INTRODUCTION TO THE

PHILOSOPHY OF THE HUMAN PERSON

(Core Subject)

Chapter 1

Understanding Philosophy by Doing It

Lesson 1:
A Holistic Perspective: The Philosopher’s Way

To understand Philosophy is to engage in it. This entails opening ourselves up to the

experience of questioning of our own established beliefs, of looking with the mind beyond what
we “see” with our senses. Philosophers use their minds “to see the whole”. They have insight.
Insight means “seeing with the mind” (Ferriols, 2001). If Philosophy has a “basic requirement”
before one can engage in it that would be the courage to break open our partial perspective in
order to have a glimpse of a broader truth. Doing philosophy entails a holistic rather than a
partial perspective. With a holistic perspective, we are able to see the connectedness of parts
to see a meaningful whole. Having a glimpse of the whole allows us to see the meaning of the
activities that we do everyday – from rising to working to sleeping.
“My philosophy comes from a worldview that looks at the world as one. It’s a holistic
view that sees the world as interconnected and interdependent and integrated in so many
different ways...” – Dennis Kucinich
Did you know?
The first noted philosopher in western history is Thales (c. 624-545 B.C.). He was a
thinker who loved to gaze at the star. By sensing the harmony in the movements of the heavenly
bodies, he deduced the relationship of things in the universe. He said that everything is related
to each other because everything that exists contains water.

Lesson 2:
What it means to be a Philosopher?
The word “Philosophy” comes from two Greek words ‘philos’ which means love and
‘sophia’ which means wisdom. So philosophy literally means love of wisdom. Sometimes,
however, the term ‘pilosopo’ has a negative connotation like someone who asks nonsense
questions for selfish reasons. The etymological meaning, however, leads us to the true meaning
of ‘pilosopo’ as someone who asks questions because of a genuine desire to know and to view
things in a different way. His questions emanate from real confusion, astonishment and wonder

1
and from an honest admission that he does not know. His questions are personal because they
deeply touch on his understanding of the meaning of life. In a broad sense, wisdom is the goal
of philosophy. Generally, Philosophy is defined as the science that by the natural light of reason
studies the first causes or highest principles of all things.

Lesson 3:
Philosophical Questions/Reflections

The French philosopher Gabriel Marcel (1889-1973) shares that philosophical

questioning begins with a metaphysical unease. Simply put, this form of unease is described as
metaphysical because the scope of the questions we ask cover something broader and deeper
than what is immediately before us, beyond what we physically see. The scope of these
questions point to something that we share with other human beings.
“Judge a man by his questions rather than by his answers.”- Friedrich Nietzsche

CHAPTER 2

TRUTH AND PHILOSOPHY

Lesson 1:
The Domains of Truth
If we examine the perspective on truth that has been dominant in society, we would
find that people mostly equate truth with scientific truth. We often say that something is true
because it is based on facts. Furthermore, we say that something is factual when it is
scientifically proven, that is, when it is backed by data-gathering, analysis and repeated
verification.
Truth understood this way is what philosophers call objective truths. They point to
descriptions of “state of affairs” which remain true regardless of who is viewing them. Examples
of these are the truths about the water cycle or the truth about the constant acceleration of a
free falling body (9.8m/s2). Both examples point to observable phenomena that remain
constant and true. Whether or not it is a woman or a man, Japanese or Filipino, a child or an
adult viewing this phenomenon, the truths about them remain the same. Some scientists,
however, point out that the scientific truths are part of just one among the many ways of
understanding truth.

