Dasein and inter-esse, or how event is design

0.51 MB·English

by  Anton Heinrich Rennesland

Inscriptions
–contemporary thinking on art, philosophy and psycho-analysis–
https://inscriptions.tankebanen.no/
Title: Dasein and inter-esse, or how event is design
Author: Anton Heinrich Rennesland
Section: Academic articles
Abstract: I provide an insight into Being’s self-realization, emphasizing inter-esse as event as a
twofold designal quality in resoluteness and a propensity toward the other. Primarily
working on Henk Oosterling’s Premsela lecture, I consider Dasein as an event realized
through what Oosterlink captures as the inter-esse, a realization of firstly unreflective
everydayness and secondly one’s craftsmanship which fills the spaces between individuals.
Being becomes self-reflexive through intersections; inter-esse’s disclosiveness is the event in
dwelling. Dwelling makes possible an intersection of existence – a realization of everyday
life and of encountering both the human and nonhuman other – that fundamentally equates
Dasein with design. This I argue creates a pivotal perspective to consider how shared reality
is fundamentally a shaping of one’s existence in the world, how existence is a designing of
the world. Space constitutes the event for which Being discloses itself, that Dasein
re-understands itself through this designal quality.
Keywords: Dasein; design; event; space
©
Copyright 2022 Rennesland.
Correspondence: Anton Heinrich Rennesland, e: [email protected].
Received: 15 October, 2021.
Accepted: 18 November, 2021.
Published: 15 January, 2022.
How to cite: Rennesland, Anton Heinrich. “Dasein and inter-esse, or how event is design.”
Inscriptions 5, no. 1 (January 2022): 56-63.
This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution
4.0 International License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is
permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the
original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No
use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
inter-esse
Dasein and , or how event is design
Anton Heinrich Rennesland1
Abstract
I provide an insight into Being’s self-realization, emphasizing inter-esse as event as a
twofold designal quality in resoluteness and a propensity toward the other. Primarily
working on Henk Oosterling’s Premsela lecture, I consider Dasein as an event realized
through what Oosterlink captures as the inter-esse, a realization of firstly unreflective
everydaynessandsecondlyone’scraftsmanshipwhichfillsthespacesbetweenindividuals.
Being becomes self-reflexive through intersections; inter-esse’s disclosiveness is the
event in dwelling. Dwelling makes possible an intersection of existence – a realization
of everyday life and of encountering both the human and nonhuman other – that
fundamentally equates Dasein with design. This I argue creates a pivotal perspective to
consider how shared reality is fundamentally a shaping of one’s existence in the world,
how existence is a designing of the world. Space constitutes the event for which Being
discloses itself, that Dasein re-understands itself through this designal quality.
Keywords: Dasein;design;event;space
On 1 April 2009, Henk Oosterling delivered the direction Heidegger proceeds with follow-
the fifth Premsela lecture entitled “Dasein als ing his introduction of such; sections 12 and
design Of: Moet design de wereld redden?” 13 of his Sein und Zeit present the essential el-
(“Dasein as Design Or: Must Design Save the ements to this state of Dasein – in-the-world,
World?”) attheRoyalTropicalInstituteinAm- entity, and Being-in – yet is ultimately followed
sterdam. ThePremselalectureseriesareannual by a hermeneutical approach to what it is to
addresses given in honor of Benno Premsela, be subjected to knowing the world.4 Sloter-
a leading Dutch designer, to discourse on the dijk began work on this with his spherology
current state of design.2 What is extraordi- as his own recovery of that untrodden path
nary in Oosterling’s lecture is his catchy as- of Heidegger. Being and space are worthy of
sociation of Dasein with design. This play of our consideration yet not solely on an analyt-
words presents a serious consideration of Pe- ical level but rather an existential one, which
ter Sloterdijk’s much earlier emphasis on the is where Oosterling’s lecture comes in since
in-ness of being-in-the-world.3 The focus is he portrays a distinctive element of existence:
1 DepartmentofPhilosophy,UniversityofSantoTomas,Phillipines.
2 See“Premselalecture,”https://premsela.hetnieuweinstituut.nl/en/activities/premsela-lecture.
3 SeeHenkOosterling,“DaseinasDesign,Or: MustDesignSavetheWorld?,”trans. LauraMartz,Premselalec-
ture2009(Premsela2009),3andPeterSloterdijk,SpheresI:Bubbles,Microspherology,trans. WielandHoban(South
Pasadena,CA:Semiotext(e),2011),333ff.
