This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
Social Philosophy and Social Science
Although philosophy and science spring from experience, from the inherent desire of the human person to know reality, they differ in their approach and intent. Philosophy seeks to understand reality in its totality and ultimate value, while science attempts to control and manipulate it. Philosophical approach integrative of experience; while science isolates a certain aspect of reality.
Social philosophy penetrates into the social dimension of human existence with the immediacy of intuition, searching its meaning and value(s), conceptualizing them for the sake of integrative meaningful living. Structures that social philosophy seeks to understand are not taken in isolation from one another but placed in a figure-horizon sort of way. Attempts to understand being-with-others-in society in total integrative way.
. Method limited to observable phenomena. their economics or politics) as a fact and to explain it. their culture. to social reality as an object. Social scientist tries to find inter-objective connections between facts and formulates theories and laws. Uses induction and deduction. Social sciences try to examine a segment of social reality (a group of people. sometimes with measurements and statistics.
and scientist is impelled to probe into a social fact by the insight of a philosopher. Social philosophy and social sciences help each other. Scientist¶s methodology contains certain philosophical presuppositions for the philosopher to unearth and criticize. Philosopher¶s understanding of social reality would remain abstract and unfounded without findings of the social sciences. Philosopher¶s insight substantiated by facts provided by scientist. .
(Paul Ricoeur) Neighbor is the personal way I encounter another as a person. the interpersonal.The Social and the Interpersonal Social philosophy and social sciences deal with relating to others that is called socius. . Socius differs from the neighbor. with varying degrees of intimacy. Neighbor is the immediate direct relationship with another.
In real life. the two overlap and crisscross each other. Socius is the mediate indirect relationship I have within the context of institutions and structures. Socius is the human relationship I have with an organized group or the person I encounter through his/her social function. .
³for the ultimate meaning of institutions is the service which they render to persons. works out through the fringes of the socius. After all. it becomes treacherous when it absorbs and exhausts the whole of our relationships. our human existence is social through and through. The socius and the neighbor are two ways of relating with others. and we must avoid the monopoly of one or the other. . The socius is not evil in itself. The personal relationship of the neighbor passes through the relationship of the socius. and rises against the socius.´ Nor can our relationships simply be that of the neighbor for this can easily lead to a false sense of charity or delusion.
executes them according to accepted patterns and does them for his/her fellow human beings.Human Existence is Social Our life is social in everything. Even wanting to be alone is social. The person¶s activities are social not only because he/she performs them with others but also because he/she learns them from others. . By ³everything´ we mean everything that is subject to human responsibility.
but this orderly field of meaning is at our disposal through others. Orderly field of meaning in human activity depends upon our fellow human beings and is in turn dependent upon the human person. Every genuinely human activity is interwoven with an orderly field of meaning. and feeling. This is true in the areas of work. sense perception. play. . through society. thinking.
2) we need others to enter into the human world of meaning and to make it our own. Here.Human existence is fundamentally social in that 1) human existence has a historical character. . and 3) being-together is a fundamental value which gives authentic fulfillment in our life. the being-for-others and the being-through-others merge. The authentic being-for-others is being at the service of others that promotes the existence of the other for his own sake.
There is only involuntary imitation and psychic contagion. and the individual member is absorbed in total experience.Social Unity The German philosopher Max Scheler (1874-1928) speaks of several essential types of social unity: 1. No individuality and sphere of the person as transference of feeling takes place in absence of knowledge. No solidarity because the individual does not exist at all as an experience . The mob possesses its own lawfulness not determined by its members. mass (herd among animals): no understanding and experience of the other.
Togetherness is experienced as common stream having its own lawfulness. occupation. dignity. tribe. though varying in course and content in their total dependency on the variations of collective experience. acting. There is an immediate experience of the other and the content of all experience is identical. Corresponds to different tasks of community: caste. a people): There is understanding but not preceding the experience of togetherness. etc. Representable solidarity: self-responsibility is built upon an experience of coresponsibility for the willing. 2. and effecting of the whole community. . Life Community (as in family. class.
