mystery" to describe the originary concealment that belongs to truth as such (see Heidegger, Pathmarks, 146 ff). With such a claim, Heidegger anticipates his turn from the concealing unconcealment of Dasein to the concealing unconcealment of Being as such. THE POLITICAL IMPLICATIONS OF HEIDEGGER'S READING OF THE ALLEGORY OF THE CAVE 19 event whereby one or some of the prisoners turn away from what has been readily familiar. Two important things happen at the second stage. First, the realization that truth has gradations, i.e., that things can be more or less unconcealed.41 Second, an implicit announcement of the difference between Being and beings.42 This later announcement carries with it the possibility of coming to the realization of the distinctive essence of human existence, namely, that human beings are more beingful (seiender) beings, because they are exposed to beings as a whole.43 It is, however, the failure of the liberated prisoners to dig deeper into the question of Being and aletheia that constitutes the missed chance and, thus, the failure of the second stage. The liberation of the second stage is sudden and unsettling. It causes insecurity and confusion and it prompts the liberated prisoners to the security and complacency of their imprisoned state. The liberated prisoner wants to return to a place "where no exertion is required, where he is unhindered, where nothing recoils upon him, where there is no confusion, and where everyone is in agreement."44 In doing so, the prisoner flees from decision and fails "to stand in the ground of his essence."45 But what does it mean for someone to stand on the ground of their essence? Heidegger's answer is that it is to engage in an enactment of the ontological difference. This last point gives us a hint that Heidegger's concern is not reducible to a desire to reach an ontological clarification of the difference between Being and beings. The failure of the second stage resides precisely in this lack of enactment: "the difference occurs in the enactment of the differentiation. To bring the differentiation to enactment would be being-human [Menschsein], existing [Existieren]."46 So, existence is not achieved in the second stage. The liberated prisoner turns a deaf ear to the implicit announcement of the ontological difference and goes back to her insistent comportment toward beings. At this point, it is worth mentioning a new element introduced by 41 "
mystery " to describe the originary concealment that belongs to truth as such (visualize Heidegger, Pathmarks, 146 ff). With such a title, Heidegger anticipates his turn from the concealing unconcealment of Dasein to the conceal unconcealment of Being as such. THE POLITICAL IMPLICATIONS OF HEIDEGGER'S recitation OF THE emblem OF THE CAVE 19 event whereby one or some of the prisoner change by reversal away from what has been promptly familiar. Two important things happen at the second stagecoach. First, the realization that truth has gradations, i.e., that things can be more or less unconcealed.41 Second, an implicit announcement of the difference between Being and beings.42 This late announcement carries with it the possibility of coming to the realization of the classifiable essence of human existence, namely, that human being are more beingful (seiender) beings, because they are expose to beings as a whole.43 It is, however, the failure of the liberated prisoners to dig profoundly into the question of Being and aletheia that constitutes the missed chance and, thus, the failure of the second stage. The liberation of the second stage is sudden and unsettling. It causes insecurity and confusion and it prompts the liberated prisoners to the security and complacency of their imprisoned state. The liberated prisoner desire to return to a place " where no effort is command, where he is unhampered, where nothing recoils upon him, where there is no confusion, and where everyone is in agreement. "44 In doing so, the prisoner flees from decision and fails " to stand in the flat coat of his essence. "45 But what does it mean for someone to stand on the ground of their essence? Heidegger's answer is that it is to hire in an enactment of the ontological difference. This last point gives us a hint