Facticity vs. Factuality: A Journey into Ontological Coaching-Part 2

In Part 1, we explored the foundational distinctions of facticity, factuality, and authenticity. Now, let’s build on these ideas by examining how language shapes our reality, providing practical tools to deepen your ontological enquiry.

Deepening the Distinctions: Linguistic Acts

In my previous post, we looked at the ontological distinctions of facticity, factuality, and authenticity in order to use ontological enquiry to reflect on our life and the challenges we may be experiencing. Ontological coaching has a powerful set of additional distinctions to deepen our ontological enquiry. To further enrich our understanding of facticity and factuality and our unconcealment of our authenticity, we can also look at factuality and facticity through the lens of basic linguistic acts, a framework central to ontological coaching. This framework has its origins in the work of philosophers like John Searle and J.L. Austin, who studied how language shapes our perception of reality. The Basic Linguistic Acts (BLA) framework includes assertions, assessments, declarations, requests, offers, and promises—each of which plays a role in how we navigate the world and create meaning. I will publish another article on the complete BLA framework in another post. For now, we will only concentrate on the two that relate to facticity and factuality:

• Assertions are statements of factuality. They reflect what we believe to be true about the world and are based on objective observations. For example, "The sun rises in the east" is an assertion—it is a statement that can be verified. There is a correspondence between the words used and the world and will be true, false, or pending (an assertion about something in the future).
• Assessments align closely with facticity. They are subjective interpretations based on our past experiences, emotions, and beliefs. For example, saying "I am not good at public speaking" is an assessment—it is coloured by one's past experiences and judgments. As humans, we cannot NOT have assessments; they are constitutive of being human, based on the past, made in the present in order to manage, create, and control the future. Assessments are either ungrounded or grounded, where the grounding is based on true assertions.

By using these distinctions, clients often realise that many of their limiting beliefs are not objective truths but assessments influenced by their facticity. This opens the door to question whether these beliefs are grounded and helps create space for new possibilities.

Real-World Applications of Ontological Coaching

Using these distinctions in coaching helps clients distinguish between objective facts and subjective interpretations shaped by facticity. For instance, a client might assert, "I am always overlooked at work," but through ontological enquiry, they may come to see this as an ungrounded assessment—one based on their past experiences, not an immutable fact.

Reflective Questions to Deepen Your Enquiry

1. What assessments am I mistaking for assertions?

Write down a limiting belief. Is it an assertion or an assessment coloured by your facticity?

2. Who am I being when I respond to these beliefs?

Are you reacting out of habit (Das Man), or consciously aligning with your authentic self (Dasein)?

3. What possibilities open up if I see this situation differently?

Once facticity is separated from factuality, what new actions become available to you?

Call to Action

Ready to take the next step on your journey of self-discovery? Reach out and let’s uncover the distinctions that hold you back and reveal the possibilities awaiting you. Connect with me or share your reflections in the comments below.

If you’re ready to break free from the limitations holding you back, let’s start a conversation. Together, we’ll explore how to take meaningful steps into your authentic way of being.

Graham Smale

Ontological Coach - 2024-10-31

→ Part 1

Hashtags

#OntologicalCoaching #TransformativeChange #LeadershipDevelopment