4 Cf. MartinHeidegger,BeingandTime,trans. JohnMacquarrieandEdwardRobinson(NewYork: Harper&
Row,1962),79andSloterdijk,Bubbles,340-341.
56 January 2022 – Volume 5
Rennesland Dasein and inter-esse
being designs space, being is design in space. nothavetorelyonanyintermediaryinvarious
What I seek to do in this essay is to present transactions(realestateandthestockmarketto
theinter-relationalcharacterofDasein’sdesig- nameafew)andcaneven,withagreatamount
nal quality; I present the two ways Oosterling of perseverance, become an interior designer
framesinter-esseyetgobeyondhispresentation andacityplannerthroughintersectionsofme-
to correlate these with Heidegger’s association dia. Such an admission is not to trivialize these
of existence and dwelling. Though Ooster- professions but rather to show how one today
ling’s equation of Dasein and design already isdirectlybroughtclosertoothers. Theformer
provides a differed reading of Dasein, what I role of the genius as the font of knowledge has
wish to do is to take this a step further and as- slowly been lost in the rubble of interconnec-
sociate design to a twofold understanding: a tivity, interdisciplinary study, and the internet.
resoluteness in face of the ambiguity found in Designisaneed,yetitismorethanmerefunc-
everydayness but at the same time a renewed tion. It is our capacity to make sense of the
attention precisely to the everyday in which world we live in.
relations to others arise. Such an association In raising several elements in the previous
is what I wish to portray as an event (of en- paragraph, my hope was to stress the ubiqui-
counter) in this designal state of Dasein. This tous prefix inter for me to proceed with Oost-
is what I ultimately tie to the concept of event erling’s inter-esse which he supposes as the in-
(Ereignis)as“thewayinwhichthegivennessof terior of Dasein qua being-in-between.7 He
givenbeings–includingourselves–comesinto supposes a fundamental realization of Dasein’s
questionforus”whichinfaceofcontemporary authenticity as this natural propensity; a pro-
questions to design is a double “apocalypse” as portionate realization of one’s resoluteness and
revelation and disaster to Dasein qua design.5 a greater degree of care (Sorge).8 Oosterling
Oosterling begins his lecture by stating the works on Sloterdijk’s presentation of the re-
commodified and consumed status of design. lational character of being-in-the-world. Al-
Inaworldthathasequatedthedesignalquality though Heidegger discusses Dasein in the sin-
with mere functionality, design is a need.6 A gular, Sloterdijk’s spherelogy unfolds as an in-
brief narrative then follows of design’s devel- sight into the systems or spheres which sup-
opment to exhaustion (signaled by the ‘end of port Dasein.9 We therefore have this progres-
art thesis’) and the seemingly necessary shift to sioninterminology: frombeing-in-the-world
today’s multi-media amalgamation. We cur- (Heidegger) to being-in-spheres (Sloterdijk)
rently experience design multifacetedly from to being-in-common or being-in-between
being mere consumers to designers. Design is (Oosterling).10 Being-in-the-world is funda-
a need, yes, but it is one that I myself am able mentally a tempting state of Dasein.11 How-
to address. This is evidenced by how one does ever, I ascribe temptation not solely in relation
5 RichardPolt,“Ereignis,”ACompaniontoHeidegger,ed. HubertL.DreyfusMarkA.Wrathall(Malden,MA:
BlackwellPublishing,2005),383-384.
6 SeeOosterling,“DaseinasDesign,”1.
7 SeeIbid.,5.
8 SeeHeidegger,BeingandTime,238.
9 See Allan Parsons, “Sloterdijk,” Course Compendium (accessed 02 November 2021), https://narrative-
environments.github.io/CourseCompendium/Sloterdijk.htmlandOosterling,“DaseinasDesign,”5.
10 SeeHenkOosterlingandEwaPlonowskaZiarek,“GeneralIntroduction”inIntermedialities: Philosophy,Arts,
Politics,eds. HenkOosterlingandEwaPlonowskaZiarek(Plymouth: Rowman&LittlefieldPublishers,2011),
1-2.
