For the audio-visual material of this topic, Philosophical & Science, on Youtube channel, click.
In the history of philosophy, philosophers aimed at pinning down a definite answer to the question, what is man? At the outset, each philosopher came out with different answers or philosophies of man. This part presents the different philosophies of man, which are categorized as Dualism, Holism, Pluralism, Mechanistic and Post-Modern Views. These philosophical labels will not do justice to the elaborate systems of thought of every philosopher though. For purposes of giving a holistic and comprehensive view of the self from a philosophical perspective, we will treat those labels as a heuristic device used to give us a clearer picture of the self according to various philosophies. Socrates as a model of wisdom is included in the discussion because, in our quest for self-knowledge, it is necessary to always remind ourselves that to know oneself is not knowing clearly as holding an apple in the palm.
Course Outcome 1: Students are able to articulate a holistic, comprehensive view of self.
Performance Tasks: Activity 1: My Ideal Man/Woman [click]. Plato claimed that man/woman is one who is "ideal." To contextualize Plato's ideal man/woman, students are asked to conduct a mini-research from among their friends about their ideal man/woman. Activity 2: What is The Essence of Man? [click]. Descartes claimed that man is essentially a "thinking thing." In this activity, students will ask the same question, What is the essence of man? If man is stripped of everything such as his family, his degree earned, his limbs, and so on, what is left of him as his essence? This is intended for a group presentation. If it is not possible, this activity is omitted.
Lesson Contents:
- Socrates: The Model of Wisdom
- Dualism: Plato, St. Augustine & Rene Descartes
- Mitigated Dualism: Aristotle & St Thomas Aquinas
- Holism: Gabriel Marcel
- Pluralism: David Hume
- Post-modern View: Richard Rorty
- Mechanistic View: Paul Churchland
SOCRATES: The Model of Wisdom
As we begin to understand the self, we need to know the difference between knowledge and wisdom. As mentioned above, self-knowledge is the main goal of this course. The danger, however, in knowing the self is that one has the tendency to become self-centered. In other words, a person who pretends he knows himself better may gain too much self-confidence. With much self-confidence, he might become arrogant. Socrates once reminded his fellow intellectuals during his times that being wise is to accept one's ignorance. It is also good to remind ourselves that knowing oneself is not as clear as holding an apple in the palm. For more discussion, read related articles: (1) Basic Concepts Defined [click] and (2) Knowledge and Wisdom [click].
Dualism
It is a philosophical belief which claims that man is composed of a material body and immaterial soul. This belief is propounded by Plato, Aristotle, St. Augustine, St. Thomas Aquinas and Rene Descartes. There are two kinds of dualism: absolute and mitigated. The sort of dualism espoused by Plato, St. Augustine, and Descartes is somehow absolute, whereas the one espoused by Aristotle and St. Thomas Aquinas is somehow mitigated. It is absolute because for Plato the two principles, body and soul, are distinct and separable. One principle is less important (the material body) than the other (the immaterial soul). For Plato, the essence of man is his soul. So, the immaterial soul is more important than the material body. In fact, the material body is like an imprisonment, which hinders the soul to go back to its real place, the World of Ideas. On the other hand, it is mitigated since the two principles (body and soul) are distinct but inseparable. Man's existence is not merely his soul but must be a composite of body and soul. If the soul separates from the body, then man ceases to exist. That is why, in death, man ceases to exist because it is in death that the soul separates from the body. For Aristotle, however, when the soul separates from the body, that is the end of man. There is no life after death.
Let's have a thorough discussion of each philosopher.
Let's have a thorough discussion of each philosopher.
