GEC 101 Module: Understanding The Self PDF

GEC 101 MODULE UNDERSTANDING THE SELF Prepared by: PRINCE CARL VINCENT D. ROJAS /Instructor  “Knowing thyself is the beginning of Wisdom” - Aristotle The thought of understanding onesel...

GEC 101 MODULE UNDERSTANDING THE SELF Prepared by: PRINCE CARL VINCENT D. ROJAS /Instructor  “Knowing thyself is the beginning of Wisdom” - Aristotle The thought of understanding oneself is not novel to most of us, young generation. It is often asked among secondary level learners; most are adolescents. It is perhaps considered as a cliché which whispers to the inner us. Who am I?.....does this question “ring a bell” to you? Have you truly discovered yourself? Intrapersonal level of Intelligence is being nurtured when we are more knowledgeable about our own “self”. According to Howard Gardner in his theory of Multiple Intelligences, if an individual is strong in intrapersonal intelligence, they are considered good at being aware of their own emotional states and motivations. They tend to enjoy self-reflection and analysis, exploring relationship with others, and assessing their personal strengths. Being able to do these things could be a useful tool or advantage against the adversities and uncertainties of life. Knowing oneself is considered as a precursor in understanding other people, and even all bio existence. It could be easy to understand other entity, if one truly understands himself/herself. Hence, all shall start from within. The current trend in the educational system recognizes the importance of understanding the self. This is the rationale behind the creation and now taught in tertiary level, the General Education Curriculum (GEC) 101, known as Understanding the Self. Due to the presence of the global threat, the COVID- 19 Pandemic, MSU- Buug needs to adapt to the changes brought about by the disease and that is to avoid face-to-face classes. As a remedy, blended learning which include modular class is being utilized by the College Instructors. Hence, this module is created for that sole purpose. This module brings students to the different lessons about self. It has three major chapters; “Self from various Philosophical Perspectives, “Unpacking the Self”, and “Taking Care of the Self” respectively. Each chapters have different lessons. Activities are also incorporated for assessment purposes.  Module 1 Defining the Self: Various Perspectives on Self and Identity Unit 1: The Self from various Philosophical Perspectives Introduction Before we even had to be in any formal institution of learning, among the many things that we were first taught as kids is to articulate and write our names. Growing up, we were told to refer back to this name when talking about ourselves. Our parents painstakingly thought about our names. Should we be named after a famous celebrity? A respected politician or historical personality? Or even a saint? Were you named after one? Our names represent who we are. It has not been a custom to just randomly pick a combination of letters and numbers (or even punctuation marks) like zhk756 to denote our being. Human being attach names that are meaningful to birth progenies because names are supposed to designate us in the world. Thus, some people get baptized with names such as “precious”, “lovely”, “Mary”. Likewise, when our parents call our names, we were taught to respond to them because our name represents who we are. Our names signify us. Death cannot even stop this bond between the person and his/her name. Names are inscribed even into one’s gravestone. A name is not the person itself no matter how intimately bound it is with the bearer. It is only a signifier. A person who is named after a saint most probably would not become an actual saint. He may not even turn out to be a saintly! The self is thought to be something else than the name. The self is something to molds, shapes, and develops. The self is not a static thing that is simply born with like a mole on one’s face or is just assigned by one’s parents like a name. Everyone is tasked to discover one’s self. Have you truly discovered yours? Learning Objectives At the end of this lesson, you should be able to: 1. explain why it is essential to understand the self;  2. describe and discuss the different notions of the self from the points-of-view of the various philosophers across time and place; and 3. compare and contrast how the self has been represented in different philosophical schools. Activity # 1 Do You Truly Know Yourself? Answer the following questions about your “self” as fully and precisely as you can. Responses are written/encoded in a short band papers. 1. How would you characterize yourself? ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ _____________________ 2. What makes you stand out from the rest? What makes yourself special? ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________ 3. How has yourself transformed itself? ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ _____________________ 4. How has yourself connected to your body? ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________ 5. How is yourself related to other selves? ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ _____________________ 6. What will happen to yourself after you die? ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ _____________________ Analysis Were you able to answer the questions with ease? Why? Which questions did you find easiest to answer? Which ones are difficult? Why?  