Introduction to the

PHILOSOPHY
of the
Human Person
Etymological Meaning of Philosophy
Division of Philosophy
Timeline of Philosophy
Western Philosophy
Eastern Philosophy

2019
Part 1: The Meaning of Philosophy
Philosopher can be best described as one who loves truth in its deepest meaning. This is
in keeping with the literal meaning of the word “Philosophy” as love of wisdom. The study of
Philosophy is a continual encounter, a dialogue carried on in search of truth wherever it may be
found. Philosophy can be termed as an inquiry which seeks to encompass the whole of reality by
understanding its most basic causes and principle in so far as these are acceptable to reason and
experience. It is characterized as ‘beginning in wonder and ends in mystery”.
(Reflections on Man by Jesse Mann et al. P2-4)
Philosophy of man is an overview on the nature, activities and destiny of man. It attempts
to assess his place in and his relationship to the world. Through such an overview, an
understanding of what man is and who he is will emerge. In some respect, Philosophy of man
constitutes a metaphysics of man, for it is a probe of the deepest causes and meaning of man.
(Reflections on Man by Jesse Mann et. al p.13)
Etymologically, the word “philosophy” comes from the Greek words, Philo, meaning “to
love”, and “Sophia”, meaning “wisdom.” Philosophy originally meant “love of wisdom,” and in
a broad sense, wisdom is still the goal of philosophy. Philosophy is also defined as the science
that by natural light of reason studies the first causes or highest principles of all things. Under
this definition, four things are to be considered:
a. Science. It is called science because the investigation is systematic. It follows certain
steps or it employs certain procedures. It organized body of knowledge just like any other
sciences.
b. Natural Light of Reason. Philosophy investigates things, not by using any other
laboratory instrument or investigative tools, neither on the basis of supernatural
revelation, otherwise it becomes theology; instead, the philosopher uses his natural
capacity to think or simply, human reason alone or the so-called unaided reason.
c. Study of All Things. This sets the distinction between philosophy from other sciences.
All other sciences concern themselves with a particular object of investigation.
Philosophy is not one dimensional or partial. In short, a philosopher does not limit
himself to a particular object of inquiry.
d. First Cause or Highest Principle. A principle is that from which something proceeds in
any manner whatsoever. The First Principles:
 Principle of Identity – whatever is is; and whatever is not is not; everything is
what it is. Everything is its own being, and not being is not being.
 Principle of Non-Contradiction – it is impossible for a thing to be and not to be
at the same time, and at the same respect.
 Principle of Excluded Middle – a thing is either is or is not; everything must be
either be or not be; between being and not-being, there is no middle ground
possible.
 Principle of Sufficient Reason – nothing exists without a sufficient reason for its
being and existence.
1
Part 2: The Branches of Philosophy
Philosophy is divided into the practical and theoretical according to its function.
1. Theoretical (or speculative) philosophy – enriches the mind by principles to be
speculated upon or to be known. It does not directly impose laws or norms as guidance
for thought. Theoretical philosophy includes epistemology, theodicy (or theology),
cosmology, philosophical psychology, and metaphysics.

