At the philosophical school of existentialism’s core lies an understanding of the consciousness that leads to a new outlook on life. The consciousness is understood to be different from anything material in this universe and existentialists view it as being “for-itself,” that is, able to be aware of its own self. Thus, with the unconscious part of the universe and the conscious part of the universe, the existentialist Jean-Paul Sartre created the unique categories of being, transcendence and facticity, and beings, “being-in-itself” and “being-for-itself” (Being and Nothingness 78). Sartre continues on to define the consciousness as having interactions between itself, beings-in-itselfs (being-in-itselfs is different from being-in-themselves, this is not a
…show more content…
H. van Hateren builds on this idea of language and consciousness being connected by suggesting that communication between organisms creates an “intrinsic meaning” that evolves into a consciousness (van Hateren 985). Van Hateren intentionally makes the term “intrinsic meaning” vague as to be “used in the broad sense of value, import, significance, and purpose;” thus, Sartre’s existentialism can find refuge in van Hateren’s “intrinsic meaning” and establish a firmer foundation (985). When considering why humans are the only being to have a consciousness, even though many animals also possess a form of communication, van Hateren introduces the idea of “formative communication,” communication that enhances the “intrinsic meaning” of an organism by communicating with another organism (986). “Formative communication” has been developed by humanity through years of evolution and allows man to capitalize on the “intrinsic meaning” to form a consciousness (986). While it is not van Hateren’s intention to provide existentialist phenomenology an evolutionary post upon which it can “hang its hat,” his theory provides an understanding as to why communication could serve an important role in validating
H. van Hateren builds on this idea of language and consciousness being connected by suggesting that communication between organisms creates an “intrinsic meaning” that evolves into a consciousness (van Hateren 985). Van Hateren intentionally makes the term “intrinsic meaning” vague as to be “used in the broad sense of value, import, significance, and purpose;” thus, Sartre’s existentialism can find refuge in van Hateren’s “intrinsic meaning” and establish a firmer foundation (985). When considering why humans are the only being to have a consciousness, even though many animals also possess a form of communication, van Hateren introduces the idea of “formative communication,” communication that enhances the “intrinsic meaning” of an organism by communicating with another organism (986). “Formative communication” has been developed by humanity through years of evolution and allows man to capitalize on the “intrinsic meaning” to form a consciousness (986). While it is not van Hateren’s intention to provide existentialist phenomenology an evolutionary post upon which it can “hang its hat,” his theory provides an understanding as to why communication could serve an important role in validating