2
Domains of Truth
Objective Domain
Jürgen Habermas argues, in his universal pragmatics, or the study of the structure of
communicative language as we use it everyday, that apart from the scientific truths, there are
other domains in life in which we understand truth differently (Habermas: 1979). Scientific
truths are covered by the objective domain of life. This pertains to the natural world that
maintains a relative independence from the perspective and attitude of human beings that
perceive them. Typhoon season, which belongs to the natural realm, comes and goes whether
or not we want it. Water’s boiling point remains 100 degrees Celsius, and will remain so even if
a powerful tyrant wants to change it.
Social Domain
In the social domain, “Truth” is analogous with (not the exact equivalent) of a general
agreement or consensus on what is right as opposed to what is wrong. The truths in the social
domain are mostly products of an “agreement” in society that has been established over time.
Because of time-honored presence, they become so embedded in our society such that they
are hardly questioned by anyone. It is in this way that norms or values appear as truths.
Nevertheless, we have to be constantly aware that these truths are “created” or constructed by
people. As such they can be changed through a critical examination and deliberation among the
members of a community.
Personal Domain
Aside from the social domain, there is also the personal domain where truth is
analogous with sincerity. This is a precarious domain of truth because no one can have access
to our minds and our thoughts except ourselves. For this reason, the truths that we claim in this
domain need corresponding actions that will establish trust. A person who proves to be
consistent with what he declares about himself is regarded as authentic and can therefore be
trusted or trustworthy.

Truth and Justification

Richard Rorty offers a simple way of defining truth: Truth can be understood as what
has passed “procedures of justification” (Rorty, 1989). Justification means the process of
proving the truth or validity of a statement. This process is made up of ways of critically testing
a claim against certain criteria.
Domains of Truth Justification/Criteria for Truth
Scientific/Objective domain - Empirical Evidence
Social domain - Acceptability to a particular time in history
Personal domain - Consistency and authenticity of the person who claims it

3
Criteria for Truth
Scientific Statement – held as true when it is justified by data gathered from careful
observation and analysis. It goes through a rigorous review process where experts raise critical
questions that the researchers should be prepared to answer and defend with data. As soon as
scientific claim is no longer questioned or criticized, it more or less gains the status of a
scientific truth. In the language of Rorty, the claim of the scientist has passed the procedures of
justification.
Social Norms – its justification takes longer than scientific truths. This is especially true
when what is involved in the process of justifying them are people coming from varying
backgrounds and history. Despite the difficulty of gaining a consensus, however, this does not
discount the possibility that we can talk about social “truth.” Social norms turned to social
“truths” are the basis for the balance in our society. Without them, society will be no different
from a jungle in which only the strong and powerful survive.
Personal Truths – its justification is probably the longest to complete among the three.
This is because personal truths take a whole lifetime of consistency in the actions and decisions
of a person who makes claim about himself. For example, when someone says, “I love you” to
his girlfriend, how would one know that this is true? True love, as the adage goes, is tested by
time. For this reason, believing on someone’s sincerity takes years of hard work.

Lesson 2:
Truth and Opinion
An opinion is a statement of judgment of a person about something in the world. Not all
opinions, however, are made equally. Some opinions are so weak while other opinions are very
strongly put that people unquestioningly take them as true. Thus, opinions are statements of
judgment that are in need of further justification. If they do not pass the test of justification,
opinions will have to be defended with better reasons to strengthen them.
How to critically examine opinions?
First, we need to clarify what an argument is. An argument is a group of statements that serve
to support a conclusion. It is composed of a claim (the conclusion of an argument) and premises
(the reasons used to support the conclusion).
“There is no hope in the Philippine government” (This is not yet an argument. It is an expression
of opinion)
“There is no hope in the Philippine government because many officials are corrupt, and Filipino
voters continue to elect them” (This is an example of an argument)

