Intro.-to-Philosophy-Summary-Chapters-1-4.pdf

INTRODUCTION TO THE PHILOSOPHY OF THE HUMAN PERSON (Core Subject) Chapter 1 Understanding Philosophy by Doing It Lesson 1: A Holistic Perspective: The Philosopher’s Way...

INTRODUCTION TO THE PHILOSOPHY OF THE HUMAN PERSON (Core Subject) Chapter 1 Understanding Philosophy by Doing It Lesson 1: A Holistic Perspective: The Philosopher’s Way To understand Philosophy is to engage in it. This entails opening ourselves up to the experience of questioning of our own established beliefs, of looking with the mind beyond what we “see” with our senses. Philosophers use their minds “to see the whole”. They have insight. Insight means “seeing with the mind” (Ferriols, 2001). If Philosophy has a “basic requirement” before one can engage in it that would be the courage to break open our partial perspective in order to have a glimpse of a broader truth. Doing philosophy entails a holistic rather than a partial perspective. With a holistic perspective, we are able to see the connectedness of parts to see a meaningful whole. Having a glimpse of the whole allows us to see the meaning of the activities that we do everyday – from rising to working to sleeping. Perspective / Point of View Perspective is a way of looking at a situation or fact based on true relation or relative importance. The partial point of view is the way of assessing using a particular point of view based on personal beliefs and experiences. A holistic perspective is a way of assessing a situation using all angles possible and weighing each perspective for the best answer. PARTIAL POINT OF VIEW HOLISTIC PERSPECTIVE Pros: Pros: Can make faster decisions Can give a deeper Give a specific set of guidelines understanding of a situation for everyday life Evaluates beliefs and principles thoroughly Cons: Cons: Limited understanding of other Takes time and effort for a perspectives about an issue person Possible bias and prejudices Being critical to all perspectives before reaching a consensus 1  “My philosophy comes from a worldview that looks at the world as one. It’s a holistic view that sees the world as interconnected and interdependent and integrated in so many different ways...” – Dennis Kucinich Did you know? The first noted philosopher in western history is Thales (c. 624-545 B.C.). He was a thinker who loved to gaze at the star. By sensing the harmony in the movements of the heavenly bodies, he deduced the relationship of things in the universe. He said that everything is related to each other because everything that exists contains water. Lesson 2: What it means to be a Philosopher? Philosophy is the study of the fundamental ideas about knowledge, truth, morality, and human nature by exercising reason and logic in questioning existing theories, beliefs, and laws about life as well as answer issues and problems that science and arts deal with. The word “Philosophy” comes from two Greek words ‘philos’ which means love and ‘sophia’ which means wisdom. So philosophy literally means love of wisdom. Sometimes, however, the term ‘pilosopo’ has a negative connotation like someone who asks nonsense questions for selfish reasons. The etymological meaning, however, leads us to the true meaning of ‘pilosopo’ as someone who asks questions because of a genuine desire to know and to view things in a different way. His questions emanate from real confusion, astonishment and wonder and from an honest admission that he does not know. His questions are personal because they deeply touch on his understanding of the meaning of life. In a broad sense, wisdom is the goal of philosophy. Generally, Philosophy is defined as the science that by the natural light of reason studies the first causes or highest principles of all things. A. Branches of Philosophy 1. Metaphysics – It investigates the fundamental nature of reality, being and existence. It is an extension of a fundamental and necessary drive in every human being to know what is real. The question is how to account for this unreal thing in terms of what you can accept as real. (Appearance vs. Reality) 2. Ethics - The study of what is right and wrong in man’s behavior as well as the pursuit of good life. (For Socrates, to be happy person is to live a virtuous life. Knowing what is in the mind and heart of a human being is achieved through self-knowledge. Thus, knowledge does not only mean theoretical or speculative, but a practical one. Practical knowledge means that one does not only know the rules of right living, but one lives them). 2  3. Epistemology - the study of the origins, presuppositions, nature, extent, and veracity of knowledge. How do we acquire reliable knowledge? a. Empiricism – the view that knowledge can be attained only through sense experience. Real knowledge is based on what our sight, hearing, smell, and other senses tell us. b. Rationalism – the view that real knowledge is based on the logic, the laws, and the methods that reason develops. c. Pragmatism - the meaning and truth of an idea tested by its practical consequences. 