Developing a personal philosophy of life is a meaningful process that requires understanding various influential ideas. One concept that holds great importance in Martin Heidegger’s philosophy is the notion of “the they” (das man). However, many people are familiar with this idea but do not fully grasp its significance. Gaining a clear understanding of “the they” can have a profound impact on how we shape our own philosophies of life. This article will discuss Martin Heidegger’s philosophy, explain the idea of “the they” (das man), and explore its relevance to personal philosophical development.
Key features of Martin Heidegger’s philosophy
Martin Heidegger was a German philosopher known for his exploration of existence and being. His most famous work, Being and Time, focuses on the concept of “being” and what it means for humans to exist in the world. Heidegger introduced the term Dasein, which can be translated as “being-there,” to describe the human experience of being aware of and situated in the world. He emphasized that humans are not separate from their environments but are always interconnected with the world and others.
A key idea in Heidegger’s philosophy is the concept of authenticity. He argued that people often live inauthentically by conforming to societal expectations and avoiding their own unique potential. Authentic living, for Heidegger, involves recognizing and confronting the inevitability of death, which leads to a deeper understanding of one’s purpose and individuality.
Heidegger was also interested in technology and its influence on humanity. He believed that modern technology often reduces the world to mere resources for human use, which alienates us from a deeper connection to nature and being. While his ideas can be complex, Heidegger’s work is ultimately about challenging us to reflect on how we live, our relationship with the world, and the importance of leading a meaningful and authentic life.
What is the they (das man)?
Martin Heidegger, a significant figure in 20th-century philosophy, introduced the concept of “the they” (das Man) in his work Being and Time. According to Heidegger, “the they” represents the social structures and norms that influence individuals to conform to societal expectations. It describes how people often behave or make decisions not based on their authentic selves but according to what is socially accepted or expected.
For Heidegger, being part of “the they” means losing oneself in the collective identity of society. The individual becomes anonymous, acting not as an independent “Self” but as a part of the overarching crowd. This results in a way of being where personal responsibility is diminished, as actions are guided by what “one does” or “one thinks” rather than personal reflection or authenticity.
Heidegger does not view “the they” as a specific group but as a state of existence within the shared world of human beings. It reveals how people are inherently social and interconnected, but also how this connectedness can lead individuals to forfeit their unique sense of being. Understanding “the they” is crucial to Heidegger’s discussion of authenticity, as it challenges individuals to overcome this tendency and reconnect with their true selves.
The example below demonstrates this philosophical perspective. Imagine a person who is choosing a career path. Instead of deeply reflecting on their own authentic desires or goals, they opt to pursue a profession simply because it is deemed prestigious or socially acceptable by others. They follow what “one does” in society, acting based on the unspoken rules and expectations of the majority rather than their own unique aspirations. For instance, they might decide to become a doctor, not because they feel passionate about medicine, but because it is seen as a respectable and successful career choice. By doing this, they lose a sense of individuality and become absorbed into the collective norms of society. Their actions are guided by what “one thinks” or “one says” about a good life, rather than what they personally hold to be true or meaningful.
Challenges to Martin Heidegger’s view about the they (das man)
Some philosophers object to or reject Martin Heidegger’s view about “the they” (das Man) because they see it as overly pessimistic, overly vague, or potentially dismissive of human individuality. For one, critics argue that his portrayal of “the they” tends to paint societal norms and shared practices in a negative light, suggesting they lead primarily to conformity and inauthentic existence. Philosophers who disagree with this view believe that societal norms are not inherently problematic. Instead, they argue that these norms can also provide individuals with structure, a sense of belonging, and the tools needed to work collaboratively for meaningful goals.
Another objection stems from the vagueness of Heidegger’s conception of “the they.” While his description emphasizes how people tend to lose themselves by adopting the values and expectations of the collective, some philosophers find his analysis too ambiguous to apply concretely. These detractors believe that Heidegger’s terminology remains abstract to the point of being difficult to critically assess or contrast with alternative views. Without a clear, differentiated understanding of what makes “the they” unique, it becomes challenging to engage in productive debate or to evaluate his arguments against real-world examples.
Finally, some philosophers criticize Heidegger’s ideas for what they see as a failure to adequately recognize the potential for individuality and authenticity within communal or collective settings. According to this line of criticism, people do not always lose their sense of self when they engage with society. Instead, being part of a community can sometimes enhance individuality by offering opportunities for self-expression, mutual support, and collaboration toward shared ideals. Critics in this camp argue that Heidegger’s view may undervalue the positive role that relationships and social conventions can play in personal growth and flourishing.
Overall, objections to Heidegger’s position often revolve around his perceived negativity about communal life, the lack of clarity in his concepts, and the limited recognition of the benefits that participation in shared social systems can bring. These criticisms have fueled ongoing philosophical debate about how we ought to understand the relationship between individuals and the collective.
Why the they (das man) is important to Martin Heidegger’s philosophy
These are some of the primary reasons why grasping the concept of “the they” (das Man) is essential for understanding Martin Heidegger’s philosophy.
- Understanding Social Conformity
One reason the concept of the “they” (das Man) is important is that it helps to explore how individuals in society often conform to shared norms and expectations. This idea highlights how people might, consciously or unconsciously, adopt behaviours, thoughts, and attitudes that align with what is generally accepted as “normal.” Such conformity can provide structure and predictability in social interactions, helping people know what is expected of them in various situations. However, it can also lead to a lack of individuality, as people may avoid questioning these norms or thinking independently. By examining this idea, it becomes clear how much of human activity is shaped by the influence of collective societal standards.