4
 Let us examine genuine arguments from fake ones. We call fake arguments ‘fallacies’.
Fallacies are a group of statements that appear to be arguments, but fail to support the
conclusion. Among the many fallacies enumerated in logic, here are some of the most common
ones.
a. Argumentum ad misericordiam (Appeal to pity))
- A specific kind of appeal to emotion in which someone tries to win support for vh
igan argument or idea by exploiting his or her opponent’s feelings of pity or guilt.
b. Argumentum ad ignorantiam (Appeal to ignorance)
- Whatever has not been proved false must be true, and vice versa.
c. Equivocation
- This is a logical chain of reasoning of a term or word several times, but giving the
particular word a different meaning each time. Example: Human beings have
hands; the clock has hands. He is drinking from the pitcher of water; he is a
baseball pitcher.
d. Argumentum ad hominem (Against the person)
- This fallacy attempts to link the validity of a premise to a character or belief of
the person advocating the premise.
e. Argumentum ad baculum (Appeal to force)
- An argument where force, coercion, or the threat of force, is given as a
justification for a conclusion.
f. Argumentum ad populum (Appeal to the people)
- An argument that appeals or exploits people’s vanities, desire for esteem, and
anchoring on popularity.
g. False Cause (post hoc)
- Since that event followed this one, that event must have been caused by this
one. This fallacy is also referred to as coincidental correlation, or correlation not
causation.
h. Hasty generalization
- The fallacy is commonly based on a broad conclusion upon the statistics of a
survey of a small group that fails to sufficiently represent the whole population.
i. Argumentum non sequitur
- it is a fallacy where an argument does not follow as the arguer concludes from
the premises.

5
Lesson 3:
Methods of Philosophizing

Rene Descartes and Western Modern Thinking

Rene Descartes (1596-1650), a French philosopher says that only the mind, not the body
can arrive at clear and distinct ideas which cannot be doubted. He arrived at this truth by first,
asking if objects that I come to know through my senses can be fully trusted. We know that we
can not because of the deceptive nature of the senses. We see things- big burger in a billboard,
a slim fashion model in a magazine cover- but find upon closer look that we have been
deceived. Descartes then knew that the body and the senses cannot be trusted when it comes
to arriving at indubitable truths.
What can be trusted then? Descartes continues to ask. In the process, Descartes comes
to the conclusion that there is one thing that cannot be doubted, and that is, doubt itself. Even
if he doubts that he is doubting, the doubting still clearly demonstrates that he is doubting.
From this insight, Descartes proceeds with asking what else he can find that cannot be doubted
by the mind. He realizes that doubting is thinking. Therefore, thinking cannot likewise be
doubted. The more he doubts that he is thinking, the clearer it appears that he is actually
thinking.
Finally, Descartes realizes the most important truth shown in this process. If there is
doubting and thinking, then there must also be thinker and a doubter. And that, of course, is
Descartes himself. Cogito Ergo Sum – “I think, therefore I am” When one thinks, one
intuitively or immediately realizes that he exists. This is the first clear and distinct idea that one
arrives at, namely, that thinking implies the thinker’s existence.

The Oriental Thought

The Chinese thought differs greatly with its western counterpart, particularly with the
Aristotelian logic. Central to this difference is the Taoist theory of the Yin and Yang which
permeates Chinese culture including traditional Chinese medicine, martial arts, agriculture, etc.
Yin and Yang refer to the two polarities of an entity- the bottom and the top, the inside and the
outside. Yin represents rest, darkness, the ground below or earth while Yang is the opposite-
activity, brightness, the sky above or heaven. In nature, the moon is Yin and the sun is Yang. In
society, the emperor is Yang, the loyal subjects are Yin-Yang relationship. But unlike the
Aristotelian logic that influenced western thought for a long time, Yin and Yang are not like A as
opposed to not-A. Something can both be Yin and Yang at the same time; there is no pure Yin
or pure Yang. Everything is relative: the leg, as we said earlier, is Yin but only in relation to the
head. The leg is more Yang when compared with the feet which is more Yin than the legs.