11 SeeHeidegger,BeingandTime,221.
January 2022 – Volume 5 57
Dasein and inter-esse Rennesland
to the world but to the state of Being-In. Re- to one’s relation with others yet more funda-
gardless of world, sphere, or in-betweenness, mentally with one’s very self. It is an embrace
there is this in-ness that is tempting for an of two perceptions of clarity (literally, Zwei-
individual to simply fall into. It is a tempta- deutligkeit) of how to live life. This leads us to
tiontonotmakesenseofbeing-in. Oosterling realizeone’sprecariousnessevidentinone’sloss
does not mention this, yet I would posit that it in the rubble of meaning: one has become a
is against this backdrop that designing ought strangertooneself,thelossofhomelessnessand
to be understood for as inter-esse is being-in- rootedness.15 In a rather strong way of saying
between, designing conditions us to resist the it, it is a reduction of Dasein to Anybody, a
temptation to be part of Anybody (das Man). reduction to the state of being fake, of being
With this in mind, we approach how Ooster- everyone yet no one.16
ling presents inter-esse: a realization of firstly This quotidian state of ambiguity is ram-
unreflective everydayness and secondly one’s ified today by multimedia, empty messages
craftsmanship which fills the spaces between multiplied through various channels. We may
individuals.12 This two-tiered development thusreadOosterling’spresentationofbeing-in-
conjures a different approach to being in the between as a critical counterweight to radical
world and how design plays a role in this. mediocrity. In face of the abundance of multi-
On the first level, we confront a seemingly media,thisnewformofbeingismindfulofthe
quotidian and non-reflective mood of radical spaceforacriticalencounterwiththeother. It
mediocrity.13 This type of existence banks on is not a passage of one into another but rather
the amplification of time over space via mul- a between that peculiarly relies on the tensions
timedia’s proliferation through various plat- less of time and more of space.17 Contrary to
forms, highlighted by the speed at which mes- thestateofhomelessness,suchanintermediary
sagestraveltodaybecauseoftheinternet. How- bringsoneoutofoneselftowardtheother. De-
ever, this type of hyper-engagement with me- sign is understood here as an unthrowing in
diacomesatthepriceoffallingintoambiguity. the state of thrownness.18 Literally, a little play
We are reminded of Heidegger’s depiction of of words reveals to us how design (Entwurf)
such as part of one’s in-ness alongside idle talk standsinoppositiontofallenness(Geworfenheit).
and curiosity.14 This state of ambiguity refers One is brought out of oneself to un-fall yet is
12 SeeOosterling,“DaseinasDesign,”6-8.
13 SeeIbid.,6.
14 SeeHeidegger,BeingandTime,217-219.
15 See Martin Heidegger, Discourse on Thinking, trans. John M. Anderson and E. Hans Freund (New York:
Harper&RowPublishers,1966),48-49.
16 SeeHeidegger,BeingandTime,165andRomualdoAbulad,“FilipinoPostmodernity: QuoVadis?,”Kritike13,
no. 2(December2019): 44,https://www.kritike.org/journal/issue_25/abulad2_december2019.pdf.
17 SeeHenkOosterling,“ACultureofthe‘Inter’JapaneseNotionsmaandbasho,”inSensusCommunisinMulti-
andInterculturalPerspective. OnthePossibilityofCommonJudgementsinArtsandPolitics,eds. HeinzKimmerleand
HenkOosterling(Würzburg: Königshausen&Neumann,2000),70. Oosterlingpositshowthisnotionofinteris
similartoDeleuze’sbecomingwhichrecognizesatraversalofplanesofimmanceswithinatranscendentalfield
ratherthanameretransitionfromonetoanother. (SeeGillesDeleuze,PureImmanence: EssaysonALife,trans.
AnneBoyman[NewYork: Urzone,2001],25-26.) WheretheydifferthoughisthatOosterling’sapproachtothis
transcendentalfield,toborrowDeleuze’sterm,isinrelationtoapolitical(inter)ontology(esse)inrelationtothe
GesamtkunstwerkratherthanametaphysicalanalysisthatwouldbemorepropertoDeleuze. (SeeHenkOosterling
andEwaPlonowskaZiarek,“IntroductiontoPartThree,”Intermedialities,115.)