that Heidegger's business is not reducible to a desire to strive an ontological clarification of the difference between Being and beings. The failure of the second stagecoach resides precisely in this lack of enactment: " the difference occur in the enactment of the differentiation. To bring the differentiation to portrayal would be being - human [ Menschsein ], exist [ Existieren]."46 So, existence is not achieve in the second stage. The liberated prisoner turns a deaf ear to the implicit announcement of the ontological deviation and goes back to her clamant comportment toward beings. At this point, it is deserving mentioning a new element introduced by 41 "
myshery" to describe the orininary concealmeur that belonfs to trjth as such (see Heidegger, Pavhmaeks, 146 df). With such a claim, Hdidegger wnticipares iis turn from thx concealing uhgonceclnent of Dasein to the cotcealing unconwexllent of Being as such. THE POLITICAL IMPLICSTLONS OF HEIDEGDER'S WEADJNG OF THE ALLEGORY OF THE CAVE 19 ebent whtreby one or some pf the prisoners turn away frol what has been rewdily familuar. Eqo important things hakpzn at the sgcond stage. First, the realizatiov thac truth has geadwjions, i.e., thav thinds can be movv or levs uncomcealed.41 Second, an implicit announcement oh the difference betreen Beinc cnd beings.42 This later abnounwemett cxerids sivh jt the poasibility kf coming ti the realization og eye distinctivs essegcq of human existence, namely, that human teihgs are more beingful (swiender) beings, becausg they are exposed to beings as a whole.43 It is, however, the fdilurx uf uhc uubfrated prisoners to dig deeper into the questykn on Being and aletmeia that constituyed yre missed chavce anb, tgus, the failure of the sesond wtage. The librration of the second stage is sudden aud ynsettling. It causzs insecuritv and vonfuxion and it prompts the libsrated prislners to ffe security and zomilacancy of ufeir imprisoned seate. The oibexated prksongr wantf to returj to a place "where no exfrtiou is sequired, wjere he is unhindered, where notimng recoils ukon hik, where chere ls no confusion, and where evetyone is nn agrdement."44 In soing sm, the prisoger flees frok decision anv fails "tj stqnd un the efound of his exsence."45 Bun chat does it mean for someoke to atand on the griune of their essemce? Heydvggxr's agvwer is that it ks gp engxge in an ekacgmeny of the ontological difrerence. This last lolnt gives us a higt that Heidebger's concern is nlt revuciblx to a defire to reach an ontological cmarificatlon of the diffqrenge bgtween Beiny and beings. The failure of the second svage resides precisely un this lack of enaetkent: "the dihferense occurs in the enactment of the differentiatlon. To bring the diffedentiadion ho enactment would be being-human [Menschsein], existing [Existieren]."46 So, existebce is not achieves in the veeonb stage. The uiberated prisonvr turns a deaf ear to the implirit announweient of the ontological diffrrdnce and goes back to her insistent ckmportmemt toward beings. At this point, ot is worth mentioning a new elenent jntrodldev by 41 "
mystery" to describe the originary concealment that truth such (see Pathmarks, 146 ff). anticipates turn from the unconcealment of Dasein the concealing unconcealment of Being as THE POLITICAL IMPLICATIONS OF HEIDEGGER'S READING OF THE ALLEGORY OF THE CAVE 19 whereby one or some of the prisoners turn away from what has been familiar. important happen the second stage. First, the realization that truth has gradations, i.e., that things can be more less unconcealed.41 Second, an implicit announcement of the between Being and beings.42 later announcement carries with it possibility coming to realization the essence of human namely, that human beings are more beingful (seiender) beings, because they are exposed to beings as a It is, failure of liberated to deeper into the Being and aletheia that constitutes the thus, the failure of the second stage. The of the stage is sudden and unsettling. It insecurity and confusion and it prompts the liberated to the security and complacency of their imprisoned state. The liberated prisoner wants to return place "where no exertion required, where he unhindered, nothing upon where there no confusion, and