PHILO LECTURE NOTES PDF

LECTURE NOTES – 2 Introduction to the Philosophy of the Human Person Context: Plato’s scission refers to a concept introduced by Plato in his dialogues, particularly in works like the “Phaedrus” and the “Phaedo.” It involves the idea of dividing or separating various elements of reality or knowledg...

LECTURE NOTES – 2 Introduction to the Philosophy of the Human Person Context: Plato’s scission refers to a concept introduced by Plato in his dialogues, particularly in works like the “Phaedrus” and the “Phaedo.” It involves the idea of dividing or separating various elements of reality or knowledge into distinct categories to better understand their nature and relationships. This “scission” or division helps in clarifying complex philosophical issues by breaking them down into more manageable parts. The need for a method in philosophy stems from the necessity of a structured approach to address and solve philosophical problems. Philosophy often deals with abstract concepts and fundamental questions about existence, knowledge, values, and reason. Without a systematic method, it can be challenging to navigate these issues effectively. In Plato’s view, the method often involves dialectic – a form of dialogue or debate where ideas are examined through questioning and discussion. Using this method helps us reveal the underlying assumptions, clarify concepts, and ultimately arrive at a deeper understanding of philosophical issues. PLATO’s Theory of Forms The Nature of Reality Plato argued that the physical world we experience through our senses is NOT the true reality but ONLY a shadow or reflection of a higher, more perfect reality. He believed that everything in the physical world is imperfect and constantly changing. For example, think about a tree: it grows, loses leaves, may wither and die. This changing, physical tree is not the “true” form of a tree; it is just an imperfect copy. In contrast, TRUE reality exists in an eternal, unchanging realm that is beyond our senses. o The ‘really real’ are those things that are eternal and unchanging, and are found in the World of Forms (Ideas). Plato claimed that what we experience through sight, touch, and other senses is just temporary, while the deeper reality – the essence of things – remains constant and perfect. The World of Forms According to Plato, the World of Forms (or Ideas) is where true reality exists. Forms are the perfect, non-physical essence of all things. They represent the purest version of objects or concepts. o Example-1: Consider the idea of a “circle.” In the physical world, you may draw a circle on paper, but it will never be perfectly round. However, the Form of a Circle – the perfect, abstract idea of a circle – exists in the World of Forms. o These Forms are eternal and unchanging. No matter how many imperfect circles you draw, the perfect “Form of the Circle” remains the same. o Example-2: Consider the concept of Justice, in the physical world, our attempts to create a just society are flawed and ever-changing, but the Form of Justice is the perfect and timeless ideal. FORMS are independent of the physical world. Even if all trees were to disappear from the earth, the Form of the Tree would still exist as the perfect idea of what a tree truly is. For Personal and Classroom Use Only 1 LECTURE NOTES – 2 Introduction to the Philosophy of the Human Person Similarly, the Form of Beauty, Truth, or Equality exists independently of how we experience these concepts in the physical world. In Plato’s view, we are like the prisoners in his Allegory of the Cave: we mistake what we see for reality when the true, perfect reality lies beyond our physical perception, in the World of Forms. The Allegory of the Cave The Allegory of the Cave is one of his most famous metaphors, illustrating his theory of knowledge and reality. In the allegory: o Prisoners are chained inside a dark cave, unable to turn their heads, and can only see the shadows of objects projected on the cave wall from a fire burning behind them. o These prisoners mistake the shadows for the entirety of reality, as they have never seen the actual objects causing them. o When one prisoner is freed and experiences the outside world for the first time, he realizes that the shadows were mere illusions, and the true reality exists outside the cave, illuminated by the sun. This allegory represents the intellectual journey from ignorance and illusion (the shadows) to enlightenment and true knowledge (the outside world), symbolizing the transition from the deceptive world of appearances to the higher World of Forms, where ultimate truth and understanding reside. Plato’s View: Human Person A person is essentially a soul, not merely a physical body, as understood through Plato’s concept of the “Form of the Soul.” The SOUL is the essence of what it means to be human. Plato divides the soul into three (3) distinct parts: o Rational soul – the seat of reason and wisdom, guiding the pursuit of truth and knowledge. o Spirited soul – the source of courage and willpower, driving honor and ambition. o Appetitive soul – the center of desires and instincts, concerned with bodily pleasures and material needs. According to Plato, the physical body and the material world are realms of imperfection, subject to change and decay, while the world of Forms exists independently and is the realm of perfect, unchanging, and eternal ideals, including abstract concepts like justice, beauty, and the soul. In this philosophical framework, the soul is viewed as an immortal, non-material entity. It originates in the world of Forms, existing in a state of perfection before it enters the body at birth and departs upon death, returning to the realm of Forms. The physical body is merely a temporary vessel for the eternal soul, which transcends the limitations of the material world. For Personal and Classroom Use Only 2 LECTURE NOTES – 2 Introduction to the Philosophy of the Human Person ARISTOTLE’S Theory of Substance A. The Nature of Reality Aristotle rejected Plato’s dualism, which separates the physical and non-physical worlds. Instead, Aristotle believed the physical world is real and that true knowledge comes from empirical observation and experience rather than relying on abstract ideas. o For example: On the one hand, Plato argued that the perfect form of a tree exists beyond the physical world. On the other hand, Aristotle believed that we can understand the nature of a tree by studying actual trees in the physical world. Observing the tree’s growth, structure, and function leads us to knowledge about its essence. In this context, Aristotle believed that the physical world is REAL and that true knowledge can be derived from EMPIRICAL observation and analysis. Meaning, the world can be known through experience. B. Theory of Substance (Metaphysics) Aristotle’s theory of substance is central to his metaphysics. A substance is that which underlies and persists through change. o Primary substances refer to individual entities, such as a particular human being or a specific horse. o Secondary substances refer to categories or species, such as “humanity” or “horses” in general. This theory states that EVERYTHING in the world is composed of two fundamental components: matter (hyle) and form (morphe). o Matter is the underlying material or substance of an object. o Form is the specific essence or structure that gives an object its identity and properties. o For instance, a wooden table is made of matter (wood) and has a form (the design or structure of the table). Without both, the table wouldn’t exist as a recognizable object. C. Human Person as Hylomorphism Aristotle applied his theory of Substance to human beings, suggesting that a person is a compound (combination) of matter (the physical body) and form (the rational soul or mind). EVERYTHING in this world is composed of two (2) fundamental components: Matter (hyle) is the material or substance that makes up an object. Form (morphe) is the essence or structure that gives an object its identity and characteristics. In relation to the Human Person: o Matter (hyle) is the physical body o Form (morphe) is the rational soul, which gives the human person their unique essence. In this context, Aristotle described the human person as “an individual substance of a rational nature.” o For example, the human body (matter) is the physical aspect, while the mind and reasoning abilities (form) make us