- For Plato (428/427 – 348/347 BC), man is his soul (the rational part of the soul). Soul is the essence of humanity and the source of all his activities (Calasanz cited in Dy, 2001). In Phaedrus, Plato gives this metaphor: the soul is a charioteer of two-winged horses. One is sensible and flies high to the heavens to reach the light of truth and goodness. The other comes from a bad breed and because of neglect and sinfulness, had lost its wings and fallen to earth to assume human form. With this metaphor, Plato gives us a clearer picture of the tripartite structure of the soul, namely: rational, spirited, and appetitive part. The rational part is the charioteer. The spirited part is the sensible one. The appetitive part comes from a bad breed. Each has its own proper function: rational has a natural attachment to knowledge and wisdom guiding the lower parts; spirited has a natural attachment to honor and, more generally, to recognition and esteem by others; and appetitive concerns with anything pleasurable like food, money, sex, etc. The rational part is identified with the mind; spirited with the heart, and appetitive with genitals or belly. Each part is also identified with the different classes of people in society: rational with philosophers/kings who have the natural affinity with wisdom and virtue of justice; spirited with soldiers/ auxiliaries who have the virtue of courage and the ally of reason; appetitive with merchants who value the virtue of temperance (Lorenz, 2009; Kerns, 2013; Pavo, 2012). In Phaedo, “surely the soul can best reflect when it is free of all distractions such as hearing or sight or pain or pleasure of any kind –that is, when it ignores the body and becomes as far as possible independent, avoiding all physical contacts and associations as much as it can, in its search for reality.” In this context, Plato implies that the rational part of the soul serves as the governing principle of the whole of human person. Read more on Plato's rational psychology [click].
- For more discussion on St. Augustine's philosophy, [click].
- For more discussion on Cartesian philosophy, [click].
- For more discussion on Aristotle's philosophy, [click].
- For more discussion on St. Thomas Aquinas' philosophy, [click].
Holism
A philosophical belief which claims that man is primarily a subjectivity enfleshed in the human form. This is propounded by Gabriel Marcel. For Marcel, the body is "me." The "subject/I" is inseparably one with the body. For more discussion, [click].
Pluralism
A philosophical belief which claims that self is simply a mental construct, or "an idea or concept." If it is an idea, then there is no reality of it. For Hume, the self is the outcome of an "association of simple ideas" from impressions of our daily life.
David Hume is an English philosopher. He is considered an empiricist and at the same time a skeptic. An empiricist is one who believes that the source of knowledge is experience --impression, in particular. On the contrary, a rationalist is one who believes that the source of knowledge is reason, not experience/impression. A skeptic is one who believes that we cannot be certain of anything. As an empiricist, Hume claims that we know nothing but ideas. We can't know directly the external object like the table in front of us because such extended material table will not enter into the mind. Rather, we have an impression of the table; this impression produces idea. This idea is a mental representation of the table, which is what we directly know. There are two types of ideas: primary and secondary. The primary idea comes from the impression. Impression is the lively copy of the external object perceived through any of the senses. For example, if you tap the table, your impression, maybe, is that it is hard. This impression of the "hardness" of the table, which is the primary idea, is the real source of knowledge. Any other idea you may have associated with that impression is simply a secondary idea. For example, you associate the idea of "pain" from the hardness of the table, then this idea is a secondary idea, which is no longer the source of knowledge. This is where Hume begins his skepticism. As a skeptic, he believes that what is real is the impression and any idea associated with the "first impression" is simply a product of association of ideas.
When applied to the self, what is real about me is my own impression. For example, in one occasion, I had the impression that I'm tall. In other occasion, I got another impression that I am shy. Now, for Hume, what is real about me is the series of impressions I have of myself like being tall and being shy. If I will come to believe that there is a self associated with those impressions, then I am mistaken. Self is non-existent. There is no reality of it. It is simply a product of association of ideas. Another important thing is that I could have multiple impressions about myself. Thus, I could have multiple selves --a pluralistic view of self.
Pluralism
A philosophical belief which claims that self is simply a mental construct, or "an idea or concept." If it is an idea, then there is no reality of it. For Hume, the self is the outcome of an "association of simple ideas" from impressions of our daily life.
David Hume is an English philosopher. He is considered an empiricist and at the same time a skeptic. An empiricist is one who believes that the source of knowledge is experience --impression, in particular. On the contrary, a rationalist is one who believes that the source of knowledge is reason, not experience/impression. A skeptic is one who believes that we cannot be certain of anything. As an empiricist, Hume claims that we know nothing but ideas. We can't know directly the external object like the table in front of us because such extended material table will not enter into the mind. Rather, we have an impression of the table; this impression produces idea. This idea is a mental representation of the table, which is what we directly know. There are two types of ideas: primary and secondary. The primary idea comes from the impression. Impression is the lively copy of the external object perceived through any of the senses. For example, if you tap the table, your impression, maybe, is that it is hard. This impression of the "hardness" of the table, which is the primary idea, is the real source of knowledge. Any other idea you may have associated with that impression is simply a secondary idea. For example, you associate the idea of "pain" from the hardness of the table, then this idea is a secondary idea, which is no longer the source of knowledge. This is where Hume begins his skepticism. As a skeptic, he believes that what is real is the impression and any idea associated with the "first impression" is simply a product of association of ideas.