a. Epistemology (or Criteriology). The word epistemology comes from the Greek
words Episteme, meaning “knowledge,” and logos meaning “science or study.” Thus,
epistemology is the science of knowledge. It is the science of true and certain
knowledge (Glenn, 1957). Epistemology comprises the statement of and solution to
the critical problem (including its nature, origin, and objectivity), and validity of
knowledge, truth, and certitude.
b. Theodicy (or Natural Theology). The term Theodicy is derived from the two Greek
words theos, which means “God,” and dike, which means “justice.” Thus, theodicy is
a study which investigates the nature, existence, essence, attributes, and operations of
God (Roa, 2007). It covers the demonstrability and actual demonstration of the
existence of God; His essence and attributes; His immanent operations, i.e.,
intellection and volition; and His transient operations, i.e., creation, conservation,
concurrence, governance, and providence.
c. Cosmology. The name cosmology comes from the Greek words cosmos meaning
“universe,” and logos meaning “science or study.” Thus, cosmology studies the
nature and origin of the universe. It is the science which considers the ultimate
principles and causes of mobile beings in general (pasigui Parallag, Requidan, &
Tabin, 2006). This includes the essential principles of natural bodies, matter and
form, change, motion, time, place, space, causality and finality, generation and
corruption.
d. Philosophical Psychology (or Rational Psychology). Psychology is derived from
the Greek words Psyche, meaning “soul” and logos, meaning “science or study.
Philosophical psychology deals with man not only as a sensing and thinking being but
also a being composed of body and soul; it treats the whole being of man as man.
e. Metaphysics (or Ontology) is derived from the Greek words meta, meaning
“beyond” and physikon meaning “nature”. Thus, metaphysics studies the nature of
the mind, the self, and consciousness. It includes the concept of being, its analogy and
fundamental attributes, the problem of evil, act and potency, essence and existence,
substance and accidents, person, and causality (Roa, 2007)
2. Practical Philosophy – perfects the will by principles to be practiced. It presents related
data from which the directive laws or norms are immediately derived. Its function is
primarily directive: logic aims at norms for correct thinking while ethics aims at a norm
for correct acting.

2
 a. Logic. the name Logic comes from the Greek word logike, which means “thought”.
Logic is the science and art of correct thinking. it studies the law of thought. It covers
the study of ideas and terms, judgment and proposition, reasoning ang syllogism,
among others.
b. Ethics (Moral Philosophy) the term ethics is derived from the Greek word ethos,
meaning “characteristic way of acting,” an attribute appropriate to man as a rational
being. The Latin word for ethos is mos (or mores), which may be the reason why
ethics is sometimes called moral philosophy. Ethics is the science which investigates
the morality of human acts or conduct. It is concerned with human acts and the
principles of human actions, ultimate end of man, the dereminants of morality, law,
and conscience.
c. Axiology. The name axiology comes from the Greek words axios, meaning “worthy,”
and logos menaing “discourse” or “study.” Axiology is the discourse or study of the
system and nature of value judgments or worthiness. It includes the study of values,
its origin, types, and characteristics (Roa, 2007).
Figure 1. Division of Philosophy

PHILOSOPHY

THEORETICAL PRACTICAL

EPISTEMOLOGY LOGIC

THEOLOGY ETHICS

COSMOLOGY AXIOLOGY

RATIONAL PSYCHOLOGY

METAPHYSICS

Part 3: TimeLine of Western Philosophy

Western Philosophy is primarily concerned with uncovering the truth through

systematic argumentation and theory. There is greater emphasis on the use of reason rather than
faith, and an increased focus on man as an individual. This perspective has led to the

3
development of a more scientific, theory-based approach in philosophy, and a more
individualistic, self- oriented approach in analyzing the human condition.

Figure 2. Timeline of Philosophy

Part 4: Western Philosophy

The Sophists were an important group that emerged and influenced learning in Ancient
Greece. They were teachers who traveled throughout Greece and taught people who wished to
learn. Learning during that time was done through discussion and argument, and the Sophists
were excellent public speakers who trained their students to win each and every argument they
participated in.
This style of teaching, however, soon met resistance from another group of thinkers who
disagreed with the methods of the Sophists. They believed that teaching is more than just training
people to win arguments. Teaching and learning should be an opportunity to learn the truth of all
things in this world, and all real wisdom should strive to achieve truth aside from knowledge.
One of their leader, Pythagoras, called themselves philosophos – a term which means “lovers of
wisdom.” For the philosophos, arguments and discussion must be based on sound reasoning.
They were the pioneers of today’s philosophers. Their central belief was that man need not know
all things in the world, but one must continue to inquire and seek to understand and learn about
the human condition.
From their roots in Ancient Greece, the thoughts and ideas of philosophers soon gained
popularity in many places throughout the world. Among the ancient Greeks, the philosophers
became pioneers in various fields of knowledge such as history, biology, medicine, mathematics,
astronomy, and even physics. It was quite common to hear of an ancient philosopher who was
considered an “expert” in various fields of learning.

