50
G. Riva, M.T. Anguera, B.K. Wiederhold and F. Mantovani (Eds.)
From Communication to Presence: Cognition, Emotions and Culture towards the
Ultimate Communicative Experience. Festschrift in honor of Luigi Anolli
IOS Press, Amsterdam, 2006, (c) All rights reserved - http://www.emergingcommunication.com
whatever task is currently being performed. This situation is described by Heidegger
[1] as “readiness-to-hand” [Zuhandenheit]:
“The kind of Being which equipment possesses - in which it manifests itself in its own
right - we call “readiness-to-hand”... Ifwe look at Things just ‘theoretically’, we
can get along without understanding readiness-to-hand. But when we deal with
them by using them and manipulating them, this activity is not a blind one; it has its
own kind of sight, by which our manipulation is guided and from which it acquires
its specific Thingly character. Dealings with equipment subordinate themselves to
the manifold assignments of the 'in-order-to'. And the sight with which they thus
accommodate themselves is circumspection.” (pp. 97-98).
In contrast, we may also encounter objects as purely bare “presence-at-hand,”
[Vorhanden], simply alongside us in the world. Typically, this happens in
“breakdown” situations. In them the object ceases to be “ready-to-hand” and
becomes “present-at-hand,” that is, non transparent to the user. As noted by
Winograd and Flores [6]:
“[In Heidegger] objects and properties are not inherent in the world, but arise only
in an event of breaking down in which they become present-at-hand. One simple
example he gives is that of a hammer being used by someone engaged in driving a
nail. To the person doing the hammering, the hammer as such does not exist. It is a
part of the background of readiness-to-hand that is taken for granted without explicit
recognition or identification as an object. It is part of the hammerer's world, but is
not present any more than are the tendons of the hammerer's arm.” (p. 36).
In the example of hammering, it is only during a breakdown - when the hammer
breaks or misses the nail - that the properties of the hammer are revealed and become
“present-at-hand.” In this process, the being comes across entities [Seiende] like
himself. It is important to underline that “being-with” [Mitsein] is a mode of our
existence, too [7]: as the being is never without a world so, too, it is never without
others. Heidegger clearly underlines this point:
“Thus in characterizing the encountering of Others, one is again still oriented by
that Dasein which is in each case one’s own. [Others] are rather those from whom,
for the most part, one does not distinguish oneself—those among whom one is too.
The world ofDasein is a with-world. Being-in it Being-with Others.” (pp. 154-155).
For this reason, the character of being towards others is different from the character
of being towards entities ready-to-hand and present-at-hand. This new character is
defined “solicitude” [Fursorge]: attentive care and protectiveness.
The fourth chapter of “Being and Time” introduces two forms of solicitude [3]:
“leaping in” [Einspringen] and “leaping ahead” [Vorspringen]. “Leaping in” is an
inauthentic form of solicitude: in it the being relieves other beings of responsibility,
but with the result that they may become dominated by or dependent upon him.
Apparently, in “leaping in” the being consider the other being like an object, an
extension of him/her. In “leaping ahead” - the authentic form of solicitude - the being
helps other beings to become transparent to them. Using transparency only, the being
is able to see the truth of his or her condition and become free.