4. Logic- It is the science and art of correct thinking. Aristotle was the first philosopher to devise a logical method. He understood truth as the agreement of knowledge with reality; truth exists when the ideas in the mind correspond with things in the objective world. 5. Aesthetics – is the science of the beautiful in its various manifestations- including the sublime, comic, tragic, pathetic and ugly. To experience aesthetics, therefore, means whatever experience be that of creative artist or of appreciation. B. Filipino Philosophy 1. Loob: Holistic and Interior Dimensions Kagandahang-loob, kabutihang-loob, and kalooban are terms that show sharing of one’s self to others. Interiority manifests itself in freedom. Loob puts one in touch with his fellow beings. In short, the Filipino as individual looks at himself as holistic from the interior dimension under the principle of harmony. As a result, the Filipino generally believes in the innate goodness of the human being. 2. Filipino Philosophy of time The Filipino believes in the gulong ng palad (wheel of fortune) and hence looks at life as a series of ups and downs. This philosophy of life makes the Filipino an unmitigated optimist. When the so-called wheel of life is on the downtrend, he looks to the future with hope because life’s wheel cannot stay down forever. The Filipino looks at every event, fortunate or unfortunate, as fleeting or transitory. The Filipino Time is mistakenly interpreted as always delayed in the committed time of arrival. This notion can be misleading since the Filipino farmers are early risers to go to their field and waste no time for work. 3. Bahala Na 3  The Filipino subconsciously accepts the bahala na attitude as a part of life. Bahala na literally means to leave everything to God who is Bathala in the vernacular. The bahala na philosophy puts complete trust in the Divine Providence; it contains the element of resignation. Thus, the Filipino accepts beforehand whatever the outcome of his problem might be. “Judge a man by his questions rather than by his answers.”- Voltaire Did you know? Socrates (c. 470-399 B.C.) of Athens, Greece, is known through the writings of his student Plato (c. 427-348 B.C.). In one of Plato’s writings (Apology), a friend of Socrates went to a priestess (an oracle) to ask who the wisest man was. The priestess answered that “there is no man wiser than Socrates.” He was sentenced to death for the charges of disrespecting the gods and for corrupting the minds of the youth. He was killed by being forced to drink the poison hemlock. CHAPTER 2 TRUTH AND PHILOSOPHY Lesson 1: The Domains of Truth If we examine the perspective on truth that has been dominant in society, we would find that people mostly equate truth with scientific truth. We often say that something is true because it is based on facts. Furthermore, we say that something is factual when it is scientifically proven, that is, when it is backed by data-gathering, analysis and repeated verification. Truth understood this way is what philosophers call objective truths. They point to descriptions of “state of affairs” which remain true regardless of who is viewing them. Examples of these are the truths about the water cycle or the truth about the constant acceleration of a free falling body (9.8m/s2). Both examples point to observable phenomena that remain constant and true. Whether or not it is a woman or a man, Japanese or Filipino, a child or an adult viewing this phenomenon, the truths about them remain the same. Some scientists, however, point out that the scientific truths are part of just one among the many ways of understanding truth. Domains of Truth Objective Domain 4  Jürgen Habermas argues, in his universal pragmatics, or the study of the structure of communicative language as we use it everyday, that apart from the scientific truths, there are other domains in life in which we understand truth differently (Habermas: 1979). Scientific truths are covered by the objective domain of life. This pertains to the natural world that maintains a relative independence from the perspective and attitude of human beings that perceive them. Typhoon season, which belongs to the natural realm, comes and goes whether or not we want it. Water’s boiling point remains 100 degrees Celsius, and will remain so even if a powerful tyrant wants to change it. Social Domain In the social domain, “Truth” is analogous with (not the exact equivalent) of a general agreement or consensus on what is right as opposed to what is wrong. The truths in the social domain are mostly products of an “agreement” in society that has been established over time. Because of time- honored presence, they become so embedded in our society such that they are