uniquely human. A person remains the same individual despite changes in appearance or knowledge over time. For Personal and Classroom Use Only 3 LECTURE NOTES – 2 Introduction to the Philosophy of the Human Person D. Theory of Substance in relation to the notion of Hylomorphism Humans as beings with both a physical aspect (the body) and a non-material aspect (the rational soul), emphasizing the importance of both components in understanding the true nature of a person. In Aristotle’s philosophy, the idea of “an individual substance of rational nature” pertains to his conception of the human person as a unique and distinct entity with specific characteristics. Let’s break down this idea in relation to the human person: o Individual Substance: Aristotle viewed each human being as an individual, distinct substance. This means that every person is a separate and unique entity, different from all others. For example, your individual personality, characteristics, and experiences make you unique. o Rational Nature: Aristotle believed that what sets humans apart from animals and other creatures is their rational nature. Humans possess the capacity for reason and intellect, which allows them to think, reflect, make choices, and engage in moral deliberation. For example, while animals may act on instinct, humans have the ability to reason and make ethical decisions, such as choosing between right and wrong in a given situation. E. Theory of Virtue (Ethics) Aristotle believed that being human involves not just existing as an individual but striving for a life of rationality and virtue. Rationality is the key feature of human nature and is central to Aristotle’s ethics. The ultimate goal of human life is to achieve eudaimonia, often translated as “happiness” or “flourishing.” However, Aristotle’s concept of happiness goes beyond pleasure – it is about living a virtuous and fulfilling life. o For example, a person achieves eudaimonia not by pursuing temporary pleasures but by developing their intellectual and moral capacities over a lifetime Aristotle argued that virtue lies in moderation, a principle known as the Golden Mean. Virtue is found between extremes, such as between recklessness and cowardice, with courage as the virtuous middle. o For example, bravery in the face of danger (courage) is virtuous, but too much fear (cowardice) or too little fear (recklessness) is a flaw. o A life of moderation is a life worthy of human flourishing. Virtues like courage, wisdom, and justice are essential for achieving eudaimonia. By consistently making virtuous choices, individuals can live a life that is not only morally sound but also fulfilling and purposeful, aligning with Aristotle’s vision of human flourishing. IN OTHER WORDS, Aristotle’s view emphasizes that humans are both physical and rational beings who can achieve a meaningful life through reason and virtue. For Personal and Classroom Use Only 4 LECTURE NOTES – 2 Introduction to the Philosophy of the Human Person ST. AUGUSTINE OF HIPPO He believed that the human person is primarily a soul temporarily inhabiting a physical body. He saw the soul as immortal and divine, created by God, and the body as temporary and mortal. Augustine’s principle supporting this view is rooted in his Christian belief that the soul’s ultimate destiny is union with God, and the body is a temporary vessel for the soul during a person's earthly life. Augustine’s notion of Imago Dei is closely related to his view of the human person. In Augustine’s theology and philosophy, the concept of Imago Dei has profound implications for his understanding of the human person. o Divine Origin: Augustine believed that the human person is created in the image and likeness of God. This means that human beings have a unique and special connection to the divine. The Imago Dei signifies that humans share certain qualities or attributes with God, such as reason, intellect, and the capacity for moral understanding. o Moral and Spiritual Nature: Augustine's view of the human person is deeply rooted in the idea of the soul's moral and spiritual nature. He saw the human soul as the locus of the Imago Dei, where individuals have the capacity for moral discernment, free will, and the pursuit of spiritual growth. This perspective underscores the importance of the soul in Augustine’s view of the human person. o Teleological Perspective: Augustine believed that the ultimate purpose of human life is to seek union with God and to conform to the divine image within them. This teleological perspective informs his understanding of the human person as someone on a journey toward God, striving for moral and spiritual perfection. In other words, Augustine’s concept of Imago Dei is intimately connected to his view of the human person as a morally and spiritually endowed being with the potential for communion with God. The Imago Dei serves as a foundational principle that shapes his understanding of the nature, purpose, and destiny of human beings. SAINT THOMAS AQUINAS Aquinas, heavily influenced by Aristotle, viewed the human person as a composite of body and soul. He believed that the soul is the substantial form of the body, meaning it gives the body its identity and animates it. The soul, for Aquinas, is rational and immortal, and it is the source of human consciousness and intellect. The human person is an individual substance of rational nature, quite like Aristotle. The term ‘rational’ connotes the will and intellect of the person. His principle is based on the idea that the soul and body together form a unified, complete human being, and both are essential for human existence and functioning. Augustine emphasizes the primacy of the soul and its divine origin, while Aquinas emphasizes the unity and interdependence of the soul and body in constituting the human person. For Personal and Classroom Use Only 5 LECTURE NOTES – 2 Introduction to the Philosophy of the Human Person RENE DESCARTES (France) He used a foundational principle in his philosophy known as “cogito, ergo sum,” which means “I think, therefore I am.” o This principle is at the core of his explanation of the human person. Descartes argued that while we can doubt everything, including the existence of the external world or even the existence of God, we cannot doubt the fact that we are thinking beings. The act of doubt itself requires thinking, and therefore, the existence of a thinking self is undeniable. This thinking self, according to Descartes, is what defines the human person. He called this thinking self “res cogitans,” which is Latin for “thinking thing" or "mind.” In Descartes’ philosophy, the human person is primarily a thinking, conscious being, distinct from the physical world. On the other hand, “res extensa” is another Latin term used by Descartes, which means “extended thing” or “matter.” It refers to the physical, extended world of objects that we perceive through our senses. Descartes believed that the physical world, including our bodies, is made up of matter (res extensa), while the thinking self (res cogitans) is non-material and distinct from the physical realm. In other words, Descartes used the principle “cogito, ergo sum” to assert that the thinking self (res cogitans) is the core of the human person because it is the one undeniable certainty in his philosophy. “Res extensa” refers to the physical world, and Descartes’ dualism posits that the human person is a combination of the thinking self and the physical body, which are fundamentally different in nature. IMMANUEL KANT (German) The principle that supports and explains Kant’s definition and understanding of the human person as a moral agent. This idea is premised on the principle of rational autonomy. o Rationality allows individuals to use reason to make moral judgments and act according to principles, while autonomy means the ability to make moral choices freely and independently, guided by reason and moral principles rather than external influences. For Kant, the Categorical Imperative (CI) essential in understanding a person's duty as a moral agent. Kant’s categorical imperative is a central concept in his moral philosophy. The categorical imperative is essential in understanding a person’s duty as a moral agent because it guides individuals in making moral decisions based on reason and rational principles rather than personal desires or external pressures. It emphasizes the importance of treating others with respect