In his fundamental ontology, Heidegger rightfully raises the question how it is possible to make the sense of being in general a subject of consideration without clarifying the sense of being of the only being able to raise the question of being, i.e. the being of a concrete human. Existentialism is against representing the connection between the human and the world as a relation between subject and object, because a concrete human being, existence, is not out of the world, but it is thrown into the world by its very constitution. Intentionality, one of the most important categories of existentialism, adopted by the latter from Husserl’s phenomenology, means directivity of human mind toward…, so as to say there cannot by human being without the word, the human must necessarily have his world, where he is being oriented by ‘placing’ the things in space, having time as horizon. Space and time have a subjective and not objective meaning for the human. The being of a concrete human is finite in space as well as in time, it is spatial and temporal.

The human being, Heidegger says, understands the being of the surrounding world ascending from himself, and therefore any ontology must be fundamental, i.e. the being of a concrete human, its mode and sense must be studied first of all, and then the surrounding world, if only, of course, that is possible.

As fundamental ontology must differ from the traditional Philosophy, its method, too, must differ from the methods of the traditional Philosophy. Heidegger sees hermeneutics as such a method.

This-being or the presence or, in Heidegger’s term, Dasein, from which the true, according to Heidegger, ontology starts and with which it ends, understands itself as being as well as the being of the surrounding world and things. That understanding is not a scientific cognition and anticipates it.

¶ 6:29 AM