The past is the only essence a for-itself ever possesses

Evidence

Past. What the For-itself has been. The Past thus becomes Being-in-itself and is the For-itself’s essence and substance as well as part of its facticity. This is the only sense in which the For-itself has either essence or substance since in its living present it “is what it is not and is not what it is.” — Jean-Paul Sartre, Being and Nothingness, 1505

Categorization

• DEFINE: Precisely defines the past’s ontological status: the for-itself becomes in-itself in the past, gaining essence only post hoc.
• XREF: Directly feeds Beauvoir’s account of how women are fixed as objects by being made into their past/essence; also mirrors the basic formula of bad faith. — connects to: Being one’s past is the foundation of being able not to be it; The past remains unthematizable yet inescapable for the for-itself; Essence is one’s accumulated past, made by living rather than predetermined. (+5 more)

Broader Connections

• The past is a for-itself that has hardened into an in-itself #corroborates (0.95) — Jean-Paul Sartre, Being and Nothingness, 434
• The past is an in-itself whose content can neither be changed nor added to #expands (0.90) — Jean-Paul Sartre, Being and Nothingness, 427
• The for-itself is its past yet cannot posit or thematize it #expands (0.85)
• Only the for-itself has a past, the in-itself does not. #corroborates (0.85) — Jean-Paul Sartre, Being and Nothingness, 422
• The past cannot be constructed from present elements alone #qualifies (0.80) — Jean-Paul Sartre, Being and Nothingness, 411