and dignity and acting in ways that can be universally justified. This concept of moral duty, rooted in rational autonomy, is central to Kant’s understanding of the human person as a moral agent capable of making morally sound choices. Kant’s view of the human person as a moral agent is deeply tied to his ethical theory, which he elaborated in works like the “Groundwork for the Metaphysics of Morals” and the “Critique of Practical Reason.” o The only thing that is absolutely good, good in itself and without qualification, is the good will. For Personal and Classroom Use Only 6 LECTURE NOTES – 2 Introduction to the Philosophy of the Human Person o All the other intrinsic goods, both intellectual and moral, can serve the vicious will and thus contribute to evil. o They are only morally valuable if accompanied by a good will. o All duties or obligations can be translated into the language of imperatives, or commands. o As such, moral duties can be said to have imperative force. Why did Kant define the human person as a moral agent? o Rational Autonomy: Kant believed that what distinguishes humans from other beings is their capacity for rational autonomy. Autonomy means the ability to make moral choices freely and independently, guided by reason and moral principles rather than external influences or desires. Kant considered this rational autonomy to be the hallmark of human dignity. o Moral Law and Duty: Kant argued that morality is rooted in rationality and the capacity to recognize and act upon moral principles. He believed that moral principles are not imposed externally but are discovered through rational reflection. Therefore, human beings, as rational agents, have the ability and duty to recognize and follow the moral law, which he expressed through the categorical imperative. o Universal Moral Principles: Kant's concept of moral agency is closely tied to the idea that moral principles must be universal and applicable to all rational beings. A true moral agent, according to Kant, acts according to principles that could be consistently willed as universal laws. This universality and rationality are key aspects of his understanding of the human person as a moral agent. CATEGORICAL IMPERATIVE o Principle of the Universal Law – “Act only according to that maxim by which you can at the same time will, that it would become a universal law.” o Principle of Humanity – “Act so that you treat humanity, whether in your own person or in that of another, always as an end and never as a means only.” o Principle of Autonomy – “Every rational being is able to regard oneself as a maker of universal law, that is, we do not need an external authority (like God, the State, our culture, or anyone else) to determine the nature of the moral law, since we can discover this for ourselves.” For Kant, being human means having the capacity for rational moral deliberation, the ability to recognize and follow moral principles, and the duty to act in accordance with the moral law. In Kant’s view, moral agency is intrinsic to human nature and is a fundamental aspect of what it means to be a person. SǿREN KIERKEGAARD (Danish - Berlin) Kierkegaard had a complex and multifaceted understanding of the human person, which he explored in his philosophical and theological writings. His ideas are often framed within the context of the “three stages of existence” or “stages of life,” which are central to his understanding of the human condition. Aesthetic Stage: In this stage, individuals live primarily for sensory pleasure and immediate gratification. They are driven by their desires and are often characterized by For Personal and Classroom Use Only 7 LECTURE NOTES – 2 Introduction to the Philosophy of the Human Person a lack of commitment and a search for novelty and excitement. Kierkegaard believed that individuals in this stage lack a deeper sense of purpose and are trapped in a cycle of hedonism and boredom. Ethical Stage: This stage represents a higher level of existence where individuals recognize the importance of moral values, duties, and commitments. In this stage, individuals seek to live in accordance with ethical principles and take responsibility for their actions. Kierkegaard emphasized the need for ethical choices and personal integrity in this stage. Religious Stage: This stage is the highest stage of existence for Kierkegaard. It involves a deep commitment to faith and religious values. It's important to note that Kierkegaard's religious stage is not limited to any specific religious tradition but represents a profound and personal relationship with the divine. In this stage, individuals make a “leap of faith” and find ultimate meaning and purpose through their relationship with God. Kierkegaard’s understanding of the human person is closely tied to the idea of individual subjectivity and the existential choices that individuals make. He believed that true selfhood and authenticity are found in the religious stage, where individuals confront the ultimate questions of existence and make a commitment to a higher purpose, whether it be religious or moral. The goal of human existence, according to Kierkegaard, is to attain a state of authentic selfhood by moving beyond the aesthetic and ethical stages to embrace the religious stage. This involves a profound and passionate commitment to faith and the pursuit of a meaningful and purposeful life, guided by one's relationship with the divine. Kierkegaard’s philosophy underscores the importance of individual choice, subjective truth, and the personal quest for meaning in the human experience. FRIEDRICH NIETZSCHE (Germany) Nietzsche had a complex and often controversial understanding of the human person. His philosophy is characterized by a critique of traditional values and the exploration of individualism, will to power, and the concept of the “Übermensch” (Overman or Superman). Major principles and concepts that support Nietzsche’s understanding of the human person: o Critique of Traditional Morality: Nietzsche was critical of conventional moral values, particularly what he called “slave morality” or “herd morality.” He believed that traditional morality, which promotes concepts like humility and meekness, suppresses the individual's will to power and creativity. o Will to Power: the fundamental driving force of human beings; individuals have an inherent desire for self-assertion, self-improvement, and the pursuit of their own goals. It is not merely about domination but about the constant striving to overcome challenges and obstacles. o Übermensch (Overman): Nietzsche's concept of the Übermensch represents the idealized individual who has transcended traditional morality and societal constraints. For Personal and Classroom Use Only 8 LECTURE NOTES – 2 Introduction to the Philosophy of the Human Person The Übermensch creates their own values, lives authentically, and embraces their will to power fully. It is a vision of human potential beyond conventional norms. o Eternal Recurrence: Nietzsche introduced the idea of the “eternal recurrence,” which poses the thought experiment that one must live their life as if it would endlessly repeat itself. This concept emphasizes the importance of every action and choice, as they would be repeated infinitely. It challenges individuals to live in a way that affirms life and its value. o Amor Fati: Nietzsche also introduced the idea of “amor fati,” which means “love of fate.” It encourages individuals to embrace and affirm their life's experiences, both positive and negative, as essential components of their existence. o Child, as a philosophical trope: In Nietzsche’s philosophy, he uses the symbol of a “child” to represent the idea of embracing life in a positive and joyful way. When we think of a “child,” we often picture someone who looks at the world with curiosity and excitement, without being weighed down by worries or doubts. Nietzsche believes that we should adopt this childlike attitude towards life, saying “yes” to its fullness and embracing life-affirming values. By doing so, we avoid falling into nihilism, which is a belief that life lacks meaning or value. Instead, like a child, we should approach life with a fresh and creative perspective, not just doing things out of necessity but with enthusiasm and a sense of creativity. In other words, Nietzsche encourages us to live life to the fullest, like a child does, by choosing life and its positive aspects. For Personal and