- Recognizing the Role of Everydayness
Another key reason is that the notion of the “they” illuminates the role of everyday routines and habits in shaping human existence. Much of daily life is spent engaging in activities that are guided by a shared understanding of how things ought to be done. This shared understanding allows society to function efficiently, as people draw on common knowledge and practices to make decisions and carry out tasks. At the same time, it can obscure individuals’ awareness of their unique perspectives and possibilities. Recognizing this dynamic helps to better understand the impact of habitual behaviours on personal choices and experiences, as well as how people relate to one another collectively.
- Examining Responsibility and Authenticity
The concept further emphasizes the tension between living according to the expectations of “the they” and taking responsibility for one’s own choices. It raises important questions about authenticity—living a life that feels genuinely one’s own versus simply doing what is expected. This distinction is crucial in considering how individuals make their decisions and assert their own values in contrast to the pressures exerted by societal norms. By reflecting on these dynamics, it becomes possible to explore what it means to lead a life that feels personally meaningful while also participating in a broader social context.
Contrasting Martin Heidegger’s philosophy with Friedrich Nietzsche’s philosophy
Martin Heidegger’s concept of “the they” (das Man) and Friedrich Nietzsche’s philosophy share certain thematic connections, yet they diverge in significant ways. Heidegger’s idea of “the they” focuses on the way individuals conform to societal norms and lose their sense of authentic self. According to Heidegger, people often fall into a mode of living dictated by “the they,” where individuality is submerged in collective expectations and routines. This results in a kind of inauthentic existence where people fail to truly confront or take ownership of their own being.
Nietzsche’s philosophy, on the other hand, critiques societal norms and herd mentality in a different way. One of Nietzsche’s major ideas is the concept of the “Übermensch” or “Overman,” which represents an individual who breaks free from traditional morality and societal constraints to create their own values. For Nietzsche, the herd mentality—where people follow conventional beliefs and moral codes without question—is something to overcome in the pursuit of individual greatness and self-creation.
The key difference lies in how the two philosophers approach this conformity. Heidegger views it as a fundamental part of human existence that must be recognized and transcended to achieve authenticity. Nietzsche, however, places an emphasis on the will to power, encouraging individuals to reject societal standards entirely and forge new, subjective values. While both are critical of conformity, Heidegger’s approach is existential and phenomenological, focusing on being, whereas Nietzsche’s is more dynamic and rooted in his critique of morality and power structures.
The They (Das Man), Martin Heidegger’s philosophy and the philosophy of life
Reflecting on Martin Heidegger’s philosophy, particularly his concept of “the they” (das man), is of practical importance when working to shape your own philosophy of life, regardless of whether you agree with his view or not. This reflection pushes you to examine how societal influences impact your decisions, goals, and sense of self. It allows you to critically assess to what extent your actions are genuinely your own and how much they are shaped by external expectations. This insight can lead to a more authentic and intentional life, where you make choices aligned with your values and personal vision, rather than simply following the crowd.
By engaging with Heidegger’s ideas, you can gain a deeper awareness of your relationship with society. It’s easy to fall into patterns of conformity without even realizing it, leading to a life that may not fully satisfy your inner aspirations or potential. Taking time to critically analyze these influences gives you the opportunity to reclaim control over your decisions and craft a life that feels more fulfilling and true to your individuality. Whether or not you ultimately agree with Heidegger’s perspective, this exercise can help strengthen your philosophical foundation by encouraging a rigorous evaluation of your habits, motivations, and beliefs.
Practically, this reflection serves as a reminder to pause and think critically before accepting popular opinions or norms. It encourages you to carve out space in your life for introspection, questioning, and self-discovery. These practices are essential in modern times, where the influence of social media, cultural trends, and societal pressures are stronger than they’ve ever been. Considering how these forces interact with your own identity can empower you to resist being swept along by external expectations and instead build your life on a foundation of self-awareness and meaningful choice.
Ultimately, reflecting on Heidegger’s philosophy is less about agreeing or disagreeing with his ideas and more about using them as a tool to deepen your understanding of yourself and the world around you. This process can help you clarify what truly matters to you and inspire you to live a life that reflects your own values and beliefs, rather than merely echoing those of others. It’s this pursuit of authenticity and self-determination that makes engaging with Heidegger’s ideas such an influential and valuable experience.
Further reading
Dreyfus, H. L. (1991). Being-in-the-world: A commentary on Heidegger’s “Being and Time,” Division I. MIT Press.
Guignon, C. (1984). Heidegger and the problem of knowledge. Hackett Publishing Company.
Heidegger, M. (1962). Being and Time (J. Macquarrie & E. Robinson, Trans.). Harper & Row. (Original work published 1927)
Kockelmans, J. J. (1985). Heidegger’s “Being and Time”: The analysis of existence. University Press of America.
Mulhall, S. (2005). Heidegger and being and time. Routledge.
Polt, R. (1999). Heidegger: An introduction. Cornell University Press.
Richardson, W. J. (2003). Heidegger: Through phenomenology to thought. Fordham University Press.
Sartre, J.-P. (1956). Being and nothingness (H. Barnes, Trans.). Philosophical Library.
Taylor, C. (1995). The ethics of authenticity. Harvard University Press.
Thomson, I. D. (2001). Heidegger on ontological education, or how we become what we are. Inquiry, 44(3), 243–268.
Wrathall, M. A., & Malpas, J. (Eds.). (2000). Heidegger, coping, and cognitive science: Essays in honour of Hubert L. Dreyfus, Volume 2. MIT Press.