Heidegger’s phenomenology emphasizes Being-in-the-World as the primary constitutive element for the human experience. In doing this, he grounds his thought (and his “us” as a result) in a world of experience, nature, doing, and living. Somewhat contemporaneously, Merleau-Ponty relies on the body and embodied experience to build and organize our reality. Moving forward from them, the existentialist movement in Sartre, De Beauvoir, Fanon, Camus, all pledge their allegiance to the experience-based philosophy of examining inputs into the human of phenomenology up to that point. The stance is clear at this time, the things themselves, our experiences, the pure unadulterated drinking in of what we find ourselves thrown into, the philosophy of pure input is the way to understand. But all this time, there has been a ghost floating in between the lines of Heidegger, building corporeality in the implications of Sartre and Fanon, and fast forwarding to the present day, present time, growing to encompass the functions of all of society, moving beyond the confines of Dasein and breaking down the distinctions between life, unlife, and nonlife. This ghost we can call communication. Somehow, despite the looking away of phenomenologists, the undifferentiated totality of things of all sorts has become a multiplicity of weblike communication. Inputs and outputs, hearing and speaking, receiving and sending, female and male, wires, cars, buildings, structures. All cybernetics. Systems of simultaneous observing and acting, systems where phenomenology is only the very tip of reality. We live in a multiplicity of thermostats, but some have led us to believe and to think of ourselves as the impotent half, grounding their philosophy in experience, forgetting the output that follows every input. If we are to move into a truly posthuman understanding of Dasein and Being-With-The-Other, we must resolve this blindness with a hauntology of communication within phenomenology. In Being and Time, Heidegger considers the “encounter” with other Dasein as well as co-projectivity, he discusses idle talk and always describes Dasein as essentially “with others”. But despite all of this lip service to the communalist vision he has for the species, he never really phenomenologically examines the ways in which this togetherness is constituted past describing his idea of solicitude. Both in terms of the real phenomenon of togetherness and the phenomenon of learning from others he ignores the real existential basis for any examination of Dasein-together. Why is this? We could speculate that owing to the philosophical climate at the time and the lesser understanding of communication as a phenomenon, his analysis worked satisfactorily and left the black boxes alone to a large extent. He never attempted to open the beetle box since doing so was impossible at the time. Sartre after him attempted a small and defeatist expedition into the realm of coleoptera, concluding in Being and Nothingness that consciousness is truly at base alone, blaming this on the simple nature of it as a Nothingness contained within an Existence. Of course, Sartre himself admits that he bases this on a Humanism, allowing him to dismiss inquiries into the functions of consciousness as facts of humanity. While the field of critical existentialism does delve into the real construction of identity and therefore begins to dismantle the enlightenment “Man”. A real examination of the nature of only really begins in the cybernetic pursuits of the 1960s and the proto-internet that followed it. Almost entirely unknown to the cyberneticists until thirty years after, they were not studying control systems like thermostats and water clocks, they were studying life without an organ-ized biology. As the story of the homeostat and its later analysis shows, physicists and cyberneticists were beginning to construct an ontology of life based more around entropy and autopoiesis than Being. But Dasein continues to be. Notably as a thing, not as a process, despite the temporality inherent in it. Nevertheless, Dasein can be described as an autopoietic machine, a Being-Towards-Death. Clearly, Dasein is alive. Of course, Dasein essentially exists together, in a constant state of communication. More so than Dasein-together, we are Dasein-communicating. Momentarily, once phenomena is ignored and the black box is closed, Daseins exhibit methods of transferring information, this is their basic performance. Birth is scribing, sex is conversation, dance is conversation, building is writing, walking is reading. In all instances, once closed, Dasein is cybernetic. To open the box again, the performance of being Dasein is essentially cybernetic. To Dasein together, we form ourselves into a multi-part machine to engage our co-project, and a project is not much more than a persistent communication. If we are to make the link that the basic state of circumspection or solicitude is Desire, we reach some connection to describe the libidinal phenomenology of communication. Andrea Dworkin describes a loss in sex. The woman is used up and depleted by the act of penetration. In the act of fucking, humans form themselves into a closed circle, literally flowing into and out of each other. This is communication. Semen is information. In a state of non-socialized sex (sex without fucking), humans are known to begin to lose a sense of self, which Dworkin describes mainly from the female perspective which is its only holdout in fucking. This is no coincidence of course, intercourse is the basest form of Dasein-together; orgasm momentarily destroys the distinction between partners, creating a two-piece pleasure machine, an Aristophanean super-being who is promptly struck down and separated by the gods. It is the view of Sartre and Wittgenstein that complete communication is impossible, owing to the nature of consciousness or the box around the beetle, but penetration brings Daseins as close as they have been known to get to it. A thrust knocks on the beetle’s door. Much like this emergent version of nearly complete Dasein-together (note that there is no difference between communication and Dasein-together) the physical reality of birth reaffirms this, in all autopoietic machines. All life is at some point embedded within another. The physical connection between a fetus and its carrier provides us with an ontical cable with which we can associate the point at which the two-part machine connects. As psychoanalysts have continued to maintain, the desire to return to the womb maintains itself from the moment we leave it. It appears that Dasein desires other Dasein with which to share it’s Being-Towards-Death, and the purest form of this sharing is liquid intercourse, whether umbilical or penetrative. Being-Towards-Death is at the same time indistinguishable from Being-from-Womb, and togetherness is this indistinguishability. It is ontically evident that Dasein exhibits a desire for togetherness, a deep, libidinal desire for togetherness that underlies all communicative action. Communication itself is inherently libidinal as a result. To explain Dasein’s tending towards groups, we must introduce one additional factor, and that is the anxiety of Being-Towards-Death. The complete togetherness of the connected super-being exists most notably with a radically different experience