Conflict, not harmony, is the original meaning of being-for-others

Evidence

EVERYTHING which may be said of me in my relations with the Other applies to him as well. While I attempt to free myself from the hold of the Other, the Other is trying to free himself from mine; while I seek to enslave the Other, the Other seeks to enslave me. We are by no means dealing with unilateral relations with an object-in-itsclf, but with reciprocal and moving relations. The following descriptions of concrete behavior must therefore be envisaged within the perspective of conflict. Conflict is the original meaning of being-for-others. — Jean-Paul Sartre, Being and Nothingness, 938

Categorization

• DEFINE: Defines the fundamental ontological structure of being-for-others: reciprocal, moving relations in which conflict is primary.
• XREF: This is exactly the backdrop Beauvoir builds on in The Second Coming — the Other as obstacle to freedom, conflict as original relation. — connects to: Being-for-others is suffered rather than actively existed; Being-for-others generates perpetual conflict as each self objectifies the other — Jean-Paul Sartre, Being and Nothingness: An Essay on…, 1462; A unified human We-subject is impossible; conflict grounds being-for-others — Jean-Paul Sartre, Being and Nothingness: An Essay on…, 1041 (+2 more)

Broader Connections

• Being-for-others generates perpetual conflict as each self objectifies the other #corroborates (0.90) — Jean-Paul Sartre, Being and Nothingness, 1462
• A unified human We-subject is impossible; conflict grounds being-for-others #corroborates (0.85) — Jean-Paul Sartre, Being and Nothingness, 1041
• Being-for-others is suffered rather than actively existed #expands (0.82)
• Conflict is a positive force distinct from mere indifference #corroborates (0.78) — Georg Simmel, on individuality and social forms_…, 276