hardly questioned by anyone. It is in this way that norms or values appear as truths. Nevertheless, we have to be constantly aware that these truths are “created” or constructed by people. As such they can be changed through a critical examination and deliberation among the members of a community. Personal Domain Aside from the social domain, there is also the personal domain where truth is analogous with sincerity. This is a precarious domain of truth because no one can have access to our minds and our thoughts except ourselves. For this reason, the truths that we claim in this domain need corresponding actions that will establish trust. A person who proves to be consistent with what he declares about himself is regarded as authentic and can therefore be trusted or trustworthy. Truth and Justification Richard Rorty offers a simple way of defining truth: Truth can be understood as what has passed “procedures of justification” (Rorty, 1989). 5 Justification means the process of proving the truth or validity of a statement. This process is made up of ways of critically testing a claim against certain criteria. Domains of Truth Justification/Criteria for Truth 1. Scientific/Objective domain Empirical Evidence 2. Social domain Acceptability to a particular time in history 3. Personal domain Consistency and authenticity of the person who claims it Criteria for Truth Scientific Statement – held as true when it is justified by data gathered from careful observation and analysis. It goes through a rigorous review process where experts raise critical questions that the researchers should be prepared to answer and defend with data. As soon as scientific claim is no longer questioned or criticized, it more or less gains the status of a scientific truth. In the language of Rorty, the claim of the scientist has passed the procedures of justification. Social Norms – its justification takes longer than scientific truths. This is especially true when what is involved in the process of justifying them are people coming from varying backgrounds and history. Despite the difficulty of gaining a consensus, however, this does not discount the possibility that we can talk about social “truth.” Social norms turned to social “truths” are the basis for the balance in our society. Without them, society will be no different from a jungle in which only the strong and powerful survive. Personal Truths – its justification is probably the longest to complete among the three. This is because personal truths take a whole lifetime of consistency in the actions and decisions of a person who makes claim about himself. For example, when someone says, “I love you” to his girlfriend, how would one know that this is true? True love, as the adage goes, is tested by time. For this reason, believing on someone’s sincerity takes years of hard work. Lesson 2: Truth and Opinion Opinions are propositions based on personal belief, view, or judgment that cannot be verified with evidence. Not all opinions, however, are made 6 equally. Some opinions are so weak while other opinions are very strongly put that people unquestioningly take them as true. Thus, opinions are statements of judgment that are in need of further justification. If they do not pass the test of justification, opinions will have to be defended with better reasons to strengthen them. How to critically examine opinions? First, we need to clarify what an argument is. An argument is a group of statements that serve to support a conclusion. It is composed of a claim (the conclusion of an argument) and premises (the reasons used to support the conclusion). “There is no hope in the Philippine government” (This is not yet an argument. It is an expression of opinion) “There is no hope in the Philippine government because many officials are corrupt, and Filipino voters continue to elect them” (This is an example of an argument) Fallacies Logical fallacies are flawed, deceptive, or false arguments that can be proven wrong with reasoning. Fallacies are illogical, irrelevant, and baseless. These are the most common fallacies you should know about. 1. Argumentum Ad Hominem (Against the person) An ad hominem fallacy uses personal attacks rather than logic. This fallacy occurs when someone rejects or criticizes another point of view based on the personal characteristics, ethnic background, physical appearance, or other non-relevant traits of the person who holds it. Ad hominem arguments are often used in politics, where they are often called "mudslinging." They are considered unethical because politicians can use them to manipulate voters' opinions against an opponent without addressing core issues. Example: My opponent is a notorious liar! You can’t believe a word that he is going to say. Are we going to agree with that foolish man is saying? 2. Argumentum Ad Baculum (Appeal to Force) -An argument where force, coercion, or the threat of force, is given as a justification for a conclusion. 