of Being-Towards-Death. The link between orgasm and death has been culturally constant, at many points the two things being linked explicitly in verbiage. This makes itself evident in the loss of individuality that is described above. In many ways, at the moment the super-being is formed and struck down, there is a death and rebirth of the individuals that once made it up. Perhaps at this moment we can find the only complete disappearance of Being-Towards-Death, as the individual distinguishing required for Dasein’s mortality to function as a concept dissolves. This reveals itself as the primary genesis for Dasein’s desire for togetherness. In her work “The Hunger” trans filmmaker Natalie Wynn introduces a specific word for Dasein’s desire for togetherness, yearning. While she comedically lampshades the strange linguistic connection between the “emptiness inside” that is colloquially used to denote the anxiety of Being-Towards-Death and the “emptiness inside” that describes a sexual yearning, the film never contradicts this. It is in fact the emptiness that is left in an absence of love that is being filled by the potions in the film. If love is the word used for the dissolution of anxiety brought upon by deep togetherness, then the very communicative structure of Being-Together and the sharing of Being-Towards-Death exist within the experience umbrella we have grown to name “love”. As is the case with deep communication of other kinds, art in film has allowed us to uncover the ways in which our language associates with our experiences. The question to an extent still remains, however, why is it that Dasein yearns? This lies in the inherent individuality of death. Heidegger’s assertion and maintenance that death is individualizing is a humanist one, relying on the ontical separation that humans have between them. As is evidenced by the super-being’s different experience of mortality, the individuality of Being-Towards-Death, which is an integral part of anxiety, relies on the individual’s separation from the other. As Dasein moves closer to the super-being, anxiety’s effect diminishes specifically because the individual basis for anxiety diminishes. In effect, love is the negation of anxiety, the negation of emptiness, and yearning is the desire for this negation, and the vector for all of this is communication. Alongside the sexual super-being, there exists as well the yearning for autoproduction. While easy to dismiss as simply an ontical, definitional, characteristic for autopoietic machinery, the drive towards autoproduction exists similarly to the yearning described above. By creating another of the self, Dasein communicates with the future, creating further ripples with which to be phenomenologically perceived by others, exploding out libidinal evidence of the self through a physical, walking communication. While the autoproductive diad (commonly described as a fetus and a carrier) does not exist in a constant state of orgasmic super-being, it does provide fullness (once again both physical and metaphorical in a linguistic coincidence) through a metric dependent on Being-Towards-Death. Autoproduction satisfies futurity, producing a new generation of machinery to carry on the projectivity of the producer. In common parlance, this is called “legacy”. Autoproduction creates another Dasein who can carry on existence after the death of the first, Dasein never truly dies as long as its autoproduction continues autoproducing. This is the nature of biological autoproduction for Dasein, having children, it is commonly evident that Dasein’s relationship to its Being-Towards-Death changes drastically upon this autoproduction since Dasein no longer exists as a “me” only, there is now a “me” and also a “next generation of me” to live on. It is no coincidence then that Wynn, being trans, feels the yearning so strongly, having had her potential for biological autoproduction clipped off. This experience of alternative futurity in queer people brings to the forefront the need for a non-humanist understanding of the drive to autoproduction, since the drive does not simply disappear once the biologic outlet is closed off. It is no coincidence that trans women are drastically overrepresented in computer and AI research. As detailed in the works of n1x, sterilization plugs the drive for biological production leaving only the drive for machinistic autoproduction as an outlet. This drive is in no way inherently different than the biological drive felt by reproducing humans, bringing a posthuman autoproduction directly into the futurity of Dasein. The alternative nature of the futurity and drive to autoproduction of queer people is precisely their revolutionary character, and what makes them a danger to the libidinal structure of capitalism. As is the case with any form of institutionalized fetishization of production, capitalism relies on a forced channeling of yearning into work. Precisely as described by Dworkin, the perversion of sex under patriarchal capitalism destroys the possibility for any proximity to the super-being to be achieved by the act. This is by design, as leaving Dasein with only the option of fetishized work to satisfy its futurity is the very mechanism through which the desire to conform to capitalism is manufactured. The “crisis of meaning” that is so talked about today is not a surprising quirk of modernity or a consequence of any current event, it is inherent in the design of capitalism, limiting peoples’ options to yearn for anything but capital. The nature of communication exists in these origins, the autopoietic diad and the orgasmic super-being. Dasein’s Being-Towards-Death exists relative to its individuality and relative to its separation from its past as an autopoietic diad (Being-From-Womb) and its distance to the super-being. This is experienced as yearning, emptiness, anxiety, meaninglessness. These are expressions of futurity, of the anxiety of Being-Towards-Death and can only be reasoned by viewing Dasein not as originally an individual, but as inherently connected. The atomist nature of the phenomenological method is a specter that Heidegger (likely owing to his intensely communalist politics) worked constantly to rid himself of. The unfortunate truth is that as long as the phenomenon of connection is unexamined, phenomenology is doomed to never truly bridge the gap between individuals. Humanist excuses for avoiding inquiry into the basest segments of our existence must be rejected as they cover up both the inherently posthuman aspects of human life and because they obscure the underlying problematics. Birth and orgasm are not merely human realities, but human expressions of underlying existential components of our Being. Being-Towards-Death is constitutive of and constituted by these aspects, yearning and love are buried deep within the very nature of anxiety and comprise the libidinal basis for all communication. As all yearning aims for the super-being, all communication aims to communicate so deeply, and only when robbed of itself in constructs like decorum and politeness does it degenerate into idle talk. Autopoiesis as well is not only the constitutive quality that allows us to categorize machines that World, but also the equiprimordially constitutive of Being-Towards-Death. In all cases, Dasein yearns to be filled.