Negation is constituted as ekstatic through its relation to the future

Evidence

While we have had to proceed in this way for the sake of clarity in exposition, we should not thereby conclude that being is revealed to a being which would be first presence in order afterwards to constitute itself a future. But being-in-itself is revealed to a being which arises as about-to-come to itself. This means that the negation which the for-itself makes itself be in the presence of being has an ekstatic dimension of the future; it is in so far as I am not what I am (an ekstatic relation to my own possibilities) that I have to not-be being-in-itself as the revealing realization of the this. That means that I am presence to the “this” in the incompleteness of a totality detotalized. — Jean-Paul Sartre, Being and Nothingness, 604 (#corroborates, via linked claim)

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: Negation enters the world through questioning, a pre-judicative relation to being. — Jean-Paul Sartre, Being and Nothingness: An Essay on…, 189; Negation arises in consciousness as the nihilation of another’s projected possibility. — Jean-Paul Sartre, Being and Nothingness: An Essay on…, 277; The future is a prejudicative self-relation, not representation or actual potency (+5 more)

Broader Connections

• The for-itself’s negation of being has a future-extending ekstatic dimension #corroborates (0.95) — Jean-Paul Sartre, Being and Nothingness, 604
• Abstract essence arrives from the future as the meaning of present negation #corroborates (0.90)
• Negation without a future-directed engagement loses all meaning #corroborates (0.85)