Each temporal dimension of the for-itself derives its meaning from another dimension

Evidence

In order to answer this question we must recall that the for-itself is not purely and simply a future which comes to the present. It has to be also its past in the form of “was.” The ekstatic contradiction in the three temporal dimensions is such that while the for-itself is a being which by means of its future makes known to itself the meaning of what it was, it is also in the same upsurge a being which has to be its will-be within the perspectives of a certain “was” which it is fleeing. In this sense we must always look for the meaning of a temporal dimension elsewhere, in another dimension. This is what we have called the diaspora, for the unity of diasporatic being is not a pure given appurtenance; it is the necessity of realizing the diaspora by making itself conditioned there outside within the unity of the self. — Jean-Paul Sartre, Being and Nothingness, 621

Categorization

• DEFINE: Defines ‘diaspora’ as the for-itself’s dispersal across temporal ekstases, whose unity must be made rather than given.