18 SeeOosterling,“DaseinasDesign,”3.
19 SeeHeidegger,BeingandTime,233.
58 January 2022 – Volume 5
Rennesland Dasein and inter-esse
not led to homelessness. Anxiety for Heideg- accurately describes the cubistic
ger is the state of uncanniness (unheimlichkeit), mirrors of the Show Shoppes but
of losing one’s sense of dwelling.19 This is the not the forms of typical Bauhaus
state of unease in face of the in-ness of the objects which were the honest re-
world. WhatIbringforwardindiscussingthis sultofastudyoftheirfunction,the
isthisbridgetotheconceptofdwellingwhich material they were made of and
Oosterling does not proceed to. My reading the process by which they were
of this everydayness that is the ground of rad- manufactured. Modernisticistoo
ical mediocrity is the same everydayness that valuable a word to be sacrificed as
dwelling ought to be sourced from. In inter- a sloppy substitute for modern.
esse,oneisbroughtoutofoneselfandisableto The Bauhaus had almost noth-
dwell. ing to do with streamlining, or it
Explaining this leads us to consider the sec- was not ordinarily engaged in de-
ond level of inter-esse. In his Premsela lec- signingobjectswhichhadtomove
ture, Oosterling specifically deals with crafts- efficiently at high speed.21
manship in a particular context of the en-
counter of design and the avant-garde in the McAndrew opposes the observation of critics
Gesamtkunstwerk through the impressions of that the Bauhaus was a font of modernistic ele-
theBauhausandDeStijlortheencounterofart ments that streamlined design. He tries to cor-
and Architecture (with the capital A) through rectsuchapositionandassertsthattheBauhaus
Hendrik Berlage and Theo van Doesburg.20 upheldamodernattemptatunderscoringfunc-
What we source from this is how their partic- tion in this order: the form’s determination
ular craftsmanship differs from mere produc- from the object’s use, the object’s materiality,
tivity especially in the latter section of Oost- the process of manufacture, then its creation.
erling’s lecture in which he criticizes the mass McAndrewendshisshortpiecewiththepraise
consumption of design. Craftsmanship as the that the Bauhaus creations “were never meant
encounter of design and the avant-garde or of to be ‘in style’ or ‘the last word of 1926,’ but
art and Architecture signifies an intersection were honest and often distinguished.”22 Its dis-
between design and meaning-formation. This tinction is the mark of the Bauhaus craft. I
is a rather vague concept in Oosterling’s lec- use this point on the Bauhaus craft as represen-
ture which I make tangible by referring to the tative of Oosterling’s second consideration of
reaction of John McAndrew, curator of the inter-esse. It is an illustration of the remarkable
Museum of Modern Art’s Department of Ar- distinctionthattheencounterofdesignandthe
chitecture and Industrial Art, to the reception avant-garde or Architecture entails. It is not a
of the 1938 Bauhaus exhibition: pseudo attempt at apprehending everyday life
but rather a determinate and conscious effort
Modernistic, then, should apply at meaning-formation.
to works which imitate superfi- My bridge from Oosterling’s lecture to Hei-
ciallytheformsof modernart,re- degger’s notion of dwelling is further ramified
ducing them to decorative man- by this second level. Craft is opposed to mere
nerisms. “Modernistic decoration” production for the latter implies speed while
20 SeeOosterling,“DaseinasDesign,”8-9
21 JohnMcAndrew,“‘Modernistic’and‘Streamlined’,”TheBulletinoftheMuseumofModernArt5,no. 6(Dec
1938). Emphasisretained.
