A Reflection Paper on the Human Person
Philosophy 101
What is the Human Person? What is the true purpose of our existence? What exactly does it mean to be “Human”? Since time immemorial, we humans have been striving to find answers that will fully satisfy these questions. In our quest to find the answer, we turned to Science and Research so as to systematically observe and dissect all aspects of human life. We turned to Mathematics, so as to collate, calculate and quantify the solution, and still we could not find a full answer. We turned to Religion and Metaphysics to supply us with unearthly answers with those concerning inexplicable phenomenon such as faith into beings greater than ourselves and morality so that we can have a distinction of what is good and evil. We used more and more tools in order to seek an answer to these seemingly unanswerable questions, but all have been in vain. These tools yielded results, yes that is true, but only partial results that yielded partial answers to these timeless questions. This is because all the tools we have previously used to answer these questions all have specific areas that they can answer, that they can analyze, that they can give revelations for, but none of the tools we have used so far could give a whole and full answer to these questions. Science is only concerned about the particular field it is studying, it very specific in what questions it wishes to answer and comes up with a theory backed by research to prove it’s point. Mathematics is all about precision and computation in qualitative terms. It’s quantitative side is provided for by science, and is thus capable of backing science through number and figures but is unable to stand on it’s own. Religion is mostly concerned about the worship of the being central to it, and it’s own standards on morality, more specifically what is being right or wrong, good or evil all about. Thus, in order to find the answer as to what exactly is the Human Person, we turn to the ally of logic and reason: Philosophy.
In four months of studying Philosophy, we had encountered different perspectives by some of the greatest philosophers ever born as to what the human being is. Through their works and readings we saw how the triumvirate of Master-Student philosopher thought, Socrates, Plato and Aristotle. We have gained first hand information on the thoughts of a saint, namely St. Thomas Aquinas. We have read the thoughts of the man who invented the Cartesian plane, Rene Descartes. We have tackled the unusual and radical approach on explaining the questions by the philosopher David Hume. Finally we have tangled with the great unifier’s machinations himself, the man who sought to unify rationalism and
1
empiricism, Immanuel Kant. My only regret is that we are unable to tackle Voltaire’s take on the Human Person, as his would have been quite an interesting viewpoint.
These different takes on what exactly is the Human Person have all influenced my thinking, my very rationale on this matter. From the moment in class where we were asked the question: “Can God create a rock so big, that He Himself cannot carry it?” my attention was already hooked and alert. This got me thinking, it got my mind running and my desire and hunger for answers going. Then, we turned to the different philosophers who over the course of time sought to explain what the Human Person is and I have been desiring to find an answer ever since. This reflection paper is one such opportunity to gather my thoughts into one organized material so as to try and find a concrete answer.
The works that have influenced my perception on the Human Person most are those of the Triumvirate of Master-Student philosophers, namely Socrates, Plato and Aristotle. Provided that their take on the Human Person is quite ancient and archaic as they had no access to the knowledge and technology that we now possess. We remember that Socrates and his student Plato proposed the notion of the soul being a perfect being, trapped in an imperfect form. A god, bound in human form that seeks perfection and release back into the perfect world. Aristotle then went on to take this being and called De Anima, or The Soul and went forth to write one of his masterpieces, the De Anima. He explains that Body and Soul are inseparable, but are two totally distinct objects. I partially agree with all three of them. The thoughts of these three great philosophers will serve as the core of my answer as to what exactly is the Human Person, augmented by the other philosophers’ works and re-unified in true Kantian style. When I first heard of Socrates’s notion that we are actually perfect beings in imperfect forms, I was astounded. At the time, it made sense as it conveniently explains how is it that we are able to think, to process thought while plants and other animals could not. However, the heavy involvement of metaphysics, the “perfect world” and the “imperfect world” was enough of an abstract concept to turn me off the theory. It was simply too simple and too dependent on factors that we could not touch, nor comprehend. I sought a better solution and when I heard of Aristotle’s De Anima, I thought I had the answer. Aristotle’s thoughts on the unification of the Body and Soul was intriguing and it certainly provided better, more tangible explanations and less metaphysics than Socrates’ notion of perfect 2
