Szondi and Heidegger, while both influential thinkers whose ideas intersect with existential themes, differ significantly in their understanding of conscious choice, particularly concerning the role of the unconscious and the scope of individual freedom. According to the sources, Heidegger views choice as a fundamental and conscious act that is central to human existence. His concept of "Conscience" calls on each individual (Dasein) to make choices and take responsibility for them. Heidegger emphasizes that before one can make a specific choice, there is a prior "choice to choose," an embracing of one's own possibility for action. This act of choosing is deeply intertwined with the authenticity of one's being. In "resoluteness," Dasein assesses the possibilities inherent in its situation and makes a decisive choice. For Heidegger, authentic Dasein cannot rely on pre-established moral codes but must choose and determine its own path. His philosophy highlights the individual's conscious confrontation with their own being, including the fundamental existential of "being-toward-death," which shapes the horizon of possible choices and the very historicity of Dasein. Szondi, on the other hand, presents a more nuanced perspective on choice through his theory of fate analysis, particularly in his "New Anancology". While acknowledging the importance of conscious choice, which he terms "fateful choice" and associates with the "pontifex self" or "pontifex ego", Szondi also posits a powerful influence of the "familial unconscious" and "fateful compulsion" on an individual's life. According to Szondi, major life choices, such as those related to love (libidotropism), profession (operotropism), worldview and friendship (idealotropism), and even illness and the manner of death (morbotropism), are partly determined by unconscious transgenerational patterns inherited through the familial unconscious. This "fateful compulsion" operates as a significant factor alongside conscious decisions. The key difference lies in the degree and nature of unconscious influence. For Heidegger, choice is primarily a conscious act grounded in the individual's existential freedom and responsibility. While he explores the "thrownness" of Dasein into a particular world and its inherited possibilities, the act of authentic choosing is still portrayed as a conscious appropriation and projection of possibilities. Szondi, however, explicitly integrates the unconscious as a determining force in shaping the very landscape of choices available to an individual. He sees "fateful compulsion" and "fateful choice" as coexisting in a dialectical and dynamic relationship. Furthermore, the role of the self differs. Heidegger's Dasein is fundamentally concerned with its own being and authentic existence in the face of death. Szondi's "pontifex self," while capable of conscious choice and self-awareness, also serves as a bridge between the conscious and unconscious realms, with the capacity to "socialize, humanize, individualize, sublimate and transcend" the instinctual drives arising from various levels of the unconscious (individual, familial, and collective). This "pontifex self" gains power through connecting to the "highest instance of the spirit (Geist)," enabling conscious choice through self-knowledge of the familial unconscious heritage, which then demarcates the horizon of possible choices. Another significant divergence lies in the overall tone. While Heidegger's existentialism, particularly in _Being and Time_, can be interpreted as grappling with a potentially pessimistic view of human existence ending in death, Szondi's theory, especially with the emphasis on the pontifex self and the possibility of transcendence and participation, offers a more optimistic outlook on the potential for individuals to shape their fate through conscious effort and self-awareness. Szondi believed that through understanding their familial unconscious, individuals could not only choose between different fate options but also actively influence and humanize their instinctual impulses. In summary, while Heidegger emphasizes the fundamental freedom and conscious nature of existential choice in the face of being, Szondi's theory introduces a significant layer of unconscious determination through the familial unconscious, which influences the very nature of the choices individuals make. Szondi's "fateful choice" operates within a framework where unconscious "fateful compulsion" plays a crucial role, and the conscious self acts as a mediator and potential transcender of these unconscious influences. This constitutes a fundamental difference in their conceptualization of the origins and scope of conscious choice.