The For-itself is a particular privation, not a general Nothingness.

Evidence

Our research has enabled us to answer the first of these questions: the For-itself and the In-itself are reunited by a synthetic connection which is nothing other than the For-itself itself. The For-itself, in fact, is nothing but the pure nihilation of the In-itself; it is like a hole of being at the heart of Being. … The for-itself has no reality save that of being the nihilation of being. Its sole qualification comes to it from the fact that it is the nihilation of an individual and particular In-itself and not of a being in general. The For-itself is not nothingness in general but a particular privation; it constitutes itself as the privation of this being. Therefore we have no business asking about the way in which the for-itself can be united with the in-itself since the for-itself is in no way an autonomous substance. As a nihilation it is made-to-be by the in-itself; as an internal negation it must by means of the in-itself make known to itself what it is not and consequently what it has to be. — Jean-Paul Sartre, Being and Nothingness, 1432 (#expands, via linked claim)

The thing, before all comparison, before all construction, is that which is present to consciousness as not being consciousness. The original relation of presence as the foundation of knowledge is negative. But as negation comes to the world by means of the for-itself, and as the thing is what it is in the absolute indifference of identity, it can not be the thing which is posited as not being the for-itself. Negation comes from the for-itself. We should not conceive this negation as a type of judgment which would bear on the thing itself and deny concerning it that it is the for-itself; this type of negation could be conceived only if the for-itself were a substance already fully formed, and even in that case it could emanate only as a third being establishing from outside a negative relation between two beings. But by the original negation the for-itself constitutes itself as not being the thing. — Jean-Paul Sartre, Being and Nothingness, 571 (#expands, via linked claim)

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: Mystic Nothingness serves as an ideal goal, unlike Sartre’s everyday concept; The For-itself is not a substance but the nihilation of a particular In-itself — Jean-Paul Sartre, Being and Nothingness: An Essay on…, 1432; The for-itself’s lack is internal to it, not imposed from outside (+4 more)

Broader Connections

• The For-itself is not a substance but the nihilation of a particular In-itself #expands (0.90) — Jean-Paul Sartre, Being and Nothingness, 1432
• The for-itself’s lack is internal to it, not imposed from outside #expands (0.85)
• The for-itself constitutes itself through an original negation of the thing #expands (0.85) — Jean-Paul Sartre, Being and Nothingness, 571