Classroom Use Only 9  LECTURE NOTES – Chapter III Introduction to the Philosophy of the Human Person Phenomenology and Maurice Merleau-Ponty’s Notion of the Human Person I. Introduction to Maurice Merleau-Ponty ▪ Maurice Merleau-Ponty (1908-1961) was a prominent French philosopher and phenomenologist. ▪ He was heavily influenced by the works of phenomenology pioneers, Edmund Husserl and Martin Heidegger. II. Lived-Experience and Human Existence ▪ Merleau-Ponty places significant emphasis on the concept of “lived-experience” (l’expérience vécue) as central to his philosophical framework. ▪ He argues that genuine understanding of the human person and the world can only be grasped through the lens of lived-experience. ▪ In this context, “lived-experience” refers to the immediate, pre-reflective way in which we engage with and make sense of the world. ▪ Important French Terms: o Expérience – Experience o Expérience vécue – Lived-experience o Le Corpse – The Body o Sens – Meaning o Objectif – Purpose o Soi or Moi – Self o Autre – Other III. Philosophy of Perception (Phénoménologie de la perception) ▪ The philosophy of perception is pivotal in Merleau-Ponty’s exploration of lived- experience. ▪ He contends that our perception of the world is not a detached, intellectual process but a deeply embodied and meaningful one. ▪ Perception involves (Le Corpse) the body’s engagement with the world and is inseparable from our consciousness and existence. IV. The Body-World Dialectic ▪ Merleau-Ponty posits that the relationship between the body and the world is dialectical in nature. ▪ Our body is the vehicle through which we perceive and interact with the world, and, in turn, the world shapes our understanding of our body. ▪ The body and the world are intertwined, and meaning is co-constituted through this dynamic relationship. For Personal and Classroom Use Only 1  LECTURE NOTES – Chapter III Introduction to the Philosophy of the Human Person V. Lived-Experience and the Meaning of Human Life ▪ For Merleau-Ponty, the ultimate meaning of human life is realized through one’s lived-experience. ▪ Engaging with the world and immersing oneself in the dynamic role of lived- experience is where the richness of human existence unfolds. ▪ Through our body, we perceive the world in ways that are meaningful, and our gestures and actions are imbued with significance. VI. The Intrinsic Connection of World and Self (Soi) ▪ Merleau-Ponty emphasizes that the “world” and the “I” (self) are intrinsically connected. ▪ The self is not a detached, isolated entity but is intimately tied to the world it perceives and engages with. ▪ The self-gains its identity and understanding through its relationship with the world. VII. Experience as the Basis of Knowledge (Connaissance) ▪ In contrast to a purely intellectual approach to knowledge, Merleau-Ponty argues that our lived-experience is the foundation of genuine knowledge. ▪ Knowledge is not solely the product of abstract thinking but arises from our embodied encounters with the world. ▪ It is through our experiences that we come to understand and make sense of our existence. VIII. Conclusion ▪ Maurice Merleau-Ponty’s philosophy centers on the profound interplay between lived-experience, perception, the body, and the world. ▪ He invites us to reconsider the nature of human existence and knowledge, highlighting the importance of engaging with the world in a deeply meaningful and embodied way. For Personal and Classroom Use Only 2  LECTURE NOTES – Chapter III Introduction to the Philosophy of the Human Person Phenomenology and Edmund Husserl’s Notion of the Human Person I. Introduction to Edmund Husserl ▪ Edmund Husserl (1859-1938) was a distinguished German philosopher and mathematician. ▪ He is widely regarded as the “Father of Phenomenology.” ▪ Phenomenology is a philosophical method aimed at understanding the essence of human consciousness and the structures of conscious experience. II. Transcendental Phenomenology ▪ Husserl’s philosophy is founded on the principles of transcendental phenomenology. ▪ He vehemently rejected both René Descartes’ philosophy (Cartesian method) and logical positivism, advocating for a fresh approach to philosophical inquiry. III. Transcending Experience to Find Meaning ▪ According to Husserl, to discover the true meaning in one’s existence, individuals must transcend their immediate sensory experiences and engage in a profound philosophical investigation. ▪ Important German Terms: o Erlebnis: This term can be translated as “experience” or “lived experience.” It typically refers to a specific, individual, and often emotional or significant event or moment in one's life. It emphasizes the personal and subjective aspect of an experience. o Erfahrung: This term translates to “experience” as well, but it tends to refer to a broader, more general concept of accumulated knowledge or expertise gained through a series of events or occurrences over time. It's often associated with a more objective or factual understanding of experience. o Erleben: This term can be translated as “experiencing” or “living through.” It emphasizes the ongoing and immediate process of experiencing events or situations, highlighting the subjective and personal nature of the experience as it unfolds. IV. Fundamental Objective of Phenomenology ▪ AIM: To achieve this transcendental understanding of reality, Husserl posited that philosophy should become a “rigorous” science, characterized by precise methods and systematic inquiry. V. Three Phenomenological Methods ▪ Husserl proposed three phenomenological methods as a systematic approach to understanding consciousness and the world: For Personal and Classroom Use Only 3  LECTURE NOTES – Chapter III Introduction to the Philosophy of the Human Person 1. Epoché: This concept involves suspending or “bracketing” one’s judgment about the external world and the existence of objects, allowing for a pure examination of consciousness. 2. Eidetic Reduction: Through eidetic reduction, one reduces the object of inquiry or observation to its essence, focusing on its fundamental, essential characteristics. 3. Transcendental Reduction: This method involves psychologically reducing the object of inquiry within one's consciousness and examining it in relation to the intersubjective realm of meaning shared among individuals. VI. Conclusion ▪ Husserl’s transcendental phenomenology provides a unique and systematic approach to understanding human consciousness and the structures of conscious experience. ▪ By suspending judgment, reducing objects to their eidos (essences), and exploring the intersubjective realm of meaning, individuals can gain insights into the nature of reality and human existence. Phenomenology, Existentialism, and Gabriel Marcel’s Notion of the Human Person I. Brief Introduction to Gabriel Marcel ▪ Gabriel Marcel (1889-1973) was a French philosopher, phenomenologist, and a Christian existentialist thinker. ▪ He was critical of the Cartesian model of thinking, which emphasized abstract rationality and objectivity. II. The Philosopher of the Concrete ▪ Marcel is often referred to as the “philosopher of the concrete.” ▪ Why? Because he placed significant emphasis on the concrete experiences of human beings rather than engaging in discussions of abstract ideas. ▪ His philosophy is rooted in the lived experiences of individuals and the importance of personal encounters with the world. III. Active Involvement and Participation ▪ Marcel believed that active involvement and participation in the world are crucial for providing a meaningful existence. ▪ He emphasized the embodied subject, where the human person is engaged with the world as a subjective being. ▪ This stands in contrast to purely objective and detached modes of thinking. For Personal and Classroom Use Only 4  LECTURE NOTES – Chapter III Introduction to the Philosophy of the Human Person IV. Two Phenomenological Steps 1. Primary Reflection ▪ It is a way of thinking that characterizes Marcel’s criticism of abstract and detached philosophies. ▪ It involves examining a subject by applying abstraction, generalization, impartiality, and analytic assessment. ▪ Its primary function is to identify, analyze, and solve problems objectively, often without direct involvement in the actual experiences. 