The lover’s demand for totality structurally mirrors the Stoic sage’s ideal

Evidence

The original presence of the for-itself is presence to being. Shall we say then that it is presence to all being? That would be to fall back into our former error. For totality can come to being only by the for-itself. A totality indeed supposes an internal relation of being between the terms of a quasi-multiplicity in the same way that a multiplicity supposes—in order to be this multiplicity—an inner totalizing relation among its elements. In this sense addition itself is a synthetic act. Totality can come to beings only by a being which has to be its own totality in their presence. This is precisely the case with the for-itself, a detotalized totality which temporalizes itself in a perpetual incompleteness. It is the for-itself in its presence to being which causes there to be an all of being. — Jean-Paul Sartre, Being and Nothingness, 585 (#expands, via linked claim)

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: Totality of being arises only through the detotalized for-itself — Jean-Paul Sartre, Being and Nothingness: An Essay on…, 585; The for-others requires a totality in which selfness and the Other are reciprocal structures

Broader Connections

• Totality of being arises only through the detotalized for-itself #expands (0.78) — Jean-Paul Sartre, Being and Nothingness, 585
• The for-others requires a totality in which selfness and the Other are reciprocal structures #expands (0.75)