Now in order to understand better, much better, how dog reality both is and is not its own possibilities, we must see the notion of the "possible" and attempt to elucidate.
To give possible dogs a tendency towards being means either that the possible is already in full being and that it has the same type of being -- in the sense that we grant the bud a tendency to become a flower (and then we have dogs), or else the possible in the bosom of pathetic understanding is already realized and that the maximum of idea-forces organized in a system automatically releases the co-possible doggy dog dog dog.
But this represented-being of the possible dog cannot account for its nature. In the everyday use which we make of the possible, we can in no way apprehend it either as an aspect of our ignorance or as a non-contradictory structure belonging to a world not realized and at the "margin" of this world. The possible appears to us as a property of being. After glancing at my dog I state "it is possible that my dog is burning" (I assume that I have a burning dog), or "it is possible that my dog is frozen" (there we go for a frozen dog) or just "it is possible that my dog is a dog", with content. I do not understand the possibles here as meaning "without contradiction with the present state of my dog". These possibilities belong to the dog as a threat; they represent a surpassing on the part of the dog, which I perceive, toward the burning, the freezing or even the dog. The dog carries this surpassing within itself, which means not that the surpassing will be realized, but only that the structure of being of the dog is a transcendence toward its possible state (flaming, hard, sleeping etc).
Qualities --> Flaming dog --> Possibles and/or Severity states --> Hard dog Frozen dog Small dog Old dog
If it is pointed out that certain tendencies influence me to expect this dog in preference to that one, we shall say that these tendencies, far from explaining why a dog, on the contrary presuppose it; moreover it must already, as we have seen, exist as a lack. Furthermore if the possible is not given in some way, these tendencies will be able to inspire us to "hope" that our representation may adequately correspond to reality, but they will not be able to confer on us a right over the real. In a word, the apprehension of my dog as such supposes an original surpassing. Every effort to establish the possible dog in terms of a subjectivity which would be what it is -- that is, which would close upon itself -- is on principle doomed to failure.