2. Secondary Reflection ▪ In contrast, it is a way of thinking that aligns with Marcel’s emphasis on concrete experiences. ▪ It seeks to understand a subject by using concrete examples, representative models, tangible objects, and synthetic assessment. ▪ Its primary objective is to unite or recover the original and authentic experience, emphasizing a return to the lived world. V. The Embodied Subject ▪ At the core of Marcel’s philosophy is the concept of the embodied subject or subjectivity. ▪ He argued that human beings are not merely detached thinkers but are engaged, feeling, and experiencing individuals. ▪ This perspective highlights the significance of personal encounters/involvements, relationships, and active participation in the world as central to human existence. VI. Conclusion ▪ Marcel’s philosophy is a blend of phenomenology and existentialism, with a focus on the concrete experiences of individuals. ▪ He criticized abstract and detached modes of thinking, emphasizing the importance of personal engagement with the world. ▪ Marcel’s distinction between primary and secondary reflection reflects his commitment to understanding the world through lived experiences and recovering the authenticity of human existence. For Personal and Classroom Use Only 5  LECTURE NOTES – Chapter III Introduction to the Philosophy of the Human Person Existentialism and Jean-Paul Sartre’s Notion of the Human Person I. Brief Introduction to Jean-Paul Sartre ▪ Jean-Paul Sartre (1905-1980) was a prominent French existentialist philosopher and writer. ▪ He is often considered one of the key figures in existentialist philosophy. ▪ Sartre’s philosophy places a strong emphasis on human freedom and the responsibility that comes with it. II. Freedom as the Essence of Human Existence ▪ Sartre famously proclaimed, “Man is condemned to be free.” This statement encapsulates his view that human beings are inherently free. ▪ Unlike other animals, humans do not have a predetermined essence or nature. Instead, they define themselves through their choices and actions. ▪ Sartre argues that freedom is not a mere attribute of human existence; it is the very essence of being human. Man is freedom, and freedom is man. III. The Concept of Responsibility ▪ Central to Sartre’s philosophy is the idea that one is only free if and only if they are responsible for their actions. ▪ Sartre defines freedom as responsibility. ▪ To be free means to take responsibility for one’s choices and decisions. ▪ This responsibility extends to all aspects of life, including moral choices, personal relationships, and even inauthentic behaviors. IV. Authenticity vs. Inauthenticity ▪ Sartre introduces the concept of authenticity as living in accordance with one’s freedom and taking full responsibility for one’s choices. ▪ In contrast, inauthenticity occurs when individuals evade their responsibility and fail to recognize their freedom. ▪ Bad faith is a state of inauthenticity where individuals deceive themselves into believing that they are not free or not responsible for their actions. V. The Role of Choice in Freedom ▪ Sartre’s philosophy emphasizes the significance of choice in human freedom. ▪ Every choice made reflects a commitment to a particular course of action, and it shapes one’s identity. ▪ Sartre contends that individuals should embrace the weight of their choices and the consequences that follow. For Personal and Classroom Use Only 6  LECTURE NOTES – Chapter III Introduction to the Philosophy of the Human Person VI. Conclusion ▪ Sartre’s existentialist philosophy revolves around the idea that human beings are condemned to be free. ▪ Freedom is not a mere abstract concept but the defining characteristic of human existence. ▪ To be authentic and fully realize one's freedom, individuals must embrace responsibility for their actions and choices, thus transcending the state of bad faith. Comparison: Fundamental Relation and Difference between Phenomenology and Existentialism Phenomenology provides a DESCRIPTIVE approach to understanding human consciousness, while existentialism provides NORMATIVE questions about the meaning of life and the nature of human existence. Phenomenology and existentialism are two philosophical movements that share some similarities but also have distinct differences: Basic Similarities: ▪ Focus on Subjectivity: Both phenomenology and existentialism emphasize the importance of subjectivity and the individual’s personal experience. They are concerned with the lived experiences of individuals as the starting point for philosophical inquiry. ▪ Rejection of Objectivism: Both movements reject objectivism, which is the idea that there is an objective reality or truth that exists independently of human consciousness. Instead, they argue that reality is constructed through human consciousness and perception. ▪ Emphasis on Freedom: Existentialism places a strong emphasis on human freedom and the responsibility that comes with it. Phenomenology, while not explicitly focused on freedom, provides a framework for exploring human consciousness and the choices individuals make. Basic Differences: ▪ Methodology: Phenomenology is primarily a methodological approach to philosophy. It seeks to describe and analyze human consciousness and experience without making normative or existential claims. Existentialism, on the other hand, is more of an existentialist view or attitude that addresses questions about the meaning of life, freedom, and responsibility. ▪ Normative vs. Descriptive: Existentialism often makes normative claims about how individuals should live and what gives life meaning. Phenomenology, in contrast, is primarily descriptive and seeks to understand how individuals experience the world without prescribing a particular way of living. ▪ Existentialist Themes: Existentialism deals with concrete experiential and existential themes such as authenticity, dread, choice, despair, death, and the search for meaning in an apparently indifferent universe. Phenomenology does not necessarily engage with these themes but provides a methodology for exploring them. For Personal and Classroom Use Only 7 LECTURE NOTES – Chapter IV Introduction to the Philosophy of the Human Person Lesson I: Negative Freedom Introduction: In the area of political philosophy, discussions about freedom have been central to understanding the nature of the state and individual rights. While there are various perspectives on freedom, we will explore the ideas of three influential philosophers: Thomas Hobbes, John Locke, and John Stuart Mill. We will specifically focus on how these philosophers’ notions of freedom align with Isaiah Berlin’s categorization of “negative freedom.” 1. Thomas Hobbes Hobbes’ Background and Context ▪ Thomas Hobbes (1588-1679) lived during a tumultuous period in England, marked by civil war and political instability. ▪ His major work, “Leviathan” (1651), is a response to the chaos and violence he witnessed. Hobbes’ Notion of Freedom ▪ Hobbes is often associated with a pessimistic view of human nature, where life in the state of nature is “nasty, brutish, and short.” ▪ He argued that in this state, individuals have absolute freedom to pursue their desires, but this freedom is accompanied by a constant fear of violence and insecurity. ▪ For Hobbes, freedom is not the absence of constraints but the absence of external impediments to one’s desires. ▪ In his view, true freedom is achieved when individuals surrender their natural rights to a sovereign authority in a social contract, creating a commonwealth where external violence is restrained, allowing for the pursuit of individual interests. ▪ This conception of freedom aligns with Berlin’s notion of negative freedom, where freedom is defined as the absence of external interference or coercion. 2. John Locke Locke’s Background and Context ▪ John Locke (1632-1704) was a key figure in the Enlightenment era, which emphasized reason, individual rights, and limited government. ▪ His ideas heavily influenced the American and French Revolutions. Locke’s Notion of Freedom ▪ Locke believed that individuals possess natural rights, including life, liberty, and property. ▪ He argued that in the state of nature, individuals have the freedom to exercise these rights without interference. ▪ However, Locke recognized that this natural freedom could be limited by the “inconveniences” of the state of nature, particularly in resolving conflicts. ▪ To secure freedom and protect property, individuals enter a social contract to form a civil society with a limited government. ▪ Locke’s view of freedom aligns with negative freedom, as it emphasizes the absence of arbitrary authority and interference with one’s natural rights. 