ABSTRACT
To summarize-the structure of being as it emerges from the foregoing considerations: each of us, exemplifying in his own as yet unreflexive and undifferentiated way the transcendental field of the by-itself, encounters the for-me which, under its aspects of opacity and inertia (productive in us of nausea, boredom and the like) leads to the construction of the transcendent in-itself, and then by inference of the for-itself; the form of this inference (i.e., the logical relation of the for-itself to the in-itself) proves to be negation. Ontological priority belongs to the in-itself, which is what it is, absolutely and timelessly. If the foritself is a negation of this, then it cannot be what it is, not at any rate where ‘is’ is construed as meaning participation in the kind of being exemplified by the in-itself.