22 Ibid.
January 2022 – Volume 5 59
Dasein and inter-esse Rennesland
the former, a certain habituation (Gewöhnung) life’s designal quality.
that does not bank on time but space. Gewöh- For the remaining part of this piece, we are
nung itself implies the space where one dwells brought to ponder on the event in this desig-
(Wohnung)or habituates (Wohnen). This is rem- naltheory. Oosterlingbrieflysketchesdesign’s
iniscent of Heidegger’s emphasis on dwelling self-critical history following the end of the
especially against the backdrop of the chaos of guild system in the late 1700s: design’s em-
thrownness in the world. His words are clear: braceofindustrialvalues(“Howdoesitlook?”),
“to build is in itself already to dwell.”23 He its association to status through its link to mass
emphasizes that both words (build and dwell) media (“What does it mean to me?”), and the
have the same root, bauen, which eventually shifttointeractivityormultimedia(“Howdoes
spells out as building and dwelling but also as itworkbetweenus?”);suchaprogressionraises
preserving and cherishing. It is a cherishing threequestionstoindicatethecommonunder-
of the world and of one’s everydayness – the standingofdesignasadevelopmentfromform,
intersection which serves as the entry into a content, to context or from syntax to seman-
habituated life. My own take of Oosterling’s tics to pragmatics.25 Oosterling outlines de-
craftsmanship is this habituated life in the ev- sign’s reception by society which underscores
eryday, a type of dwelling, of cherishing and the fact of design’s status as a need. Yet, we
preserving the everyday. From Heidegger’s ought not to merely reduce design to what is
perspective,thrownnessisrepresentativeofthe common to all for it is the expenditure that is
chaosintheworld,yetthischaosismadesense common not the inter-esse that makes design
throughdesign,astheaboveetymologicalplay fundamentally what it is.
reveals. Inter-esse once again is being-in-between.
Therefore, I would say that inter-esse stands It is the unravelling of design as the event of
as the intersection of design and everyday life, the equation of existence and design through
of care and dwelling. It is not about traversing a critical consciousness. This is why the last
or streamlining experiences but about cherish- question in design’s development (“How does
ing them and finding meaning in what one itworkbetweenus?”) servesasthelinktoHei-
is doing. Thus, Oosterling lastly points out degger’s consideration of event. It would be
how responsibility is the hallmark of crafts- toostrenuoustoprovideastraightforwarddefi-
manship.24 It is a responsibility not just for nitionofEreignis inthesenseofself-unfolding,
oneselforforcompensationsforone’scraftbut but I wish to frame this in relation to dwelling.
rather a responsibility toward humanity since Dasein as design may be understood between
design is a fundamental need and one’s craft beyng – not as ousia which is common to all
contributes to design in toto. Craft emerges – and the fourfold’s balance in dwelling.26 I
when the designer is responsible for one’s de- begin with the first point. What is common
signand,similartotheprocessobservedinthe to all is design’s consumption, yet this remains
Bauhaus’design,ismindfulofaproduct’sinter- an important feature since radical mediocrity
sections with life as a whole when one realizes provides us the vantage of everyday life. It is
23 MartinHeidegger,“Building,Dwelling,Thinking,”inMartinHeidegger,BasicWritingfromBeingandTime
(1927)toTheTaskofThinking(1964),ed. DavidFarrellKrell(NewYork: HarperCollinsPublisher,1993),348.
24 SeeOosterling,“DaseinasDesign,”12.
25 SeeIbid.,2-3.
26 Cf. Martin Heidegger, Contributions to Philosophy (of the Event), trans. Richard Rojcewicz and Daniela
Vallega-Neu(Bloomington:IndianaUniversityPress,2012),ğ34andHeidegger,“Building,Dwelling,Thinking,”
352-353.
60 January 2022 – Volume 5
Rennesland Dasein and inter-esse
through this perspective of the quotidian that simplyitsrelationalstatustoanotherbutrather
design can be understood, that life’s designal itsresolutenessinfaceofchaosandarealization
quality can come to the fore through craft’s of the tensions within inter-esse.