When applied to the self, what is real about me is my own impression. For example, in one occasion, I had the impression that I'm tall. In other occasion, I got another impression that I am shy. Now, for Hume, what is real about me is the series of impressions I have of myself like being tall and being shy. If I will come to believe that there is a self associated with those impressions, then I am mistaken. Self is non-existent. There is no reality of it. It is simply a product of association of ideas. Another important thing is that I could have multiple impressions about myself. Thus, I could have multiple selves --a pluralistic view of self.
Post-modern View of the Self
Post-modernism shares a similar view with Hume. Self is a mental construct --thus not real. What seems to be the reality of self is simply created by language.
Richard Rorty is an American philosopher. He is considered as a staunched proponent of Neo-pragmatism. There are two types of pragmatism: Classical and Neo-pragmatism. Classical pragmatism, which is propounded by John Dewey, William James, among others, claims that "what is true is what works in a certain situation." The criterion, then, of knowledge is how it is effective in a certain situation. Neo-pragmatism claims a similar view with the classical. But, for Neo-pragmatists like Rorty, the criterion of knowledge is not only that it is effective but also that this idea is something conventional. On this basis, Rorty shares a similar view with Hume. People, most often than not, agree on what is best for them. The idea of self is conventional (agreed upon by a number of people). For Rorty, we don't mistake the idea of self with something found in the inner part of us. "There is nothing deep down within us." We need to constantly create or invent a "word," which would best describe our individual selves. And, this word must be our "social hope" for the betterment of each individual and the whole of humanity.
Mechanistic View of the Self
A philosophical belief which claims that man is like a machine. All of his actions (overt or covert) are products of a natural mechanism of the human body just like the bodies of other living organisms. "Many people believed that the heart was somehow what made us human. And it turned out it was just a pump made of meat," said Paul Churchland. "The same is true about realizing that when we're conscious, when we make decisions, when we go to sleep, when we get angry, when we're fearful, these are just functions of the physical brain," he added. There is nothing special in man. Man is simply part of nature, whose internal processes like thinking, meditating, etc. are all natural processes. In neurological science, the human brain works because of neural circuitry. This circuitry is an electrical signal caused or transferred by chemical reactions in the brain. In other words, the chemicals or the fluids inside the human brain are the ones responsible for all mental activities, which many thinkers/ philosophers have mistaken as something special in man.
Paul Churchland is a Canadian philosopher. His philosophical thought is not actually new. In ancient Greece, philosophers before Socrates (pre-Socratic philosophers) --Thales, in particular, also believed that man came to exist as part of the natural evolution of nature. In modern times, Charles Darwin made a similar view by proposing the very controversial doctrine of evolutionism.
A philosophical belief which claims that man is like a machine. All of his actions (overt or covert) are products of a natural mechanism of the human body just like the bodies of other living organisms. "Many people believed that the heart was somehow what made us human. And it turned out it was just a pump made of meat," said Paul Churchland. "The same is true about realizing that when we're conscious, when we make decisions, when we go to sleep, when we get angry, when we're fearful, these are just functions of the physical brain," he added. There is nothing special in man. Man is simply part of nature, whose internal processes like thinking, meditating, etc. are all natural processes. In neurological science, the human brain works because of neural circuitry. This circuitry is an electrical signal caused or transferred by chemical reactions in the brain. In other words, the chemicals or the fluids inside the human brain are the ones responsible for all mental activities, which many thinkers/ philosophers have mistaken as something special in man.
Paul Churchland is a Canadian philosopher. His philosophical thought is not actually new. In ancient Greece, philosophers before Socrates (pre-Socratic philosophers) --Thales, in particular, also believed that man came to exist as part of the natural evolution of nature. In modern times, Charles Darwin made a similar view by proposing the very controversial doctrine of evolutionism.
Chapter Quiz: Quiz 1 [click] covers the lessons of Socrates, Plato, St. Augustine, & Rene Descartes. Quiz 2 [click] covers the rest of the philosophers.
References: [click]