1 For Personal and Classroom Use Only LECTURE NOTES – Chapter IV Introduction to the Philosophy of the Human Person 3. John Stuart Mill Mill’s Background and Context ▪ John Stuart Mill (1806-1873) was a utilitarian philosopher and a strong advocate of individual liberty and freedom of thought. Mill’s Notion of Freedom ▪ Mill’s essay “On Liberty” (1859) is a foundational text for understanding his views on freedom. ▪ He argued that individuals should have the maximum possible freedom to pursue their interests, provided that their actions do not harm others. ▪ Mill introduced the concept of the “Harm Principle,” which states that society can only restrict an individual’s freedom to prevent harm to others. ▪ He emphasized that freedom of thought, expression, and individuality are crucial for societal progress and the pursuit of truth. ▪ Mill’s conception of freedom closely aligns with Isaiah Berlin’s negative freedom, as it underscores the importance of freedom from external interference and coercion. In essence, Hobbes, Locke, and Mill, while differing in their approaches, all contribute to the understanding of freedom as negative freedom, where the absence of external interference and coercion is central to the concept. These philosophers’ ideas have had a profound impact on modern political thought and continue to shape discussions on individual rights and the role of government in safeguarding freedom. Lesson II: Positive Freedom Introduction: Today, we will explore the concept of positive freedom as understood by three influential philosophers: Buddhists, Immanuel Kant, and Jean-Jacques Rousseau. Positive freedom is a notion that delves into the idea of self-mastery, self-realization, and the capacity to act autonomously in alignment with one’s own authentic values and desires. These philosophers’ perspectives on positive freedom contribute significantly to our understanding of human agency and moral autonomy. 1. Buddhist Notion ▪ Buddhist Philosophy: Buddhism, a spiritual and philosophical tradition, emphasizes the path to enlightenment and liberation from suffering. In this context, positive freedom is closely tied to the idea of liberation from the cycle of suffering, known as Samsara. ▪ Freedom as Self-Mastery: Buddhists believe that positive freedom is achieved by mastering one's desires and attachments, ultimately attaining Nirvana, a state of complete freedom from suffering. ▪ Ethical Development: Positive freedom in Buddhism involves the ethical development of one's character, cultivating virtues like compassion, wisdom, and mindfulness. ▪ Detachment and Liberation: The key to positive freedom in Buddhism lies in detaching oneself from worldly desires and transcending the ego, leading to spiritual liberation and inner peace. 2 For Personal and Classroom Use Only LECTURE NOTES – Chapter IV Introduction to the Philosophy of the Human Person 2. Kant’s Notion of Positive Freedom ▪ Kantian Philosophy: Immanuel Kant, an Enlightenment philosopher, introduced the concept of autonomy and moral freedom. ▪ Autonomy: For Kant, positive freedom is grounded in moral autonomy, the capacity to act according to rational, self-imposed moral principles. ▪ Categorical Imperative: Kant’s CI guides moral actions, emphasizing that individuals should act in a way that they will to become a universal law. ▪ Self-Legislation: Positive freedom, in Kant’s view, is about self-legislating moral principles that align with rationality and human dignity, enabling individuals to act freely and morally. 3. Rousseau’s Notion of Positive Freedom ▪ Rousseau’s Philosophy: Jean-Jacques Rousseau, a social contract theorist, focused on the relationship between freedom and society. ▪ General Will: Rousseau introduced the concept of the general will, which represents the collective will of a just society. ▪ Freedom means Social Participation through the Social Contract: Rousseau’s positive freedom is tied to individuals’ participation in creating the laws and norms of a just society. It involves the capacity to act as a citizen in shaping the rules that govern one’s life. ▪ Freedom through Citizenship: In the social contract, individuals are both free and equal participants in determining the common good, making positive freedom a collective and individual endeavor. In essence, the Buddhist notion of liberation from suffering, Kant’s emphasis on moral autonomy, and Rousseau’s focus on collective self-governance all contribute to our understanding of positive freedom. These perspectives highlight the profound connection between autonomy, self-realization, and the capacity to act in accordance with one's values, ultimately enriching our philosophical exploration of freedom. 4. Fromm’s Notion of Freedom ▪ Erich Fromm, a renowned psychoanalyst, and humanistic philosopher, posits that freedom is not merely the absence of external constraints but a dynamic process rooted in human nature. ▪ Basic idea: Genuine freedom involves self-awareness, responsibility, and the ability to act in alignment with one’s authentic self. ▪ Fromm’s concept of positive freedom implies that individuals must engage in continuous self- exploration and self-realization. ▪ It suggests that societal structures should support the development of individuals who are capable of responsible and authentic actions. 3 For Personal and Classroom Use Only LECTURE NOTES – Chapter IV Introduction to the Philosophy of the Human Person ▪ Example: Consider a person who, driven by societal expectations, pursues a career that brings financial success but stifles their true passions. Fromm would argue that this individual may not be experiencing genuine freedom because they are not acting in harmony with their authentic self. 5. Steiner’s Notion of Freedom ▪ Rudolf Steiner, a philosopher, social reformer, and founder of anthroposophy, presents a holistic perspective on freedom deeply intertwined with his spiritual philosophy. He emphasized the interconnectedness of spiritual, social, and individual freedom. ▪ Basic idea: True freedom emerges from spiritual development and ethical considerations. He contends that freedom, when aligned with moral principles, leads to harmonious and just social structures. ▪ Steiner’s concept implies that individual freedom is interconnected with the well-being of the community. ▪ He envisions a society where individuals, through their moral development, contribute to the greater good. ▪ Example: Imagine a community where individuals actively engage in ethical practices and consider the well-being of others in their decision-making. This community embodies a form of freedom that goes beyond individual pursuits and contributes to a harmonious social order. In essence, Fromm’s positive freedom emphasizes self-realization and authenticity, while Steiner's holistic approach connects individual freedom with ethical and spiritual development. Both perspectives challenge us to contemplate the profound nature of freedom and its implications for our individual lives and the broader society. Lesson III: Existentialist Notions of Freedom and Sartre’s Conception Introduction: Today, we will explore into the existentialist perspective on freedom, with a particular focus on Jean-Paul Sartre’s conception of freedom. Existentialism is a philosophical movement that explores the nature of human existence, emphasizing individuality, choice, and authenticity. Sartre’s ideas on freedom are central to existentialism and offer a distinctive view on human agency and responsibility. 1. Existentialist Notions of Freedom ▪ Overview: Existentialism is concerned with the individual’s struggle to find meaning and purpose in a seemingly indifferent or absurd world. For the existentialist, life is meaningless and purposeless. The human person is responsible to find meaning and a sense of purpose in life. ▪ Freedom: Freedom is a central theme in existentialist philosophy. Existentialists emphasize that humans are condemned to be free, meaning that we have the burden of making choices and taking responsibility for our actions. ▪ Authenticity: Existentialists argue that true freedom lies in authenticity, which involves making choices in alignment with one's values, rather than succumbing to external influences or societal norms. 