7 Example: You should believe that God exists because, if you don't, when you die you will be judged and God will send you to Hell for all of eternity. You don't want to be tortured in Hell, do you? If not, it is a safer bet to believe in God than to not believe. 3. Hasty Generalization A hasty generalization is a claim based on a few examples rather than substantial proof. Arguments based on hasty generalizations often don't hold up due to a lack of supporting evidence: The claim might be true in one case, but that doesn't mean it's always true. Hasty generalizations are common in arguments because there's a wide range of what's acceptable for "sufficient" evidence. The rules for evidence can change based on the claim you're making and the environment where you are making it — whether it's rooted in philosophy, the sciences, a political debate, or discussing house rules for using the kitchen. Example: Rod and Jeff, both residents of Barangay New Pandan, are lazy and have no ambition in life. Therefore, it is safe to conclude that all residents of barangay New Pandan are Lazy. 4. Argumentum ad misericordiam (Appeal to Pity) An appeal to pity relies on provoking your emotions to win an argument rather than factual evidence. Appealing to pity attempts to pull on an audience's heartstrings, distract them, and support their point of view. Someone accused of a crime using a cane or walker to appear more feeble in front of a jury is one example of appeal to pity. The appearance of disability isn't an argument on the merits of the case, but it's intended to sway the jury's opinion anyway. Example: “Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, look at this miserable man, in a wheelchair, unable to use his legs. Could such a man really be guilty of embezzlement?” 5. False Cause (post hoc) Causal fallacies are informal fallacies that occur when an argument incorrectly concludes that a cause is related to an effect. Think of the causal fallacy as a parent category for other fallacies about unproven causes. One example is the false cause fallacy, which is when you draw a conclusion about what the cause was without enough evidence to do so. Another is the post hoc fallacy, which is when you mistake something for the cause because it came first — not because it actually caused the effect. Example: Every time Jane buys Ethyl Alcohol at Mercury Drug Store, she gets sick. Therefore, she should stop buying Ethyl alcohol to avoid getting sick. 6. Appeal to Authority 8 Appeal to authority is the misuse of an authority's opinion to support an argument. While an authority's opinion can represent evidence and data, it becomes a fallacy if their expertise or authority is overstated, illegitimate, or irrelevant to the topic. Example: citing a foot doctor when trying to prove something related to psychiatry would be an appeal to authority fallacy. 7. Equivocation Equivocation happens when a word, phrase, or sentence is used deliberately to confuse, deceive, or mislead. In other words, saying one thing but meaning another. When it's poetic or comical, we call this a "play on words." But when it's done in a political speech, an ethics debate, or an economics report — and it's designed to make the audience think you're saying something you're not — that's when it becomes a fallacy. Example: Human beings have hands; the clock has hands. He is drinking from the pitcher of water; he is a baseball pitcher. 8. Circular Argument Circular arguments occur when a person's argument repeats what they already assumed before without arriving at a new conclusion. For example, if someone says, "According to my brain, my brain is reliable," that's a circular argument. Circular arguments often use a claim as both a premise and a conclusion. This fallacy only appears to be an argument when in fact it's just restating one's assumptions. Example: Books are so important to develop your reading and the only way to truly learn to read is with books. 9. Argumentum ad ignorantiam (Appeal to Ignorance) An appeal to ignorance (also known as an "argument from ignorance") argues that a proposition must be true because it has not been proven false or there is no evidence against it. The argument can be used to bolster multiple contradictory conclusions at once, such as the following two claims: An appeal to ignorance doesn't prove anything. Instead, it shifts the need for proof away from the person making a claim. Example: Aya and Mel did not make a public statement denying that they are having an illicit affair; thus, this only affirms that our suspicion about them is right. 