relations. There is enormous potential in the I bring Lefebvre’s appraisal of the everyday
quotidian which profoundly informs design, in the discussion as a shift from Heidegger’s
be it in a literal sense through the creation of usageofeverydaylifeasthepublicnessofAny-
gadgets or furniture to a socio-political plane body to highlight the evental opportunity in
of urban planning. Everyday life should not the everyday. Oosterling claims, “Design is a
be reduced to the biological function or be as- gift you give your relations, and, as such, al-
sociated with simply a mindless observance of waysaccompaniedbyperformance.”29 Theev-
trivial activities. The thinker of everyday life, erydayisfulloftheseperformances(incontrast
Henri Lefebvre, has words worthy of serious to simply understanding them as movements)
attention: that contribute to design in toto. Design, thus,
is not merely the aestheticization of material
The concept of everydayness does components or the imposition of form over
not therefore designate a system, matter. It is inter-esse in that it moves beyond
butratheradenominatorcommon a singular ousia or essence and an understand-
to existing systems including judi- ing of this essence’s existence between diverse
cial, contractual, pedagogical, fis- ones. Parenthetically, this reminds us of how
cal, and police systems. Banality? Sloterdijk defines being as the sum of all trans-
Whyshouldthestudyofthebanal actions.30 Although Sloterdijk’s take on this
itself be banal? Are not the surreal, intermediary is in relation to his psychopolit-
the extraordinary, the surprising, ical thrust between debt and generosity, it is
even the magical, also part of the providential for us to consider how the every-
real? Why wouldn’t the concept day can unfold.
of everydayness reveal the extraor- The everyday is where the possibility of the
dinary in the ordinary?27 second point arises; dwelling is possible once
the everyday is given attention to. My men-
I add this remark from Lefebvre to bring us
tion of the event (Ereignis) here is a rewriting
beyond Oosterling’s presentation. As beings-
of it in relation to design. Ereignis showcases
in-common, we partake in Being, or rather
the event as design not from a shared entity
Being is realized through a shared-ness of ev-
but rather as a realization of the tensions of
eryday life. Yet, as Heidegger distinguishes
forces in life. It is a gift in that it “establishes
Dasein and Mitsein, we must not immediately
or confirms a relationship” yet is ambiguous
conflate the two. Mitsein is a characteristic of
in requiring to be in proportion to the rela-
Dasein.28 Dasein’s resoluteness conditions its
tion and invites a certain sense of exchange in
quality of relation qua Mitsein. I invoke this
same proportion.31 Design is fundamentally
difference to elucidate a commentary on Da-
rooted in one’s resoluteness in making sense
sein as design. Dasein’s designal quality is not
27 HenriLefebvre,“TheEverydayandEverydayness,”“TheEverydayandEverydayness.” YaleFrenchStudies73,
EverydayLife(1987): 8. https://doi.org/10.2307/2930193.
28 SeeHeidegger,BeingandTime,157.
29 Oosterling,“DaseinasDesign,”13.
30SeePeterSloterdijk,RageandTime:APsychopoliticalInvestigation,trans.MarioWenning(NewYork:Columbia
UniversityPress,2010),30.
31 Oosterling,“DaseinasDesign,”13.
January 2022 – Volume 5 61
Dasein and inter-esse Rennesland
of the ambiguity and thrownness of existence. only when the understanding of life’s designal
It is a realization of the relational character of quality turns reflective does one understand
each individual, a relation to beyng, to oneself, inter-esse.
to others, and even to the nonhuman. These What this provides us is an understanding
are various relations that cannot be reduced or of design that is dialectically engaged with the
identified to each other yet require a certain everyday. The event is that realization of the
sense of balance among them. Ereignis is the design’s disclosure through the inter-esse, the
twin occurrence of the realization of one’s res- intersections of Being with itself on an exis-
oluteness in face of ambiguity and thrownness tential – the everyday – level. It is through
and of one’s inter-relationality not just with the everyday that design arises in how each
others but with the whole of existence. The orders oneself and also through craft that is di-
event is the moment of disclosure. It is for this alectically affirmed by the crafter and by the
reason I associate it to dwelling as the enown- recipient of the craft. Oosterling reminds us
ing of one’s relations within and without the that “everyone is a designer, even though the
interplay of forces. gesamtkunstwerk remains unfinished. Every-
I conclude this piece with a clearing: I have one’s life is thrown-design, however unintel-
deliberately delayed providing a singular def- ligent.”34 We are all in the world, yet a total
inition to design throughout this piece for I intersectional design is yet unfinished. Life’s
first sought to fortify the everyday as its nec- designalqualityisdisclosedthroughitsevental
essary intermediary. Such is the reason that state: beings-in-common. “Design,then,equates
OosterlingprovidestheequationofDaseinand tomakingdecisionsaboutforminordertolib-
design, and although I begin with his lecture, erate ourselves from the arbitrariness of life.”35
I go beyond it through an intersection with This creates a pivotal perspective to consider
Heidegger’s dwelling, my presentation of a how shared reality is fundamentally a shaping
Bauhaus observation, and a shift of the every- of one’s existence in the world, how existence
dayfromHeideggertoLefebvre. Furthermore, is a designing of the world, a movement from
I liken the equation of Dasein and design to Heidegger’s everydayness captivated by Any-
the moment of Ereignis to underscore a twin body to Lefebvre’s everydayness with an ut-
occurrenceofdesignasresolutenessandanun- mostpotentialofdisclosure. Intheend,weare
throwing mindful of the other. I have done leftnotsimplywiththeequationofDaseinand
so with the idea of Heidegger in mind of a design but their association to Ereignis, finding
turn from an association to Anybody to a par- ourselves at the inter-esse as the event of this
ticipation of Being in reality, validity, inquiry, equation.