6
 The central tenet of Taoism is that everything is Qi, which literally means energy.
Everything, my self- body and mind, the world and the things around me is Qi, manifested in
different forms and moving differently as Yin and Yang- thinking/moving, resting/working,
taking in/letting go. Because Qi is in everything, the relationship between the human being and
the universe is very much intertwined. Unlike western modern thinking where the thinker is
separated from the world- looking at the world from an objective point of view, The Taoist
thought stresses that human being is one with the universe: everything that happens in the
universe will ultimately affect man and everything that man does will affect the universe.
To understand the truth, therefore, is to understand the Tao: “In the common sense it
(Tao) refers to the way of doing anything, or the pathway to some destination. In its higher
meaning, Tao refers to the way of the universe, the way things are. As a spiritual system, Tao
means the way to achieving a true understanding of the nature of mind and reality, to the way
of living in harmony with the changes of Nature. Thus the Tao is the goal, the path and the
journey all in one”.
What is the oriental “method” to understanding truth? It is by striving to achieve
balance in everything - a balance between thinking and moving, resting and working, taking
and letting go.

“Hinduism’s basic tenet is that many roads exist by which men have pursued
and still pursue their quest for the truth and that none has universal validity”
–Kenneth Scott Latourette

CHAPTER 3

THE HUMAN PERSON AS EMBODIED SPIRIT

Lesson 1:
The Body as Limitation and Transcendence

Human Limitations
Human existence is embodied existence. Many things that are related to our
existence as persons are related to our bodies – age, sex, race, relationships, etc. We are
“confined” to the details about ourselves. Confine comes from the Latin confinis made of two
words: con- ‘together’ + finis – ‘end, limit or territory’. It is as if our bodies are made up of

7
fixed boundaries that we cannot transgress. As limitations, the body-related aspects about
ourselves are not products of our free choice. They have, in a sense, been given to us on a
permanent basis.
The Body as Transcendence
While we mostly complain about how there are so many things that we can’t
change about our lives because of our bodies (the most common example for this is our height
as Filipinos), we hardly see that the body also opens possibilities. There is an important paradox
about the body that we need to understand. While the body limits us, the very same limitations
create opportunities for us. For instance, Manny Pacquiao used his limitation of being lack in
height as an opportunity to define boxing in a new way.
The Paradox of possibility in Limitation
We often complain that we cannot be everything we want to be. In this
lesson, the paradox of the body as both limitation and possibility teaches us to be thankful that
we cannot be everything, because trying to be so would end us up being nothing at all. This is a
paradox. A paradox is a statement that brings together two opposing ideas as true at the same
time. In the outset, a paradox seems senseless or absurd. Upon closer look, however, the
contradiction is sending a very powerful meaningful message. For example, “It is through our
limitations that possibilities become real.”
“A small body of determined spirits fired by an unquenchable
faith in their mission can alter the course of history”
-Mahatma Gandhi

Lesson 2:
The Human Person as an Embodied Spirit:
Ancient and Contemporary Thought

1. Ancient Greek Philosophy: Plato and Aristotle

About four (4) centuries before Christ, Plato (428-348 B.C.) Socrates’ student
wrote about the nature of the human soul. In Plato’s eyes, man has an immortal and a mortal
perishable body. The soul has a tripartite nature consisting of:
a) A soul or an immortal rational part, which existed before it became part of the body
b) A courageous or a spirited part
c) An appetitive part

8
 In book IV of Repulic, Plato writes that the soul, “is the giver of life to the
body, the permanent, changeless and divine element as opposed to the changing, transitory
and perishable body. This makes the human being “a soul using the body.

2. Medieval Christian Philosophy: St. Augustine

The novelist Luis de Wohl portrayed the life of St. Augustine in his book
entitled The Restless Flame. The human person is a restless being, continuously
searching for restful waters, wanting to attain a restful life. Indeed, St. Augustine was
restless until he found rest in God. In his Confessions he attributes this restlessness with
the distractions of the body’s urges and appetites.
What does St. Augustine say about the human being? Firstly, St. Augustine
says that man consists of soul and body, “a soul in possession of a body” which does not
constitute two persons but one man. The human soul is an immaterial principle which
animates/gives life to the body. In the Confession, St. Augustine says the human person
is created after the image and likeness of God, and what makes him as such is his
power of reason and will.

