In my view, Heidegger’s Dasein is largely an intellectual contraption. That’s why it it always capitalized. Like Being.
From him I took the idea of each individual being “thrown” adventitiously at birth into a particular time and place. And because they are born and bred in one particular historical, cultural and experiential juncture rather than another, this can have a profound impact on how they come to construe “reality” in terms of both their identity and their value judgments.
But, sure, some do become more aquainted with these human-all-too-human fabrications. But then they have to ask themselves this: to what extent [using the tools of philosophy] am I able to grasp my one “true” identity? to what extent am I able to discern the most rational, moral, just value judgments?
Sans God, is this even possible?
In any event, “down here” in the throes of human interactions that do come into conflict, I construe dasein as this:
I’m “stuck” because I recognize the extent to which any particular individual’s moral and political evaluations are rooted in the manner in which I construe the existential parameters of human identity. And I recognize the manner in which these evalutions come back to conflicting goods rooted in conflicting value judgments that are not able to be resolved such that actual flesh and blood human beings are able to arrive at a deontological juncture where it is said that rational men and women are obligated to behave in one manner rather than another.
And that is when I suggest that we take these abstractions down to earth and discuss them in the context of actual moral/political conflagrations we are all familiar with.