The following are among the most notable ancient Greek philosophers (pre-Socratic):

4
Pythagoras (570 BCE to 495 BCE) – A mathematician and scientist, he was credited with the
formulation of the Pythagorean theorem. His work earned him many followers, and he
established a community of learners who were devoted tot the study of religion and philosophy.
Heraclitus (535 BCE to 475 BCE) – He proposed that everything that exist is based on a higher
order or plan which he called logos. For him, change is a permanent aspect of the human
condition and he was credited with the saying, “No man ever steps on the same river twice”. He
claimed also that the world is not permanent, that all things are in change.
Parmenides (c. early 500’s BCE)- Headed another school of thought which stressed the
fundamental permanence and unity of all beings while allowing for second difference and
variations.
Democritus (460 BCE to 370 BCE) – He devoted himself to studying the causes of natural
phenomena. Was among the first to propose that matter is composed of tiny particles called
atoms.
Diogenes of Sinope (412 BCE to 323 BCE) – He was a known advocate of a simple and virtuous
life. For Diogenes, one should not only talk of virtue but should show it in words and actions.
His emphasis on austerity and simplicity often went to the extreme and he was said to have lived
like a beggar. He was also known to be a vocal critic of well-known philosophers such as Plato
and Aristotle. His teachings views were later developed by his followers and influenced the
development of several schools of philosophy such as Cynicism and Stoicism.
Epicurus (341 BCE to 270 BCE) – He believed that philosophy could enable man to live a life
of happiness. His views gave rise to Epicureanism – a school of philosophy which believes that
wisdom and simple living will result to a life free from fear and pain.
ANCIENT PERIOD
Socrates (470 BCE to 399 BCE) – He was considered the foremost philosopher of ancient times.
He made great contributions to the field of ethics. Socrates was a known critic of intellectuals
during his time, but he himself did not claim to be “wise” and merely considered himself a
“midwife” that helped inquiring minds achieve wisdom. He also believed that philosophy could
enable a man to live a life of virtue. He was credited with formulating the Socratic Method – a
means of examine and analyze his knowledge and views regarding the topic.
Plato (427 BCE to 347 BCE) – Student of Socrates, he wrote down his teacher’s writing and
incorporated some of his own ideas into them. His teachings and writing were considered the
foundation of Western philosophy. Plato’s most significant ideas included his Theory of Forms
or Theory of Ideas, which proposes that everything that exists is based on an idea or template
that can only be perceived in the mind; these nonphysical ideas are eternal and unchanging. He
also focused his studies on the ideal society and proposed and ideal model of government and
society which is ruled by wisdom and reason. Plato is also known for his dialectic – a method if
inquiry where two opposing ideas are discussed in an attempt to arrive at new knowledge. Plato’s
lasting contribution to learning was his founding of the Academy, an instruction of higher
learning which was first of its kind in the West.