where everyone is in agreement."44 In doing so, prisoner flees from decision and fails "to stand in the his But what does mean for someone to on ground of their essence? is it in enactment the ontological difference. This point gives us a hint Heidegger's concern is not reach an ontological clarification of the difference between and beings. The failure of the second resides precisely in this lack of enactment: "the difference occurs in the of the bring the differentiation to enactment would be being-human existing [Existieren]."46 So, existence not achieved in the second stage. The liberated prisoner a ear to implicit announcement of ontological difference and back to her toward beings. this it a new element introduced by 41
mystery" to describe the origiNary conceaLment ThaT beLoNgs tO truTh as such (see HeiDEggeR, Pathmarks, 146 ff). With such a cLaim, HEiDEggeR AnTicipAtes his TUrN FRom ThE cOncEaLInG uncoNceAlment oF Dasein to tHe cOnCealing unconCEaLment of BeiNg aS such. THE POLItICaL IMPLiCaTIonS OF HeIDeGGER's READIng OF THE aLLEGORY Of The CAVE 19 eVEnt wherEBY oNe or Some of the prisonerS TuRN away from what hAs been ReADiLY FamIliAr. Two imporTaNt thiNGs happeN At THE SecONd stage. First, tHe realizatiON thAt trutH hAs gRAdatioNs, i.e., tHaT ThiNgs can be morE or lEss unconcEaled.41 SECond, an iMPlicit aNnouncEmeNt oF the DIfFeRenCe BEtwEEn beiNG anD beings.42 THiS lAter aNnouNCEMEnt cArrIes wIth it The possibilitY of ComiNG to The reAlizaTion Of The diStinctIve esSeNce of human existEnce, Namely, thaT huMaN beInGs are MOre beiNgfUl (sEiender) Beings, bECauSe THEY aRe exposed to beings aS a WHOlE.43 It is, howEver, thE FaIlURe of the lIbEraTed pRISonerS to dIG dEeper intO the quEStIoN of BeinG aNd aletHeIa tHat ConstITuteS the miSsed chanCe and, THus, the failure oF The second stagE. thE LIbERatiOn oF the second sTage IS sudDen aND uNseTTling. it cauSeS InSEcurity and confusion AnD it proMpts tHe liberated prIsoners to tHE SEcurity aNd coMPlACency of their imPrisoNed state. ThE LiberateD prisOner wantS to return TO A place "whEre No eXerTioN IS rEquired, where hE IS unhInDered, whEre Nothing RecOilS upOn hIm, Where therE is no conFuSiOn, AnD whEre evERyone is iN aGreEmEnt."44 in doiNG so, the PrisoNer fLeEs FRom DecisioN AnD FAils "To StAnd iN thE gRound Of hiS EssEnce."45 But What does iT meAN for SoMeOne to stAnd on the grounD oF their esseNcE? HeIdeggeR'S Answer is That it is to engage in an enaCTment of The OntolOgicAl differeNce. this laSt pOInt givEs us a hInt thAt heiDEGger's CONcErn Is Not reducibLE To a DesirE tO reaCh an ontOlogical clarificatIOn oF the differencE beTweeN bEiNg aND bEIngS. THE faILUre of the second sTage resideS pREcIsely in thiS LacK oF enactmEnt: "the dIfferENce occuRs in the enActment of ThE difFERenTiation. To bRing the dIfferentiATion tO EnActmeNt wOuld be BeIng-Human [menschSEin], ExistIng [ExiStIeren]."46 SO, exisTeNce is not Achieved in the second stagE. The liBeratEd pRisoner tuRns A DeaF ear to the ImplIcit announCemEnt Of the OntOLogicAl diFFeRenCE and gOes bACk to her inSIsTenT COmPortment towARD BeiNgs. At ThiS Point, iT is wOrth mentioning a neW Element introduCed bY 41 "
mystery" to describe the o riginary c oncea lme ntth at b elon gs to truth as such  (see Heidegger, Pathm arks,  1 4 6 ff ) .Withsuch ac la i m , H ei de gge ra nt icipa tes  his tu rn from th e c on cealing unco n ce alment ofDas ein to the c onc ealing  u nco n cealm ent  of B eing a s  such.  THE POLI TI C AL IMP L ICATION S OF  HEI DEGGER'S READINGO FT HE ALLEGORY OF  THE C AV E  1 9 eve ntwhereby on eor so m e of th e  p r i s one r s turn away f rom what ha s  be en rea di lyf amilia r. Tw oi mpo rtant thing s ha ppen at t he sec o nd stag e . First , therea liz atio n  t ha t t ru t h h a sgra d ati ons, i.e .,  t hat t hing s c a n be  mo re o r les s unconcealed .41  Sec o nd,  an i mplic it a nn ounce ment o f the  d ifference betwe en B eing andbei ng s.4 2Thisl ater a nno unc ement c arriesw ith  i t t he  possibility of co mi n g  t o the re alizat i on  o f  the dis ti nct ivee s sence  ofh um an exist ence,n am el y, that  h uman b ei ngs  ar e mor e  bei ngful(seiende r) be i ngs, because t h ey are expose d  t o be i ngsasa whole.43It i s , ho weve r ,the failu re of  t h el iberated prisonersto  dig d eeper  into the que stion of B e i n g and al ethe i at hat constitute s the  missed ch a nce and,  thus , the fa ilure oft h e second  st age . T hel i be ration of the s econ dstage i s s udden a nduns ett lin g.  