3. The Modern Period and the Primacy of the Mind over the Body

Descartes’ methodical thinking has served as the model for western modern
thought. The division between body and soul became even more pronounced as he
formulated the concepts res cogitans (thinking thing) and res extenza (extended thing).
The former refers to the soul, the latter refers to the body. As the terms indicate, the
body is viewed simply as an extension or a machine of the mind.
After Descartes has shown that the foundation of all certitude is the cogito,
the thing that thinks whose existence cannot be doubted, a certain priority has been
given to the self as thinking being. This also means greater importance is given to the
mind’s activity- thinking.

Impact of the priority to the mind over the body:

A) Perception over manual labor
B) View against women

4. Phenomenology

Edmund Husserl
- There is an emphasis on the famous adage “back to the things
themselves”. A common denominator among known phenomenologists is
their dismay on how philosophy has become far removed from everyday
life. One of the effects of this detached way of living is the growing lack of
sensitivity among persons. People have become more and more
indifferent to injustices such as violations of people’s rights.

9
Gabriel Marcel

Having and Being

The body as an Object
- Marcel says that on the one hand, we relate to our bodies as if it is
something that we have. “I have a body”. We relate to the body in the
same way that we related to things we own. “This is my body. I can do
whatever I want with it.” Like a property, we “use it” for our needs and
wants. We can even abuse it. To treat the body as something we have is
to treat it as an object.
The body as subject
- Marcel reminds us that the relationship with the body as something you
“have” is just one dimension of our everyday experience. Objects like new
shoes or phone no matter how much we try these objects are one day
going to separate from us. This is the tragedy we are all bound to
experience. The body, however, is not something that we can simply lose.
If we lose our bodies, we cannot go on to say that we are still ourselves.
To lose our bodies, literally, is to die. In this way, we begin to understand
that our bodies are not just objects. It is our being, “I am my body”.

Marcel says that the root of the problem in this broken world is that we
have forgotten how to reflect. Reflection is not something you do by isolating yourself from the
world. For Marcel and other phenomenologists, reflection begins with experience. It means
that we need to reflect as we live in our experiences as one – body and spirit as one.

Maurice Merleau-Ponty

The Intelligent Body, the Embodied Mind

Maurice Merleau-Ponty articulated the meaning of the inextricable union of

mind and body. He pointed out that there is no experience that is not an embodied experience.
Everything that we experience in this world- experience of joy, sadness, love, remorse- happens
with our bodies. Our bodies open our existence to the world. Because of our bodies, we are in
the world.
We learn how to live in the world through the constant “communication”
between our bodies and the world. When we first learned how to walk, our legs were wobbly
and our body movements were awkward. Merleau-Ponty says that this was our entrance as a
novice into the world, trying to find our way through things. He believes that body has
knowledge. The most important it introduced is the realization that the body is not a
mindless tool waiting for the spirit to move it. The body learns things long before we become
conscious of what it learns. This is what is groundbreaking about Merleau-Ponty’s observation.
He unsettled the traditional way we explain learning: learning concepts in the consciousness,
then application of these concepts using the body. He pointed out that we can also learn even
while we are not conscious of it. We learn with our bodies.

10
 On the other hand, Mearleau-Ponty also stresses how our thoughts in the
mind are always embodied. They are never just “pure ideas”. Every idea in the mind needs to
have an embodied form. Through our bodies, we open our inner realities into the world. When
we want to espress pain, love, joy and sadness, these expressions are always embedded. There
is no such thing as love that is just a pure idea. In Filipino we way, “Pangatawanan mo!” Even in
our culture, we understand how it is important to enflesh our thoughts and our words.

5. Integrated Unity of Body and Spirit in the Asian Culture

Oriental thought has long understood and lived in this truth that western
culture is just beginning to appreciate. In other words, Merleau-Ponty’s groundbreaking insight
on the intertwined union of body and spirit is not as groundbreaking for Asians, as specially
shown in ancient Taoism thought, which is continually integrated with Chinese Medicine.