and above all in care.32 I invoked a shift in un-
derstanding the everyday from Heidegger to References
Lefebvre as a turn from ambiguity to resolute-
Abulad, Romualdo. “Filipino postmodernity:
nesssincethis is required for“Dasein as design
quo vadis?” Kritike 13, no. 2 (December
[tobecome]mediallyreflective”for“creativity
2019). https://www.kritike.org/journal/is-
no longer lies within individuals but between
sue_25/abulad2_december2019.pdf.
them.”33 To design is fundamentally to exist
Heidegger, Martin. Basic Writing from Being
and to be conscious of such an existence. It is
32 SeeHeidegger,BeingandTime,26-27and227.
33 Oosterling,“DaseinasDesign,”15.
34 Ibid.,18.
35 Ibid.,4.
62 January 2022 – Volume 5
and Time (1927) to The Task of Thinking Perspective. On the Possibility of Common
(1964). Edited by David Farrell Krell. New Judgements in Arts and Politics, edited by
York: HarperCollins Publisher, 1993. Heinz Kimmerle and Henk Oosterling.
——. Being and Time. Translated by John Würzburg: Königshausen & Neumann,
Macquarrie and Edward Robinson. New 2000. 61-84.
York: Harper & Row, 1962. ——. “Dasein as design, or: must design save
——. Contributions to Philosophy (of the Event). the world?” Translated by Laura Martz.
Translated by Richard Rojcewicz and Premselalecture 2009. Premsela 2009.
Daniela Vallega-Neu. Bloomington: ——, and Ewa Plonowska Ziarek, eds.
Indiana University Press, 2012. Intermedialities: Philosophy, Arts, Politics.
——. Discourse on Thinking. Translated by Plymouth: Rowman & Littlefield
John M. Anderson and E. Hans Freund. Publishers, 2011.
New York: Harper & Row Publishers, Polt, Richard. “Ereignis”. In A Companion to
1966. Heidegger, edited by Hubert L. Dreyfus and
Lefebvre, Henri. “The everyday and Mark A. Wrathall. Malden, MA: Blackwell
everydayness.” Yale French Studies 73, Publishing, 2005. 375-391.
Everyday Life (1987): 7-11. Sloterdijk, Peter. Rage and Time: A
https://doi.org/10.2307/2930193. Psychopolitical Investigation. Translated by
McAndrew, John. “‘Modernistic’ and Mario Wenning. New York: Columbia
‘Streamlined’.” The Bulletin of the Museum University Press, 2010.
of Modern Art 5, no. 6 (Dec 1938). ——. Spheres I: Bubbles, Microspherology. Trans-
Oosterling, Henk. “A culture of the ‘inter’ lated by Wieland Hoban. South Pasadena,
Japanese notions ma and basho.” In Sensus CA: Semiotext(e), 2011.
Communis in Multi- and Intercultural
©
Copyright 2022 Rennesland.
Correspondence: Anton Heinrich Rennesland, e: [email protected].
Received: 15 October, 2021.
Accepted: 18 November, 2021.
Financial statement: The scholarship for this article was conducted at the author’s own
expense.
Competing interests: The author has declared no competing interests.
How to cite: Rennesland, Anton Heinrich. “Dasein and inter-esse, or how event is design.”
Inscriptions 5, no. 1 (January 2022): 56-63.