Society: characterized by conscious acts of self and consciousness of acts of others. . Disposition: distrust. Responsibility for others based on self-responsibility. Artificial unit constituted by mature and selfconscious individual persons who agree to come together for common interests. 3. Every willing together and doing together presuppose acts of promising and contract. No solidarity.
All possible society is therefore founded through community. . nexus between society and lifecommunity: ³There can be no society without life community (though there can be life community without society). Yet.´ e.g. contract formed in common language.
4.´ On this level every individual person is at the same time a member of a collective person . spiritual. spiritual. and individual single persons µin¶ an independent. Highest type of social unity: ³the unity of independent. and individual collective person.
just as the collective person is coresponsible for each of its members. Responsibility-for distinct from responsibility-to: In collective person. Mutual coresponsibility between individual person and collective person. . every individual and the collective person are self-responsible and at the same time every individual is coresponsible for the collective person.
Responsibility-to: there is neither an ultimate responsibility of the individual to the collective person (life community) nor an ultimate responsibility of the collective person to the individual (or majority of individuals) as in society. to God. . in terms of self-responsibility as well as coresponsibility. but both the collective person and the individual person are responsible to the person of persons.
. Here solidarity takes on a new sense: change from representable solidarity to unrepresentable solidarity²the individual person is coresponsible for all other individual persons µin¶ the collective person not only as the representative of an office. rank. or any position in social structure but also as unique personal individual and as bearer of individual conscience.
participates in this according to his special and unique membership . both individual and collective. The principle of solidarity is an eternal component and fundamental article of the cosmos of finite moral persons. Total moral world becomes one encompassing whole Every person.
Two propositions of principle of solidarity: 1. community of persons belongs to the essence of a possible person 2. esteem. promising. reciprocity of social acts such as love. a priori structure of mutuality. etc. .
. Our task then is to intentionally rise from lifecommunity to bring society (where there is no solidarity) to the totality-person. where genuine solidarity reigns.
Seminar Topics and Lecturers .
Monday. May 9 GABRIEL MARCEL ON THE FAMILY Dr. Manny Dy .
J. . May 10 JUSTICE AND THE LAW Fr. David.Tuesday. Luis S. S.
Wednesday. May 11 A VIRTUAL LECTURE on ³THE VIRTUAL SOCIETY´ Dr. Peter Murphy .
May 12 CIVIL SOCIETY AND THE PUBLIC SPHERE FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF THE PRINCIPLE OF SOLIDARITY: PHILOSOPHICAL REFLECTIONS FROM KAROL WOJTYLA¶S THEORY OF PARTICIPATION Dr. Ibana .Thursday. Rainier A.
. Nemesio S. Que. May 13 HANNAH ARENDT¶S SOCIAL PHILOSOHY Fr.Friday. S.J.
Monday. Tomas G. May 16 CHARLES HARTSHORNE¶S SOCIAL PHILOSOPHY Dr. Rosario .
May 17 ART. Jovino Miroy . CULTURE AND SOCIAL PHILOSOPHY Dr.Tuesday.
Garcia . May 18 PAUL RICOEUR¶S SOCIAL AND POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY Dr.Wednesday. Leovino Ma.
Thursday. May 19 RAWLS ON ³OVERLAPPING CONSENSUS AND PLURALITY´ Dr. Zosimo Lee .
May 20 LEVINAS¶ SOCIAL PHILOSOPHY Angelli Tugado .Friday.
Rodriguez . Agustin G.Monday. May 23 HOSPITALITY AND SOLIDARITY Dr.
Remmon Barbaza . May 24 MARCUSE ON ONE-DIMENSIONAL MAN Dr.Tuesday.
May 25 SYNTHESIS .Wednesday.
This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?