The for-itself is fully responsible for its being yet cannot justify or choose it

Evidence

This inapprehensible fact of my condition, this impalpable difference which distinguishes this drama of realization from drama pure and simple is what causes the for-itself, while choosing the meaning of its situation and while constituting itself as the foundation of itself in situation, not to choose its position. This part of my condition is what causes me to apprehend myself simultaneously as totally responsible for my being—inasmuch as I am its foundation—and yet as totally unjustifiable. — Jean-Paul Sartre, Being and Nothingness, 343

Categorization

• DEFINE: Establishes facticity as the inapprehensible given that the for-itself cannot choose yet is responsible for — a core term for the foundational ontology.
• XREF: This is the systematic backdrop Beauvoir’s ethics of ambiguity builds on — the responsible-yet-unjustified condition. — connects to: The For-itself derives all its powers precisely from not being Being; The For-itself is responsible for how it apprehends qualities of things — Jean-Paul Sartre, Being and Nothingness: An Essay on…, 598; The for-itself is its past yet cannot posit or thematize it (+6 more)
• DEEPTHINKING: The tension of being simultaneously foundation of one’s being yet unable to choose that being is the dense core of Sartre’s facticity concept.

Broader Connections

• The for-itself is its past yet cannot posit or thematize it #corroborates (0.85)
• The For-itself is responsible for how it apprehends qualities of things #expands (0.78) — Jean-Paul Sartre, Being and Nothingness, 598