beings in imperfect form, but still, the presence of metaphysics put me off. Aristotle was a scientist of the ancient times who still sought to mix magic with science. But he was definitely on to something. That “something” for me is the recognition of the presence of an unearthly “thing” that enables us to process thought. As said earlier, Aristotle named this thing De Anima, or The Soul. This would later be called many different names, “consciousness” “mind” and “cogito”. He maintains that the human being cannot exist without both body and soul, that the soul is something metaphysical yet it still exists within us, within the physical world. Therein lies my problem for Aristotle’s argument. If the Human Person cannot exist without the unification of Body and Soul, then that means that a dead person, someone who’s body has stopped working, can no longer contain the soul and thus must evaporate on site. This does not happen in real life. It also means that a brain-dead person, someone whose consciousness and capacity to think has already been compromised no longer has the Soul, which according to his argument holds the body together. Thus the body left behind, though fully functioning must also vanish and dematerialize because nothing is holding it together. Again, Science and sadly for me, experience tells us that this is not so. However, I still think that Aristotle’s core argument on the unification of Body and Soul as to the makings of the human person is correct, though it needs refinement and reunification with the other theories. Herein lies my task of providing an answer, a revision of Aristotle’s’ brilliant idea and taking it to the next level with the information and technology available to us today. This is the philosophy of the new age.
My Thesis Statement is this: The Human Being, the person who we know of and call by whatever name is given to him is the perfect unification of the “whole” functioning body, and the “whole” functioning consciousness, which we can also refer to as “Soul” or “Cogito”. The “Soul” or “Cogito” is by no means the glue that holds the Human Person together, but rather the controller and determiner of the human person’s actions. The “Soul” or “Cogito” as far as we imperfect humans know is the evolutionary product of our brains, meaning our Consciousness is a product of the activities going on within our brains, our neurons and is thus scientifically explainable. How we got this, whether through a superior being who looks down upon us with favor or through natural selection by means of evolution is unknown to us. The unification of the Body and Soul is what makes the human being, human but in a way different than what Aristotle envisioned in the Anima, which I will explain later. The unification of the “whole” working Body and the “whole” working Consciousness is what constitutes and what makes the Human Person. It is what we call, the “I”. 3
To better explain my point, I would like to use the “I” that we know of as our Philosophy teacher, Mr. Dennis Temporal as the subject of our mental experiment in our quest to define the Human Person. I do this for want of a person known to both myself and the reader, which I presume to be Mr. Temporal himself for the reason that I am forbidden to reveal my true identity until the end of this paper, thus I cannot use myself as the case sample for the “I”. Mr. Temporal will understand and forgive me for using his person, philosopher as he is, in our search for the answer to such a complicated matter as to define the Human Person.
To start the case study, I would like to describe the Physical Mr. Temporal as of average Filipino height, stocky build, quite chubby and of dark brown skin. He has a deep voice, one that commands attention whenever it is heard. He has a daughter named “Pria”. As to the “consciousness” of Mr. Temporal, I know not much of, but I will nevertheless try to describe as best as I could. In our 4 months of studying together, I see Mr. Temporal as someone who thinks and philosophizes based on logic, reason, and human feelings, but still with regard and respect to his catholic faith, born out of his time in the church.