Questions Easy or Difficult to Answer Why? Read ……… The history of philosophy is replete with men and women who inquired into the fundamental nature of the self. Along with question of the primary substratum that defines that multiplicity of things in the world, the inquiry on the self has preoccupied the earliest thinkers in the history of philosophy: the Greeks. The Greeks were the ones who seriously questioned myths and moved away from them in attempting to understand reality and respond to perennial questions of curiosity, including the question of the self. Here, let’s visit the views and perspectives of the various ancient philosophers about the self. Socrates and Plato Socrates Plato Images taken from http://bahaiteachings.org/justifying-god-socrates-platos-republic  Prior Socrates’ time, the Greek thinkers, sometimes collectively called the pre-socratics to denote that some of the preceded Socrates while others existed around Socrates’s time as well, preoccupied themselves with the questions of the primary substratum, arché that explains the multiplicity of things in the world. These men like Thales, Pythagoras, Parmenides, Heraclitus, and Empedocles, to name a few, were concerned with explaining what the world is really made up of, why the world is so, and what explains the changes that they observed around them. Tired of simply conceding to mythological accounts propounded by poet-theologians like Homer and Hesiod. These men endeavored to finally locate an explanation about the nature of change, the seeming permanence despite change, and the unity of the world amidst its diversity. After a series of thinkers from all across the ancient Greek world who were disturbed by the same issue, a man came out to question something else. This man was Socrates. Unlike the Pre-Socratics, Socrates was more concerned with another subject, the problem of the self. He was the first philosopher who ever engaged in a systematic questioning about the self. To Socrates, the true task of the philosopher is to know oneself. Plato claimed in his dialogue that Socrates affirmed that the unexamined life is not worth living. During his trial for allegedly corrupting the minds of the youth and for impiety, Socrates declared without regret that his being indicated was brought about by his going around Athens engaging men, young and old, to question their presuppositions about themselves and about the world, particularly about who they are (Plato, 2012). Socrates took it upon himself to serve as a “gadfly” that disturbed Athenian men from their slumber and shook them off in order to reach the truth and wisdom. Most men, in his reckoning, were really not fully aware of who they are and the virtues that they were supposed to attain in order to preserve their souls for the afterlife. Socrates thought that that this is the worst thing that can happen to anyone: to live but die inside. For Socrates, every man is composed of body and soul. This means that every human person is dualistic, that is, he is composed of two important aspects of his personhood. For him, this means that all individuals have an imperfect, impermanent aspect to him, and the body, while maintaining that there is also a soul that is perfect and permanent. Plato, Socrates’ student, basically took off from his master and supported the idea that man is a dual nature of body and soul. In addition to what Socrates earlier espoused, Plato added that there are three components of the soul: the rational soul, spirited, and appetitive soul. In his magnum opus, “The Republic” (Plato, 2000)), Plato emphasizes the justice in the human person can only be attained if the three parts of the soul are working harmoniously with one another. Rational Soul forged reason and intellect and has to govern the affairs of the human person. Spirited Part is in charge of emotions and it should be kept at bay. Appetitive Soul is in charge of basic desires like eating, drinking, seeping, and having sex are controlled as well. When this ideal state is attained, then the human person’s soul becomes just and virtuous. Augustine and Thomas Aquinas Augustine Thomas Aquinas http://scriptoriumdaily.com/back-and-forth-with-augstine- https://ipintz.wordpress.com/2015/08/28/trademark- and-aquinas-on-the-trinity/ moralities/ Augustine’s view of the human person reflects the entire spirit of the medieval world when it comes to man. Following the ancient view of Plato and infusing it with the newfound doctrine of Christianity, Augustine agreed that man is of a bifurcated nature. An aspect of man dwells in the world and is imperfect and continuously yearns to be with the Divine and the other is capable of reaching immortality. The body is bound to die on earth and the soul is to anticipate living eternally in a realm of spiritual bliss in communion with God. This is because the body can only thrive in the imperfect, physical reality that is the world, whereas the soul can also stay after death in the eternal realm with the all-transcendent God. The goal of every human person is to attain this communion and bliss with the Divine by living his life on earth in virtue.  Thomas Aquinas, the most eminent thirteenth century scholar and stalwart of the medieval philosophy, appended something to this Christian view. Adopting some ideas from Aristotle, Aquinas said that indeed, man is composed of two parts; matter an form. Matter, or “hyle” in Greek, refers to the common stuff that makes up everything in the universe.” Man’s body is part of this matter. Form on the other hand, form or “morphe” in Greek refers to the “essence of a substance or thing”. It is what makes what it is. In the case of the human person, the body is something that he shares even with animals. The cells in man’s body are more or less akin to the cells of any other living, organic being in the world. However, what makes a human person a human person and not a dog or a tiger is his soul, his essence. To Aquinas, just as in Aristotle, the soul is what animates the body, it is what makes us humans. Rene Descartes http://www.sapaviva.com/rene-descartes-2/ Rene Descartes, Father of Modern Philosophy, conceived of the human person as having a body and a mind. In his famous treatise, The Meditation of First Philosophy, he claims that there is so much that we should doubt. In fact, he says that since much of what we think and believe are not infallible, they may turn out to be false. One should only believe that since which can pass the test of doubt (Descartes, 2008). If something is so clear and lucid as not to be even doubted, then that is the only time when one should actually buy a proposition. In the end, Descartes thought that the only thing that one cannot doubt is the existence of the self, for even if one doubts