4 For Personal and Classroom Use Only LECTURE NOTES – Chapter IV Introduction to the Philosophy of the Human Person ▪ Anguish and Responsibility: The existentialist view of freedom often involves anguish, as individuals grapple with the weight of their choices and the responsibility that comes with them. 2. Jean-Paul Sartre’s Conception of Freedom ▪ Sartrean Existentialism: Sartre is a prominent French existentialist philosopher known for his exploration of human freedom. ▪ Radical Freedom: Sartre’s conception of freedom is radical. He argues that humans are absolutely free to choose their actions, and this freedom extends even to choosing one's own values and ethics. ▪ Bad Faith: Sartre introduced the concept of “bad faith,” which refers to individuals denying their freedom and pretending to be bound by external circumstances or social roles. Bad faith involves avoiding the responsibility of authentic choices. ▪ Existential Anguish: Sartre acknowledges the existential anguish that accompanies freedom. The weight of choices and the absence of external guidance can lead to anxiety and uncertainty. ▪ “Existence Precedes Essence” famously asserted by Sartre that humans exist first and then define themselves through their choices and actions. This concept aligns with existentialism, which rejects the notion of a predefined human nature or essence. o In the existentialist view, human beings do not possess a predetermined essence, purpose, or set of characteristics that define them from birth. Instead, individuals come into existence first (through birth) and then create their own essence or identity through the choices they make, their actions, and their experiences. o In this perspective, human existence is characterized by freedom, responsibility, and the absence of inherent meaning. Each person must define their own values, beliefs, and identity through their lived experiences. ▪ “Essence Precedes existence” is a philosophical concept that suggests that there is a predetermined, fixed essence, or nature that defines an individual or object before they come into existence. In other words, the nature or characteristics of something are established prior to its actual existence in the world. ▪ Basic Presuppositions of this concept: o Historical Usage: This idea has been associated with certain forms of religious and metaphysical thought, particularly in the context of medieval and scholastic philosophy. It was used to explain the nature of God’s creations and the order of the universe. o Predetermined Nature: According to this view, individuals, objects, or entities have inherent qualities, purposes, or characteristics that are determined before they exist in the world. These qualities define what they are and how they will function. o Teleological Perspective: The concept is often associated with teleology, the philosophical study of purposes or ends. It implies that there is a preordained purpose or goal for each being or thing. 5 For Personal and Classroom Use Only LECTURE NOTES – Chapter IV Chapter 4 Introduction to the Philosophy of the Human Person In essence, Sartre’s existentialist perspective on freedom challenges traditional notions of human nature and agency. His conception of freedom as radical, absolute, and devoid of predetermined essence invites us to explore the existential anguish and responsibility that come with genuine choice. While Sartre’s freedom aligns more with Isaiah Berlin’s negative freedom, it offers a distinctive view on human autonomy and the complexities of authentic existence. Lesson IV: Freedom and Determinism 1. Determinism – It is the philosophical position or belief that all events, including human actions and choices, are predetermined, or governed by causal laws. In a deterministic universe, every event has a cause, and these causes determine all future events. ▪ Kinds of Determinism A. Hard Determinism: It posits that all events, including human actions, are predetermined and inevitable, driven by factors beyond human control such as fate or a deterministic universe. Advocates of hard determinism argue that free will is an illusion, as every choice and action is predetermined by antecedent events and conditions. B. Soft Determinism: It suggests that while there are factors influencing human behavior, individuals still possess a degree of free will. Soft determinists believe that even though external factors may shape choices, individuals can still make meaningful decisions and be held responsible for their actions. ▪ Major Proponents of Determinism A. Leucippus and Democritus: Ancient Greek philosophers who proposed atomism, the idea that the universe consists of indivisible particles (atoms) in constant motion, following deterministic laws. B. Pierre-Simon Laplace: A French mathematician and physicist known for his Laplace’s demon thought experiment, where he argued that if someone knew the positions and velocities of all particles in the universe, they could predict the future with certainty. 2. Arguments for Determinism A. Causal Consistency: Determinism provides a sense of order and predictability in the universe, as every effect has a specific cause. B. Scientific Basis: Many scientific theories, such as classical mechanics and Newtonian physics, initially suggested a deterministic worldview. C. Compatibility with Natural Laws: Determinism seems to align with the idea that natural laws govern the behavior of all things, including human actions. 6 For Personal and Classroom Use Only LECTURE NOTES – Chapter IV Introduction to the Philosophy of the Human Person 3. Challenges to Determinism A. Indeterminacy in Quantum Mechanics: Quantum mechanics introduced the concept of indeterminacy at the subatomic level, challenging strict determinism. B. Human Agency: Critics argue that determinism threatens human agency and moral responsibility, as individuals might not be genuinely responsible for their actions if they are determined by external causes. 4. Freedom – In the philosophical context, it is the capacity of individuals to make choices and act according to their own will, free from external coercion or constraints. ▪ Major Proponents: A. Immanuel Kant: A prominent figure in the Enlightenment, Kant argued for a form of moral freedom, where individuals have the autonomy to act in accordance with rational principles and moral laws. B. Jean-Jacques Rousseau: Rousseau emphasized the importance of political freedom and the “general will,” where individuals collectively participate in creating the laws that govern them. 5. Arguments for Freedom A. Moral Autonomy: Freedom is essential for moral autonomy, allowing individuals to make ethical choices and be responsible for their actions. B. Human Dignity: Freedom is seen as a fundamental aspect of human dignity, allowing individuals to pursue their own goals and aspirations. 6. Challenges to Freedom A. Deterministic Challenges: Determinists argue that true freedom is an illusion if all actions are determined by prior causes. B. External Constraints: Critics of freedom contend that external constraints, such as social, economic, or political pressures, can limit individuals’ genuine freedom. Types of Freedom: 1.) Physical Freedom ▪ Freedom of Movement: The ability to travel, explore, and move without physical constraints or restrictions, such as government-imposed travel bans or physical disabilities. ▪ Personal Autonomy: Having the freedom to make decisions about one’s own body, such as choosing one’s clothing, hairstyle, or engaging in physical activities without external interference. ▪ Freedom from Imprisonment: The absence of physical confinement, where individuals are not restricted within prisons or detained against their will. 7 For Personal and Classroom Use Only LECTURE NOTES – Chapter IV Introduction to the Philosophy of the Human Person 2.) Psychological Freedom ▪ Freedom of Thought: The ability to think, imagine, and form opinions independently, without censorship or external control over one’s thoughts. ▪ Emotional Freedom: The capacity to experience and express a wide range of emotions without fear of judgment or repression from society or individuals. ▪ Intellectual Freedom: The liberty to seek knowledge, explore ideas, and engage in intellectual pursuits without coercion, censorship, or intellectual conformity. 