidegger, M. (n.d.). Being and Time. London: SCM Press Lt.

Langan, T. (1959). The Meaning of Heidegger, a Critical Study of an Existentialist

Phenemonology. New York: Columbia University Press.

21 | P a g e