Human reality consists of two ekstases, one into being and one into non-being

Evidence

We are now at the end of our first description. The examination of the negation can not lead us farther. It has revealed to us the existence of a particular type of conduct: conduct in the face of non-being, which supposes a special transcendence needing separate study. We find ourselves then in the presence of two human ekstases: the ekstasis which throws us into being-in-itself and the ekstasis which engages us in non-being. — Jean-Paul Sartre, Being and Nothingness, 261

Categorization

• DEFINE: Introduces the two ekstases that structure the being-for-itself versus being-in-itself distinction.
• XREF: The ekstasis/transcendence distinction feeds directly into Beauvoir’s The Second Sex framing of the Other and of woman as inessential. — connects to: Being and non-being tempt us to treat them as equal complementary components; Transcendental imagination holds being and non-being in co-implication as relative non-being — Catherine Malabou, The Future of Hegel: Plasticity,…, 897; The for-itself’s negation of being has a future-extending ekstatic dimension — Jean-Paul Sartre, Being and Nothingness: An Essay on…, 604 (+3 more)

Broader Connections

• The for-itself’s negation of being has a future-extending ekstatic dimension #complicates (0.75) — Jean-Paul Sartre, Being and Nothingness, 604
• Transcendental imagination holds being and non-being in co-implication as relative non-being #qualifies (0.72) — Catherine Malabou, The Future of Hegel, 897
• Being and non-being relate only through an internal nihilating bond #qualifies (0.72) — Jean-Paul Sartre, Being and Nothingness, 429