With this, let us now begin the mental experiment with regards to what is the Human Person. Mr. Temporal was born out of the union of the sperm and egg cell of his parents, and thus he possessed a body and a brain capable of maturing and growing a Consciousness exclusive to the Homo sapiens race. As he went through life to get to where he is, he gained experiences; his thoughts were shaped by those that surrounded him, which from what I know was shaped in the Ateneo. He then went on to live his life, went in and out of the seminary, got married, had a daughter and went on to teach us Philosophy 101. Why is this important? Because the person, the “I” we know as Mr. Dennis Temporal is the unification of his “whole” functioning Body with his “whole” functioning Cogito. Both his Body and his Cogito were shaped to what they are now with regards to what he experienced in his lifetime, meaning perhaps with regards to his Body, he is quite chubby because he enjoyed too much cheeseburgers, with regards to his Cogito, he philosophizes with logic and reason but with a touch of faith because of his experiences in the seminary and the real world. Everything that Mr. Temporal is now was born and shaped by what he experienced in his lifetime leading up to know, and how he experienced it. Thus, a person who exercises and eats healthy will look healthy and think healthy. A person who has been to 4
war, who has experienced all of it’s horrors will most probably have battle scars, a physical trait and his psychological mind, his way of thinking, his Cogito might also be affected for better or worse. I come to my explanation of why I said that “The Human Being, the person who we know of and call by whatever name is given to him is the perfect unification of the “whole” functioning Body, and the “whole” functioning Consciousness, which we can also refer to as “Soul” or “Cogito”. I have said “whole” functioning Body and Consciousness to try and explain an old counter argument to this notion. If we cut of Mr. Temporal’s hands, is it no longer he? If he becomes insane, is it no longer he?
My answer is this: for a being of Homo sapiens race to be truly called a Human Person, or an “I” he must have a both “whole” functioning Body and Cogito. An absence of one revokes his humanity. For instance, if Mr. Temporal were to, God forbid, pass away, then the body he left behind is no longer Mr. Temporal and thus is no longer human, but rather a shell that once held the “I” known as Dennis Temporal. If he were to, again God forbid, become brain dead, or enter into a coma but his body is still fully functioning in which case his Cogito has left him, then what remains is no longer Mr. Temporal as we know him, but rather a piece of living meat, an animal. What I meant when I said “whole” functioning is that should Mr. Temporal lose his leg or arm, he would still be the Dennis Temporal we know. He is not “less” Dennis Temporal before he lost his arm or leg. If Mr. Temporal should go insane, that is to say his capacity to think has been injured by some external factor, he is still the Dennis Temporal we know of, so long as he still thinks and keeps the same, based on who he is, what he did and what happened to him in the past. Thus an insane person who still has remnants and recognition of who he still is, is till Human and is still the same person before he went insane, so long as he keeps his sense of self. An insane person who has changed and no longer recognizes his old self ins still human, but no longer the same person. An insane person who has lost all his capacity for rational thought and acts like an animal without recognition of his former self, or a new human self, but rather bases his decisions solely on instinct is no longer human, but an animal. The existence and unity of both “whole” Body and Consciousness is what us, us. It is what constitutes the “I” we know of as Noynoy Aquino, George Bush, or Dennis Temporal or whatever name was given to the personality “I”. This unity is the definition of what the Human Person is.
5
However, to simply say that a person is a personality, an identity who has the capacity to exist and think for me is still slightly off of what it truly means to be a Human Person. Whether we were given this capacity to think by a higher deity or natural selection does not matter. What matters is that we were given this ability for a purpose, otherwise why were we chosen out off all the other living beings in the world?
Thus, I believe that the Human Person was given the ability to process thought in order to search for and find his Telos or his goal. Each person has a specific goal, a contribution he must make in order to repay his existence whether to nature or God. Without a Telos, we are no more than animals who have the capacity to think, we are no more than lucky beasts.
In conclusion, to the best of my knowledge and philosophical capabilities, I therefore conclude that the Human Person, the “I” is the unique unity of a “whole” functioning Body with a “whole” functioning Consciousness that is the product of the activity of our brains’ neurons, whether we choose to call it “Soul” “Mind” or “Cogito”. This unique unity is exclusive, so far to the best of our knowledge, to the Homo sapiens race in planet Earth. The Human Person, the “I” was given such an ability in order to pursue a Telos, a goal so as to make his brief existence in the world relevant and thus confirm his status as an “I”.
Kevin Manuel M. Lumang
III- AB POS 6