3.) Moral Freedom ▪ Freedom of Conscience: The right to hold, express, and act according to one’s moral or ethical beliefs, even if they differ from societal or religious norms. ▪ Freedom of Religion: The ability to practice one’s religion or belief system freely, without persecution or discrimination, and to choose whether or not to adhere to any religious doctrine. ▪ Moral Decision-Making: The autonomy to make ethical choices and decisions based on one's moral compass, personal values, and principles. 4.) Social Freedom ▪ Freedom of Association: The right to form associations, join groups, or participate in social activities of one’s choice, without unjust interference or discrimination. ▪ Freedom of Speech: The ability to express opinions, ideas, and thoughts openly in a social context, including public discussions, debates, and online platforms. ▪ Cultural Freedom: The liberty to engage in cultural practices, preserve one’s cultural heritage, and express one’s cultural identity without suppression or assimilation. 5.) Political Freedom ▪ Freedom of Assembly: The right to gather, protest, or demonstrate peacefully to express political opinions or advocate for social change. ▪ Democratic Participation: The ability to participate in free and fair elections, choose political representatives, and engage in political processes without coercion or fraud. ▪ Freedom of the Press: The autonomy of media outlets to report news, provide information, and criticize government actions without censorship or undue influence. 6.) Existential Freedom ▪ Authenticity: The pursuit of one’s true self and values, making choices that align with one’s authentic identity rather than conforming to societal expectations. ▪ Freedom of Meaning: The quest to find purpose, significance, and meaning in life, allowing individuals to shape their own existential narratives. 8 For Personal and Classroom Use Only LECTURE NOTES – Chapter IV Introduction to the Philosophy of the Human Person ▪ Freedom of Responsibility: Embracing the responsibility of making choices and taking ownership of one's actions and existence, even in the face of life’s uncertainties and challenges. Some Misconceptions on Freedom: These misconceptions reflect various misunderstandings about the nature and limitations of freedom, often neglecting the ethical, societal, and philosophical dimensions that shape our understanding of this complex concept. 1.) Subjectivistic Freedom ▪ Misconception: It entails the notion of acting “freely” in alignment with one’s subjective wishes, individual preferences, and desires. In other words, it implies acting in accordance with one’s subjective values, beliefs, or feelings, devoid of external constraints like societal norms, legal regulations, or moral codes. ▪ Example: Imagine a person who thinks that freedom means doing whatever they want, regardless of its impact on others. They may argue that their freedom includes actions that harm or infringe upon the rights of others, based on their subjective interpretation of freedom. 2.) Transcendental Freedom ▪ Misconception: It refers to the idea that individuals possess a form of freedom that transcends the causal determinism of the natural world. It also suggests a kind of freedom that is not bound by the physical laws governing the universe. While transcendental freedom may have certain appeal from a speculative or metaphysical standpoint, its lack of empirical grounding, coherence, intelligibility, and compatibility issues with established scientific principles lead many philosophers to regard it as a misconception of genuine freedom. ▪ Example: A person might claim that they have the transcendent freedom to engage in any behavior, even those universally considered unethical or immoral, because they believe their personal freedom supersedes all other considerations. 3.) Scientific Freedom ▪ Misconception: This misconception implies that freedom can be quantified, measured, or proven through scientific methods. Some may believe that scientific research can definitively determine the extent of an individual’s freedom. ▪ Example: In a debate, someone might argue that scientific studies have shown that certain restrictions on personal behavior are necessary for a functioning society. They may erroneously claim that these scientific findings can dictate the boundaries of freedom for everyone. 4.) Populist Freedom ▪ Misconception: This misconception often oversimplifies the complex nature of liberty and personal autonomy. This form of freedom tends to emphasize individual desires and preferences without adequate consideration for the broader societal context, leading to potential conflicts and challenges. 9 For Personal and Classroom Use Only LECTURE NOTES – Chapter IV Introduction to the Philosophy of the Human Person ▪ Example: Some political movements or ideologies that prioritize individual liberties without a balanced regard for collective well-being. For instance, a populist leader might advocate for unrestricted freedom of speech without acknowledging the potential harm caused by hate speech or misinformation. Or an emphasis on unchecked economic freedom, without appropriate regulations, may lead to exploitation and inequality, disregarding the broader impact on society. In essence, the philosophical debate between freedom and determinism continues to captivate thinkers and scholars. While determinism offers a deterministic and predictable view of the universe, freedom emphasizes human agency, moral responsibility, and the capacity for autonomous choices. These opposing ideas raise profound questions about the nature of human existence, ethics, and the boundaries of human freedom. Lesson V: Moral Agency and Moral Virtue in the Context of Freedom 1. Moral Agency – It refers to an individual’s capacity to make moral decisions and take morally responsible actions based on their own values, principles, and conscience. Friedrich Schleiermacher’s View A. Role of Moral Agency: Schleiermacher, a German theologian, emphasized the importance of moral agency in ethical decision-making. He believed that moral agency is rooted in individual subjectivity and feelings of reverence. B. Religious Context: Schleiermacher’s views were often discussed in a religious context, where he saw moral agency as closely connected to one's religious experiences and sense of dependence on a higher power. C. Freedom and Moral Agency: According to Schleiermacher, true freedom emerges when an individual act in harmony with their inner moral compass, guided by their sense of duty and moral sensibility. 2. Moral Virtue – It encompasses a set of good moral qualities, habits, and character traits that enable individuals to act in morally upright and virtuous ways. Aristotle’s View A. Role of Moral Virtue: Aristotle, the ancient Greek philosopher, placed a strong emphasis on moral virtue to achieve ethical excellence. He believed that individuals should cultivate virtuous character traits to lead a life of ‘Eudaimonia’ (Happiness) or human flourishing. B. Ethics and Virtue: Aristotle's virtue ethics focused on cultivating virtues like courage, wisdom, justice, and temperance. Virtuous actions arise from virtuous character. C. Golden Mean: Aristotle proposed the idea of the “golden mean,” which suggests that moral virtue lies between deficiency and excess. Virtuous actions find balance between extremes. 10 For Personal and Classroom Use Only LECTURE NOTES – Chapter IV Introduction to the Philosophy of the Human Person 3. Importance of Agency and Virtue in Exercising Freedom A. Schleiermacher: For Schleiermacher, moral agency is essential for the exercise of freedom because it allows individuals to make choices guided by their inner moral compass. True freedom, in his view, is achieved when one acts in accordance with their moral sensibilities and sense of duty. B. Aristotle: Aristotle believed that moral virtue is central to the exercise of freedom because virtuous individuals are better equipped to make ethical choices. Virtues serve as guides, helping individuals navigate complex moral decisions and act in ways that promote human flourishing. In the discussion of freedom, moral agency and moral virtue play pivotal roles. Schleiermacher emphasized the significance of individual moral agency rooted in feelings and a sense of duty, while Aristotle advocated for the cultivation of moral virtue as the path to ethical excellence and Eudaimonia. Both perspectives highlight the interplay between personal character, moral choices, and the exercise of freedom, offering valuable insights into the relationship between ethics and human flourishing. 11 For Personal and Classroom Use Only