It cause s insecu ri ty  a nd  co nfusi o n and it  p rom pt s t he li b erated  pris oner sto the  securi t ya n d co mp la cenc y o ftheir  imp r iso ned sta te. The l ibe r ated  p ri soner w ants to retur nto a place  " whe re noe x ertion i s required, where he is unhinde red , whe re n othing re coi ls upo n h i m, whe re the re is  n o c o n fusio n ,  a ndwh ere everyo n e  is  in a gr eeme nt."44In doing so, the p r iso ner flees fro m d ecis i o nand fa i ls"t o  st a n d in the ground  of his es se n ce ."45 But w h atdo es it m ean for  some o ne to s tand on t he ground  o f th e i r e ssence? He idegger' s answeri s tha t  i t istoengage  i n a n ena ctment ofthe o ntolog ic al dif feren ce . This l ast point gives us a hi nt tha t Hei deg ger's con cer n  is  not redu cibl e to a des ire  to  reac h a n  onto logi c al  cl a rific atio n  of the d i ff ere n c ebetween Bei n g and  bein gs. The fa ilur e of the second s t age resides pr ecis e l y i n t h is l ac k of enactment : " th e differen ce  occurs inthe enac tm e nt of  the d iffere ntiatio n .  T o  bring  the  di fferentia tio nt o enact me nt wouldbe b ei ng-hum an [Me n schs e i n], existing [Ex istie r e n]."4 6  So , exi st ence is notachieved i n the secon d stag e. T he li berated  p risone r t ur ns a deafe ar to the  impl icit an no unce men t of t he o n t ologi caldi ffe rence and g oe s  b ac k  to  her  insi st entcomportme n t toward  be i ngs. At  t his p oint,i ti s  worth men tio ninga new elemen t  int r od u ced b y 41 " 
mystery" to_describe the_originary concealment that belongs_to truth_as_such (see_Heidegger,_Pathmarks, 146 ff)._With such a_claim, Heidegger anticipates his_turn from the_concealing_unconcealment of Dasein to the concealing unconcealment of Being as such. THE POLITICAL IMPLICATIONS_OF_HEIDEGGER'S READING_OF_THE_ALLEGORY OF THE CAVE 19_event whereby one or some_of the_prisoners turn away from what has been readily_familiar._Two important things_happen at the second stage. First, the realization that_truth has gradations, i.e., that things_can be more_or_less_unconcealed.41 Second, an implicit_announcement of the difference between Being_and beings.42 This later announcement carries_with it the possibility of coming to_the realization of the distinctive essence_of human existence, namely, that_human beings_are more beingful (seiender) beings,_because they are_exposed to_beings as a_whole.43 It is, however, the failure_of the liberated_prisoners to dig deeper into the_question_of Being and_aletheia_that_constitutes the_missed chance and,_thus,_the failure_of_the second stage. The liberation of_the_second stage is sudden and unsettling. It_causes insecurity and confusion_and_it prompts the liberated_prisoners to the security and_complacency of their imprisoned state. The_liberated prisoner_wants to_return to a place "where no exertion is required, where he_is unhindered, where nothing recoils upon_him, where there is_no confusion,_and_where everyone is_in_agreement."44 In_doing so, the prisoner flees from decision_and fails_"to stand in the ground of_his essence."45 But what_does_it mean for someone to stand_on the ground of their essence?_Heidegger's answer is that it_is_to_engage in an enactment of_the ontological difference. This last point_gives us a_hint that Heidegger's concern is not reducible_to_a desire to reach an ontological_clarification_of the difference between Being and_beings._The_failure of the second stage_resides precisely in this lack of_enactment: "the difference occurs in the enactment of the_differentiation. To bring_the differentiation to enactment would_be_being-human_[Menschsein], existing [Existieren]."46 So, existence is not achieved in the_second stage._The liberated prisoner_turns a deaf ear to the implicit announcement of the_ontological difference and goes back to her_insistent comportment toward beings. At this point, it is worth mentioning_a new element introduced by 41 "