Being-for-others precedes and founds the experience of the we.

Evidence

If this is the case, then in order for a consciousness to get the consciousness of being engaged in a “we,” it is necessary that the other consciousnesses which enter into community with it should be first given in some other way; that is, either in the capacity of a transcendence-transcending or as a transcendence-transcended. The “we” is a certain particular experience which is produced in special cases on the foundation of being-for-others in general. The being-for-others precedes and founds the being-with-others. — Jean-Paul Sartre, Being and Nothingness, 1017

Categorization

• DEFINE: Establishes the foundational ordering of being-for-others over being-with-others — central to Sartre’s rejection of Heidegger’s Mitsein.
• XREF: Contrasts sharply with Heidegger’s Mitsein (being-with) as equiprimordial; also the systematic backdrop Beauvoir builds on for the us/them dynamic of oppression. — connects to: The ‘us’ experience means being objects together before alienating others. — Jean-Paul Sartre, Being and Nothingness: An Essay on…, 1018; The We-experience is secondary to and dependent on prior knowledge of the Other.; Being-for-others is suffered rather than actively existed (+6 more)
• DEEPTHINKING: The claim that the other is only ever encountered as transcendence-transcending or transcendence-transcended — never as a peer on equal footing — is the hinge of Sartre’s whole social ontology and resists easy summary.

Broader Connections

• The We-experience is secondary to and dependent on prior knowledge of the Other. #corroborates (0.90)
• The ‘us’ experience means being objects together before alienating others. #expands (0.85) — Jean-Paul Sartre, Being and Nothingness, 1018
• Being-for-others is suffered rather than actively existed #contradicts (0.80)
• Others constitute the situation that gives individual freedom its concrete content #corroborates (0.80) — Christine Daigle, Jacob Golomb (eds.), Beauvoir and Sartre, 453
• Encountering the Other reveals the for-itself having an outside and being embedded in being #expands (0.80)
• Body-for-others is studied through the identity of my-being-for-the-Other structures #expands (0.75)
• The situation is constituted from Others’ meanings rather than from being itself #corroborates (0.75) — Christine Daigle, Jacob Golomb (eds.), Beauvoir and Sartre, 444
• Conflict, not harmony, is the original meaning of being-for-others #complicates (0.75) — Jean-Paul Sartre, Being and Nothingness, 938