Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • USELF Chapter 1 Defining The Self

    Uploaded by

    TADZMALYN JINANG
    30 views9 pages

    Original Title

    USELF Chapter 1 Defining the self

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    30 views9 pages

    USELF Chapter 1 Defining The Self

    Uploaded by

    TADZMALYN JINANG

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 9
    CHAPTER | DEFINING THE SELF: PERSONAL AND DEVELOPMENTAL PERSPECTIVES ON SELF AND IDENTITY Lesson 1: The Self from Various Philosophical Perspectives Lesson 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; 3, compare and contrast how the self has been represented in different philosophical schools; and 4. examine one’s self against the different views of self that were discussed in class. 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? .tthas: not been a custom to just randomly pick a combination of letters and number (or even punctuation marks) like zhjk756!! to denote our being. Human beings attach names that are meaningful to birthed progenies because names are supposed to designate us in the world. Thus, some people get baptized with names such as “precious,” “beauty,” OF “lovely.” Likewise, when our parents call our names, d to them because our names represent who we are. we were taught to respon As a student, we are told to always write our names on our papers, projects, or any output for that matter. Qurenameesgrifvaus. Death cannot even stop this bond between the person and her name. Names are inscribed even into one’s gravestone Atiamesis not the person itself no matter how intimately bound it is with the bearer. tis only a signifier. A person who was named after a saint most Probabiy will not become an actual saint. He may not even turn out to be saintly! The Selfig xuphainiepiiciainasiondiaae ON, The self is something thata parser erenniallymolds, shapeswand develops. The selfisMOta Static thingahatione’, or is just assigned byrone's parents just, like a name. Everyone is tasked to discover one’s self. Have you truly discovered yours? ABSTRACTION The history of philosophy is replete with men and women who inquired into the fundamental nature of the self. Along with the question of the primary substratum that defines the 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 tand reality and respond to perennial questions of them in attempting to unders' acs Curiosity, including the question of the self. The different perspectives and view, on the self can be best seen and understood by revisiting its Prime movers ‘ig identify the most important conjectures made by philosophers from the Nien, times to the contemporary period. Prior the Socrates, the Grea, thinkers, sometimes collectively called the ci to denote that some of them preceded Socrates while others existed around Socrates's time as well, preoccupieq themselves with the question of the primary substratum, @P@Re@ thai Of things"in the World. These men like FREI (Pyhageras, Parménides, ebéraciitus, ang ‘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, SGeratesiwasimoreeeneeihed with another If. He was the “who ever, quest elf, and this has become his life-long mission, the true task of the philosopher is to know oneseff. ‘Plat6 claimed in his dialogs that Soarat@SSWilied that theunexamined ife is in. During his trial for allegedly corrupting the minds of the youth and for impiety, i ir as en, young and old, to ut the world, particularly Nn himself to serve as a and shook them off in eckoning, were really not question their presuppositions about themselves and abo! about who they are (Plato 2012). Socrates took it upor @QaMy” that disturbed Athenian men from their slumbe Order to reach the truth and wisdom. Most men, in his r tanding the Self fully aware of who they were and the virtues that they were supposed to attain in t order to preserve their souls for the afterlife. ‘that-can happen to anyone ForS6éftes, every man is composed of -pody-and soul, This means that @VéRA Auman that is, he is composed of two important aspects of his personhood. For Socrates, this means 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's student, basically took ie aNd off from his master and supported the idea that woe manis 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, the “The Republic” (Plato spirited soul, and the appetitive soul. In his fRagnannOpEs. i i if 2000). Plato her. Theaatierra? the three parts of the soul are working harmoniously with one anott erson, Stub forged byfeasemand i the art whit ge of base desires like eating, drinking, sleeping, and having ex are controlled as well. When this ideal state is attained, then the human person’s soul becomes just and virtuous. RugustineanaTREMES Aquinas Augustine’s view of the human person reflects the entire spirit of the medieval world when it comes to man. Fellewingetherancient GeW@ofPRlate and infusi with the Divi Thelbadysis HOURS on eartand fe the soul is to-anticipate living etemally ina realm eevee epintual bliss in: communion with God. This is because the body can only thrive inthe imperfect, physical reality that is the world, whereas the soul can also stay . after death in a nn God. Th tt is commu! Tina i ' qhemasmAquinas, the most eminent ‘thirteenth ind , appended something to this Christian view. Adapting some ideas from Aristotle, Aquinas said that indeed, man jg Greek, refers to the makes up every in the universe.” Man'stbodysisipartiofithisomatt@r. Form o the other hand, or morplietin Greek refers to i oftaisubstancemonthing!" It is what makes it what itis. In the case of the human person, the body of the human person 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. Descartes conceived of the human person as having a body and a + mind. In his famous treatise, The Meditations~of=First) 4 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 asrot to be doubt (Descartes 2008). If something is so clear and lucid even doubted, then that is the only time when one should actually buy 4 proposition. In the end, Descartes thought that the only thing that‘one cannot “GOUDLIS THE Existence of the self. fc that there is piaohbli , for even iffone doubts oneself, that only proves nad ‘sand therefore, that cannot be doubted. Thus, his famous, eagi SP RIRRHEPETSPEePaN” The fact that ‘ * i. e fact 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 eogito==s the tlNng@RSETRINRS, which is the mind, and the GREE oreextensionoftheamnd, which is the body. In F e that is 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 |? 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 ‘GavidAume, a Scottish philosopher a r, has a very unique way of looking at man. As an @ABIR@Ist who wi the .senses_and-experiences, Hume argues that theiselais it. The self i y One can rightly see here the empiricism that runs through his veins. &mipirieism 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 experiencing. 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. ut a bul is. What To David Hume, that (Reyscancalhibexcategorizeduintouwo SImMpressions and {6as: (APFESSIOMs are: basic objects of our experience or sensati the ion. 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 products of our direct experience with the world. ills: 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 of being in love for the first time, that still is an idea g to Hume, is simply What is the self then? Self, accordin 3 like what the previous philosophers thought. In reality, what one thinks is a Critigy particular person ‘Sif is simply a combinatiomofallexperienceswith Thinking of the “self’ as a mere combination of impressions was problematic for Immanuel Kant. ‘Kage e veracit acco hing “of impressions” However, Kant thinks that the things thalWérpereey, around-them are:not just randomly infused into the: human person without an organizing principle that regulates the relationship of all these impressions. To Kant, there is necessarily a mind that organizes the impressions that men. it from the external world. Timesanduspacessfor example, are ideas that oné conan finclin the ward, but is SUIEIA-SUFIAdS. Kantralls:these.the,apparatusestthe 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. Kant therefore suggests that it is an actively engaged intelligence in all knowledge and experience. Thus, the selfisnotjustwhat ity. In addition, IS. «for alhuman person: n

    You might also like