10. Bandwagon Fallacy 9 The bandwagon fallacy assumes something is true (or right or good) because others agree with it. In other words, the fallacy argues that if everyone thinks a certain way, then you should, too. One problem with this kind of reasoning is that the broad acceptance of a claim or action doesn't mean that it's factually justified. People can be mistaken, confused, deceived, or even willfully irrational in their opinions, so using them to make an argument is flawed. 11. Slippery Slope A slippery slope argument assumes that a certain course of action will necessarily lead to a chain of future events. The slippery slope fallacy takes a benign premise or starting point and suggests that it will lead to unlikely or ridiculous outcomes with no supporting evidence. Example: You may have used this fallacy on your parents as a teenager: "But you have to let me go to the party! If I don't go to the party, I'll be a loser with no friends. Next thing you know, I'll end up alone and jobless, living in your basement when I'm 30!" 12. Straw Man A straw man argument attacks a different subject rather than the topic being discussed — often a more extreme version of the counter argument. The purpose of this misdirection is to make one's position look stronger than it actually is. The straw man argument is appropriately named after a harmless, lifeless scarecrow. Instead of contending with the actual argument, they attack the equivalent of a lifeless bundle of straw — an easily defeated puppet that the opponent was never arguing for in the first place. Example: Keep in mind that straw man arguments often arise as reactions to others’ statements. Person 1: Because of the thefts in our building, I think we should add more security cameras. Person 2: So you’re saying you don’t trust your neighbors? Lesson 3: Methods of Philosophizing Rene Descartes and Western Modern Thinking Rene Descartes (1596-1650), a French philosopher says that only the mind, not the body can arrive at clear and distinct ideas which cannot be doubted. He arrived at this truth by first, asking if objects that I come to 10 know through my senses can be fully trusted. We know that we can not because of the deceptive nature of the senses. We see things- big burger in a billboard, a slim fashion model in a magazine cover- but find upon closer look that we have been deceived. Descartes then knew that the body and the senses cannot be trusted when it comes to arriving at indubitable truths. What can be trusted then? Descartes continues to ask. In the process, Descartes comes to the conclusion that there is one thing that cannot be doubted, and that is, doubt itself. Even if he doubts that he is doubting, the doubting still clearly demonstrates that he is doubting. From this insight, Descartes proceeds with asking what else he can find that cannot be doubted by the mind. He realizes that doubting is thinking. Therefore, thinking cannot likewise be doubted. The more he doubts that he is thinking, the clearer it appears that he is actually thinking. Finally, Descartes realizes the most important truth shown in this process. If there is doubting and thinking, then there must also be thinker and a doubter. And that, of course, is Descartes himself. Cogito Ergo Sum – “I think, therefore I am” When one thinks, one intuitively or immediately realizes that he exists. This is the first clear and distinct idea that one arrives at, namely, that thinking implies the thinker’s existence. The Oriental Thought The Chinese thought differs greatly with its western counterpart, particularly with the Aristotelian logic. Central to this difference is the Taoist theory of the Yin and Yang which permeates Chinese culture including traditional Chinese medicine, martial arts, agriculture, etc. Yin and Yang refer to the two polarities of an entity- the bottom and the top, the inside and the outside. Yin represents rest, darkness, the ground below or earth while Yang is the opposite- activity, brightness, the sky above or heaven. In nature, the moon is Yin and the sun is Yang. In society, the emperor is Yang, the loyal subjects are Yin-Yang relationship. But unlike the Aristotelian logic that influenced western thought for a long time, Yin and Yang are not like A as opposed to not-A. Something can both be Yin and Yang at the same time; there is no pure Yin or pure Yang. Everything is relative: the leg, as we said earlier, is Yin but only in relation to the head. The leg is more Yang when compared with the feet which is more Yin than the legs. The central tenet of Taoism is that everything is Qi, which literally means energy. Everything, my self- body and mind, the world and the things around me is Qi, manifested in different forms and moving differently as Yin and Yang- thinking/moving, resting/working, taking in/letting go. Because Qi is in everything, the relationship between the human being and the universe is very much intertwined. Unlike western modern thinking where the thinker is separated from the world- looking at the world from an objective point of view, The Taoist thought stresses that human being is one with the universe: everything that happens in the universe will ultimately affect man and everything that man does will affect the universe. 