"Man qua man"? Tautology qua tautology!
What could it possibly mean to live as a "man qua man"? That doesn't seem to be the right question. Assuming that one is a man to begin with, how could one possibly not live as a "man qua man"? Now that is the question!
And yet this just begs the question: what do you mean by "man"? Is "man" an ideal form - the "absolute spirit" of man? If that is the case, I must inform you that noone lives as a "man qua man". Your "man" is a spook!
But oh, you sly ones, do you then claim to bring us "the superman"? Away with your "superman"! I know nothing of it. "The superman" is alien to me. You dare insinuate that "the superman" is above my ego?
My ego consumes "the superman" and takes it for its own. I transvaluate your transvaluation, for I am all in all. I no longer am possesed by either "man qua man" or "the superman". I am neither man or superman.
I am unique! Unique qua unique!