oneself, that only proves that there is a doubting self, a thing that thinks and therefore, that cannot be doubted. Thus, his famous, cogito ergo sum, “I think therefore I am.” The fact that one thinks should lead one to conclude without a trace of doubt that he exists. The self then for Descartes is also a combination of two distinct entities, the cogito, the thing that thinks, which is the mind, and the extenza or the extension of the mind, which is the body. In Descartes’ view, the body is nothing else but a machine that is attached to the mind. The human person has it but it is not what makes man a man. If at all, that is the mind. Descartes says, “But what then, am I? a thinking thing. It has been said. But what is a thinking thing? It is a thing that doubts, understands, (conceives), affirms, denies, wills, refuses; that imagines also, and perceives.” (Descartes, 2008). Hume Image taken from http://www.patheos.com/blogs/davearmstrong/2015/10/was-philosopher-david-hume-an- atheist.html David Hume, a Scottish philosopher, has a very unique way of looking at man. As an empiricist who believes that one can know only what comes from the senses and experiences, Hume argues that the self is nothing what he predecessor thought of it. The self is not an entity over and beyond physical body. One cannot can rightly see here the empiricism that runs through his veins. Empiricism is the school of thought that espouses the idea that knowledge can only be possible if it is sensed and experienced. Men can only attain knowledge by experiences. For example, Jack knows that Jill is another human person not because he has seen her soul. He knows she is just like him because he sees her, hears her, and touches her. To David Hume, the self is nothing else but a bundle of impressions. What are impressions? For David Hume, if one tries to examine his experiences, he finds that they can all be categorized in to two: impressions and ideas. Impressions are the basic objects of our experience or sensation. They therefore form the core of our thoughts. When one touches an ice cube, the cold sensation is an impression. Impressions therefore are vivid because they are product of our direct experience with the world. Ideas, on the other hand, are copies of impressions. Because of this, they are not as lively and vivid as our impressions. When one imagines the feeling being of being in love for the first time, that still is an idea. What is the self then? Self, according to Hume, is simply “a bundle or collection of different perceptions, which succeeded each other with an inconceivable rapidity, and are in a perpetual flux and movement.” (Hume and Stenberg, 1992). Men simply want to believe that there is a unified, coherent self, a soul or mind just like what the previous philosopher thought. In reality, what one thinks is a unified self is simply a combination of all experiences with a particular person. Kant https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immanuel_Kant Thinking of the “self” is a mere combination of impressions was problematic for Immanuel Kant. He recognizes the veracity of Hume’s account that everything stats with perceptions and sensation of impressions. However, Kant thinks that the thing that men perceives around are not just randomly infused into the human person without an organizing principle that regulates the relationships of all of these impressions. To Kant, there is necessarily a mind that organizes that impressions that men get from the external world. Time and space, for example, are ideas that one cannot find in the world, but is built in a mind. Kant calls this the apparatuses of the mind. Along with the different apparatuses of the mind goes the “self”. Without the self, one cannot organize the different impressions that one gets in relation to his own existence. He therefore suggests that it is an actively engaged intelligence in man that synthesizes all knowledge and experience. Thus, the self is not just what gives one his personality. In addition, it also the set of knowledge acquisition of all human person. Ryle https://stochastictalk.blogspot.com/2017/04/accounting-for-cultural-appropriation.html Gilbert Ryle solves the mind-body dichotomy that has been running long time in the history of thought by blatantly denying the concept of an internal, non-physical self. For him, what truly matters, is the behavior that a person manifests in his day to day life. For Ryle, looking and trying to understand a self as it really exists is like visiting your friend’s university and looking for the “university”. One can roam around the campus, visit the library and the football field and meet the administrators and faculty and still end up not finding the “university”. This is because the campus, the people, the system, and the territory all form the university. Ryle suggests that the “self” is not an entity one can locate and analyze but simply the convenient name that people used to refer for all behavior that people make. Maurice Merleau-Ponty https://www.wpi.edu/news/ponty  Merleau-Ponty is a phenomenologist who asserts that the mind-body bifurcation that has been going on for a long time in a futile endeavor and invalid problem. Unlike Ryle who simply denies the “self”. Ponty instead says that the mind and body are so intertwined that they cannot be separated from one another one cannot find any experiences that is not an embodied experience. All experience is embodied. One’s body is his opening toward his existence to the world. Because of these bodies, men are in the world. Merleau –Ponty dismisses the Cartesian Dualism that has spelled so much devastation in the history of msn. For him, the Cartesian problem is nothing else but plain misunderstanding. The living body, his thoughts, emotions, and experiences, are all one. Assessment……….. Choose four (4) perspectives from the Philosophers presented. In your own words, explain how your own concept of “self’ is compatible with how they conceived “self”. ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ Reference: Alata, E.J.P.,Caslib, B.N.Jr., Serafica, J.P.J., & Pawilen, R.A.(2018).