11  To understand the truth, therefore, is to understand the Tao: “In the common sense it (Tao) refers to the way of doing anything, or the pathway to some destination. In its higher meaning, Tao refers to the way of the universe, the way things are. As a spiritual system, Tao means the way to achieving a true understanding of the nature of mind and reality, to the way of living in harmony with the changes of Nature. Thus the Tao is the goal, the path and the journey all in one”. What is the oriental “method” to understanding truth? It is by striving to achieve balance in everything - a balance between thinking and moving, resting and working, taking and letting go. “Hinduism’s basic tenet is that many roads exist by which men have pursued and still pursue their quest for the truth and that none has universal validity” –Kenneth Scott Latourette CHAPTER 3 THE HUMAN PERSON AS EMBODIED SPIRIT Lesson 1: The Body as Limitation and Transcendence Human Limitations Human existence is embodied existence. Many things that are related to our existence as persons are related to our bodies – age, sex, race, relationships, etc. We are “confined” to the details about ourselves. Confine comes from the Latin confinis made of two words: con- ‘together’ + finis – ‘end, limit or territory’. It is as if our bodies are made up of fixed boundaries that we cannot transgress. As limitations, the body-related aspects about ourselves are not products of our free choice. They have, in a sense, been given to us on a permanent basis. The Body as Transcendence While we mostly complain about how there are so many things that we can’t change about our lives because of our bodies (the most common example for this is our height as Filipinos), we hardly see that the body also opens possibilities. There is an important paradox about the body that we need to understand. While the body limits us, the very same limitations create opportunities for us. For instance, Manny Pacquiao used 12 his limitation of being lack in height as an opportunity to define boxing in a new way. The Paradox of possibility in Limitation We often complain that we cannot be everything we want to be. In this lesson, the paradox of the body as both limitation and possibility teaches us to be thankful that we cannot be everything, because trying to be so would end us up being nothing at all. This is a paradox. A paradox is a statement that brings together two opposing ideas as true at the same time. In the outset, a paradox seems senseless or absurd. Upon closer look, however, the contradiction is sending a very powerful meaningful message. For example, “It is through our limitations that possibilities become real.” “A small body of determined spirits fired by an unquenchable faith in their mission can alter the course of history” -Mahatma Gandhi Lesson 2: The Human Person as an Embodied Spirit: Ancient and Contemporary Thought 1. Ancient Greek Philosophy: Plato and Aristotle About four (4) centuries before Christ, Plato (428-348 B.C.) Socrates’ student wrote about the nature of the human soul. In Plato’s eyes, man has an immortal and a mortal perishable body. The soul has a tripartite nature consisting of: a) A soul or an immortal rational part, which existed before it became part of the body b) A courageous or a spirited part c) An appetitive part In book IV of Repulic, Plato writes that the soul, “is the giver of life to the body, the permanent, changeless and divine element as opposed to the changing, transitory and perishable body. This makes the human being “a soul using the body. 2. Medieval Christian Philosophy: St. Augustine The novelist Luis de Wohl portrayed the life of St. Augustine in his book entitled The Restless Flame. The human person is a restless being, continuously searching for restful waters, wanting to attain a restful life. Indeed, St. Augustine was restless until he found rest in God. In his Confessions he attributes this restlessness with the distractions of the body’s urges and appetites. 13  What does St. Augustine say about the human being? Firstly, St. Augustine says that man consists of soul and body, “a soul in possession of a body” which does not constitute two persons but one man. The human soul is an immaterial principle which animates/gives life to the body. In the Confession, St. Augustine says the human person is created after the image and likeness of God, and what makes him as such is his power of reason and will. 3. The Modern Period and the Primacy of the Mind over the Body Descartes’ methodical thinking has served as the model for western modern thought. The division between body and soul became even more pronounced as he formulated the concepts res cogitans (thinking thing) and res extenza (extended thing). The former refers