CHAPTER 4

THE HUMAN PERSON IN HIS/HER ENVIRONMENT

Lesson 1:
Approaches to Understanding the Relationship of the
Human Person with the Environment

1. Cosmos-centric Approach

The whole of the cosmos is one whole system of order of which we are part. The cosmo-
centric approach to understanding our relationship to the environment shows that
human beings are a microcosm of the cosmos (‘micro’-small + ‘cosmos’ – universe). It
means that the universe is reflected in us; we are small version of the universe . The
same cosmic patterns that govern nature also govern our being. What this means then is
that when these natural laws and cosmic patterns are tampered with (i.e., increased air
pollution leading to global warming), the resulting imbalance will also affect the balance
within humans (i.e., increase incidence of asthma). If there is no balance of energies in
nature, the persons also feel imbalance within themselves. On the reverse side, when
there is imbalance within the person, there would also imbalance within the person,
there would also be imbalance in everything around it.

2. Theocentric Approach

Theo (God) - centric approach refers to an understanding coming from a religious

interpretation. The creation story relates after creating the world, and all that is in it,
including man and woman, God said “Go and multiply; fill the earth and subdue it.” The

11
 creation story tells how God entrusted the earth to man and woman by giving them role
of stewards of creation. It is important to stress the meaning of stewardship here. To
steward over something is to manage or to put something under your care. In Filipino,
to be a steward is to be katulong or katiwala. It is important to stress this in order to
prevent the tendency of interpreting scripture as a welcome note to dominate and
completely lord over the environment.

3. The Anthropocentric Approach

This approach, anthropos (man) + centric, is like the theocentric approach that puts the
human person in dominion over the earth, but de-emphasizes the role of God. During
the modern era and up to the present, science dominated the landscape: we discovered
that we have the ability to control and tame nature to meet our desires. This however
led to the unabated destruction of the natural world to meet our unquenchable needs.

A Balanced Approach

Learning from all these approaches, we can see that it is possible to put them
all together. The cosmos-centric approach emphasizes on the human being as a balance
between heaven and earth. This relates to the anthropocentric approach which shows how we
are earthly beings in need of resources, and the theocentric approach that emphasizes on our
heavenly role as stewards of creation.
The task of the student of philosophy of the human person in relation to the
environment is to constantly examine his dominant approach. We need this to complement the
sciences that address environmental issues from a purely technical perspective.

Lesson 2:
The Central Role of the human Person in
Addressing Environmental Problems

We are the ultimate culprit of all forms of environmental degradation and we

are the only ones who can also arrest it. We need to change our materialistic and consumeristic
lifestyle that is rooted on greed and selfishness. There is such a thing as sustainable
development defined as a development that meets the needs of the present without
compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.
The fight for the environment should begin on the personal level; individually,
we should do our part in preserving and protecting our environment. However, to have a
greater impact, the fight should be brought to the social and political level; laws and policies
should be enacted to save and revive the natural world and to protect nature from further
degradation. Let us not be defeatist; let us be proactive and use our freedom responsibly and

12
commit ourselves to a lifestyle that is beneficial not only to ourselves but also to nature and to
our fellow human beings especially to the generations that are yet to come.
“Authentic development includes efforts to bring about an integral improvement in the
quality of human life, and this entails considering the setting in which people live their
lives. These settings influence the way we think, feel and act. In our rooms, our homes,
our workplaces and neighborhoods, we use our environment as a way of expressing our
identity. We make every effort to adapt to our environment, but when it is disorderly,
chaotic or saturated with noise and ugliness, such over stimulation makes it difficult to
find ourselves integrated and happy.”
- Pope Francis, Laudato Si

References:

Corpuz, Brenda B. Et al: Introduction to the Philosophy of the Human Person, Lorimar
Publishing Inc. 2016.
Maboloc, Christopher Ryan: Introduction to the Philosophy of the Human Person, The
Inteligente Publishing Inc. 2016.

Harold L. Quitoriano, MAT

Philosophy teacher

13