Presence to being requires no third-term witness, not even God

Evidence

The distinguishing characteristic of consciousness, on the other hand, is that it is a decompression of being. Indeed it is impossible to define it as coincidence with itself. Of this table I can say only that it is purely and simply this table. But I can not limit myself to saying that my belief is belief; my belief is the consciousness (of) belief. It is often said that the act of reflection alters the fact of consciousness on which it is directed. Husserl himself admits that the fact “of being seen” involves a total modification for each Erlebnis. But I believe that I have demonstrated that the first condition of all reflection is a pre-reflective cogito. This cogito, to be sure, does not posit an object; it remains within consciousness. But it is nonetheless homologous with the reflective cogito since it appears as the first necessity for non-reflective consciousness to be seen by itself. Originally then the cogito includes this nullifying characteristic of existing for a witness, although the witness for which consciousness exists is itself. Thus by the sole fact that my belief is apprehended as belief, it is no longer only belief; that is, it is already no longer belief, it is troubled belief. Thus the ontological judgment “belief is consciousness (of) belief” can under no circumstances be taken as a statement of identity; the subject and the attribute are radically different though still within the indissoluble unity of one and the same being. — Jean-Paul Sartre, Being and Nothingness, 329 (#expands, via linked claim)

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: A nihilating being cannot be the cause of further phenomena; Consciousness never coincides with itself because it exists for a witness — Jean-Paul Sartre, Being and Nothingness: An Essay on…, 329; Negation cannot touch the plenitude of being; nothingness is denied at being’s heart (+2 more)

Broader Connections

• Consciousness never coincides with itself because it exists for a witness #expands (0.85) — Jean-Paul Sartre, Being and Nothingness, 329
• Negation cannot touch the plenitude of being; nothingness is denied at being’s heart #complicates (0.85)
• A nihilating being cannot be the cause of further phenomena #complicates (0.80)
• Self-presence requires an internal separation that is itself nothing #expands (0.80)
• If being consisted of manifesting essence, no pure being moment would be isolable #corroborates (0.80)