to the soul, the latter refers to the body. As the terms indicate, the body is viewed simply as an extension or a machine of the mind. After Descartes has shown that the foundation of all certitude is the cogito, the thing that thinks whose existence cannot be doubted, a certain priority has been given to the self as thinking being. This also means greater importance is given to the mind’s activity- thinking. Impact of the priority to the mind over the body: A) Perception over manual labor B) View against women 4. Phenomenology (It is a philosophy of experience. For phenomenology the ultimate source of all meaning and value is the lived experience of human beings) Edmund Husserl (Austrian-German philosopher and mathematician/ April 8, 1859 - April 27, 1938) - There is an emphasis on the famous adage “back to the things themselves”. A common denominator among known phenomenologists is their dismay on how philosophy has become far removed from everyday life. One of the effects of this detached way of living is the growing lack of sensitivity among persons. People have become more and more indifferent to injustices such as violations of people’s rights. Gabriel Marcel (French philosopher / December 7, 1889 - October 8, 1973) Having and Being The body as an Object - Marcel says that on the one hand, we relate to our bodies as if it is something that we have - “I have a body”. We relate to the body in the same way that we related to things we own. “This is my body. I can do whatever I want 14  with it.” Like a property, we “use it” for our needs and wants. We can even abuse it. To treat the body as something we have is to treat it as an object. The body as subject - Marcel reminds us that the relationship with the body as something you “have” is just one dimension of our everyday experience. Objects like new shoes or phone no matter how much we try these objects are one day going to separate from us. This is the tragedy we are all bound to experience. The body, however, is not something that we can simply lose. If we lose our bodies, we cannot go on to say that we are still ourselves. To lose our bodies, literally, is to die. In this way, we begin to understand that our bodies are not just objects. It is our being, “I am my body”. Marcel says that the root of the problem in this broken world is that we have forgotten how to reflect. Reflection is not something you do by isolating yourself from the world. For Marcel and other phenomenologists, reflection begins with experience. It means that we need to reflect as we live in our experiences as one – body and spirit as one. Maurice Merleau-Ponty (French phenomenological philosopher/ March 14, 1908 - May 3, 1961) The Intelligent Body, the Embodied Mind Maurice Merleau-Ponty articulated the meaning of the inextricable union of mind and body. He pointed out that there is no experience that is not an embodied experience. Everything that we experience in this world- experience of joy, sadness, love, remorse- happens with our bodies. Our bodies open our existence to the world. Because of our bodies, we are in the world. We learn how to live in the world through the constant “communication” between our bodies and the world. When we first learned how to walk, our legs were wobbly and our body movements were awkward. Merleau-Ponty says that this was our entrance as a novice into the world, trying to find our way through things. He believes that body has knowledge. The most important it introduced is the realization that the body is not a mindless tool waiting for the spirit to move it. The body learns things long before we become conscious of what it learns. This is what is groundbreaking about Merleau-Ponty’s observation. He unsettled the traditional way we explain learning: learning concepts in the consciousness, then application of these concepts using the body. He pointed out that we can also learn even while we are not conscious of it. We learn with our bodies. On the other hand, Mearleau-Ponty also stresses how our thoughts in the mind are always embodied. They are never just “pure ideas”. Every idea in the mind needs to have an embodied form. Through our bodies, we open our inner realities into the world. When we want to espress pain, love, joy and sadness, these expressions are always embedded. There 15 is no such thing as love that is just a pure idea. In Filipino we way, “Pangatawanan mo!” Even in our culture, we understand how it is important to enflesh our thoughts and our words. 