Commentators struggle to reconcile three features of Heidegger's account of authenticity. First is the claim that authenticity is independent of, and not subservient to, moral ideals. Second is the claim that we become essentially human only when we are authentic. And third is the claim that existential guilt (which we take up resolutely in authenticity) grounds the possibility of being morally good or morally evil. In this paper, I show how we can do justice to all three theses. i start by offering a detailed analysis of the fundamental distinctions that tacitly structure Heidegger's account of authenticity as an ideal. The structural account of authenticity that emerges will allow us to say more clearly how authenticity relates to other human ideals.
In Horizons of Authenticity in Phenomenology, Existentialism, and Moral Psychology, available from Springer