5. Integrated Unity of Body and Spirit in the Asian Culture Oriental thought has long understood and lived in this truth that western culture is just beginning to appreciate. In other words, Merleau-Ponty’s groundbreaking insight on the intertwined union of body and spirit is not as groundbreaking for Asians, as specially shown in ancient Taoism thought, which is continually integrated with Chinese Medicine. CHAPTER 4 THE HUMAN PERSON IN HIS/HER ENVIRONMENT Lesson 1: Approaches to Understanding the Relationship of the Human Person with the Environment 1. Cosmos-centric Approach The whole of the cosmos is one whole system of order of which we are part. The cosmo-centric approach to understanding our relationship to the environment shows that human beings are a microcosm of the cosmos (‘micro’-small + ‘cosmos’ – universe). It means that the universe is reflected in us; we are small version of the universe. The same cosmic patterns that govern nature also govern our being. What this means then is that when these natural laws and cosmic patterns are tampered with (i.e., increased air pollution leading to global warming), the resulting imbalance will also affect the balance within humans (i.e., increase incidence of asthma). If there is no balance of energies in nature, the persons also feel imbalance within themselves. On the reverse side, when there is imbalance within the person, there would also imbalance within the person, there would also be imbalance in everything around it. 2. Theocentric Approach Theo (God) - centric approach refers to an understanding coming from a religious interpretation. The creation story relates after creating the world, and all that is in it, including man and woman, God said “Go and multiply; fill the earth and subdue it.” The creation story tells how God entrusted the earth to man and woman by giving them role of stewards of creation. It is important to stress the meaning of stewardship here. To steward over something is to manage or to put something under your care. In Filipino, to be a steward is to be katulong or katiwala. It is important to stress this in order to prevent 16  the tendency of interpreting scripture as a welcome note to dominate and completely lord over the environment. 3. The Anthropocentric Approach This approach, anthropos (man) + centric, is like the theocentric approach that puts the human person in dominion over the earth, but de-emphasizes the role of God. During the modern era and up to the present, science dominated the landscape: we discovered that we have the ability to control and tame nature to meet our desires. This however led to the unabated destruction of the natural world to meet our unquenchable needs. A Balanced Approach Learning from all these approaches, we can see that it is possible to put them all together. The cosmos-centric approach emphasizes on the human being as a balance between heaven and earth. This relates to the anthropocentric approach which shows how we are earthly beings in need of resources, and the theocentric approach that emphasizes on our heavenly role as stewards of creation. The task of the student of philosophy of the human person in relation to the environment is to constantly examine his dominant approach. We need this to complement the sciences that address environmental issues from a purely technical perspective. Lesson 2: The Central Role of the human Person in Addressing Environmental Problems We are the ultimate culprit of all forms of environmental degradation and we are the only ones who can also arrest it. We need to change our materialistic and consumeristic lifestyle that is rooted on greed and selfishness. There is such a thing as sustainable development defined as a development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. The fight for the environment should begin on the personal level; individually, we should do our part in preserving and protecting our environment. However, to have a greater impact, the fight should be brought to the social and political level; laws and policies should be enacted to save and revive the natural world and to protect nature from further degradation. Let us not be defeatist; let us be proactive and use our freedom responsibly and commit ourselves to a lifestyle that is beneficial not only to ourselves 17 but also to nature and to our fellow human beings especially to the generations that are yet to come. “Authentic development includes efforts to bring about an integral improvement in the quality of human life, and this entails considering the setting in which people live their lives. These settings influence the way we think, feel and act. In our rooms, our homes, our workplaces and neighborhoods, we use our environment as a way of expressing our identity. We make every effort to adapt to our environment, but when it is disorderly, chaotic or saturated with noise and ugliness, such over stimulation makes it difficult to find ourselves integrated and happy.” - Pope Francis, Laudato Si References: Corpuz, Brenda B. Et al: Introduction to the Philosophy of the Human Person, Lorimar Publishing Inc. 2016. Maboloc, Christopher Ryan: Introduction to the Philosophy of the Human Person, The Inteligente Publishing Inc. 2016. Prepared by: HAROLD L. QUITORIANO SHS Social Science Coordinator 18