5
Man, for Plato, is a being composed of body and soul. The body is composed of the four
traditional elements – earth, water, air and fire. The soul consists of three distinct faculties, three
levels of knowledge and of desire. At the lowest level is sensation (aesthesis), capable only of
cloudy images of the ideal forms as reflected in sensible objects. Corresponding to this is a
sensuous desire (epithumia), seeking satisfaction in ever changing and thus endlessly frustrating
material objects. At the next level is opinion (doxa), in itself not free from error but sufficient for
practical matters such as the hypothetical sciences and the governance of the communal life. The
corresponding desire is the spirit (thumos), a kind of spontaneous tendency toward everything
beautiful and good. Finally, on the highest level is the mind or intellect (nous), the immortal part
of the soul, with the capacity for truth and wisdom. And the corresponding desire is the will
(boule), signifying the soul’s tendency toward the Good.
Aristotle (384 BCE to 322 BCE) – He attended Academy and was a prominent student of Plato.
Aristotle, however, disagreed with Plato’s theory of forms and took a different view in
interpreting reality. For him, all ideas and view are based on perception and our reality is based
on what we can sense and perceive. This view greatly influenced the study of the physical
sciences. Aristotle was involved in a great variety of disciplines such as zoology, psychology,
ethics, metaphysics and politics. He also proposed a system for the classification of plants and
animals. His studies in logic led to the formulation of a formal process of analyzing reasoning
which gave rise to deductive reasoning – the process by which specific statements are analyzed
to reach a conclusion or generalization.
Ergon, meaning the proper function or purpose. In search of the ergon of man, Aristotle
asks, what is man? Man is a being composed of soul and body, as taught by Plato. The soul is
that part of the composite which animates and commands, the body is the part which is
subordinate to the soul, as the tool is to the artisan, or as the slave to the master.
The soul has two main parts, the rational and the irrational. The rational soul, completely
independent of the body, is further subdivided into the speculative intellect, pure thought or
intellection (theoretike dianoia) and the practical intellect (praktikon dianoetikon), ordained
toward action and thus that which deremines the means appropriate for the intended end.
The irrational soul, closely united with the body, is subdivided into the vegetable part,
characterized by the activities of nutrition, growth and reproduction, and the desiring part, further
subdivided into three levels - the unruly and irrational sense desire and covetousness (epithumia),
the spontaneous impulses (thumos), which may partly be subject tot the dictates of reason, and
the desires and wishes (boulesis), completely under the dictates of reason, having for its object
something stable and perceived to be good.
The Speculative Intellect
The speculative intellect (theoretike dianoia), for Aristotle, has several capabilities. It is
capable of intuition of the most fundamental principles (nous). On the other hand, it is also
capable of science (episteme), demonstration and derivation of conclusions from the first
fundamental principles. But the highest capability of the speculative intellect, Aristotle calls
philosophia or at times sophia to signify its highest degree. This signifies, in general, the

6
possession of the most fundamental principles as well as their elaborations and derivations. But,
at its maximum degree, such as perfect science would mean the contemplation of the most
sublime beings, including the eternal heavenly bodies, which in Greek tradition were considered
divine, but most especially, the contemplation of the most sublime of all beings, God Himself.
Contemplation for Aristotle, it will be noted, does not signify the encounter with something or
someone outside of the speculative intellect itself. Rather, it would mean engaging one’s self in
the most immanent activity one is capable of, where the theoretical intellect is involved in
dialogue with itself, thereby approximating the eternal activity of Aristotle’s God, Noesis
noeseos, Pure Intellect intellecting Itself. As approximation of God’s own proper activity, the
theoretical intellect’s act of contemplation would constitute man’s sovereign end and happiness.
Practical Reason
Virtue, for Aristotle, connotes, first of all, action under the control of reason, thus where reason
has control of the individual’s desires and passions, following the rule of the “just middle”
(mesotes), neither deficient nor excessive. For example, the virtue of courage would consist of an
activity that is neither pusillanimous nor reckless, but remaining steadfast and firm in the face of
danger, thereby exhibiting the nobility and excellence of the human spirit or logos.
Secondly, virtue would connote a disposition or habitual state acquired by way of constant
repetition, such that the doing of the virtuous act, after repeated practice becomes a matter of
habit for the individual. According to Aristotle, any act done only after long agonizing moment
of doubt is sure indication that the individual has not acquired mastery over his unruly desires
and passions. He has not acquired virtue.
Thirdly, a virtuous act is one which proceeds from the right intention, meaning to say that the
action is done for its own sake and not for some extraneous motive outside of the action itself.
Hence, in the case of friendship, for example, which is an important virtue for Aristotle, the
intended goal should be the human relationship itself, the mutual good will binding two or more
people, each appreciating and affirming the other for his own sake, and not for some extraneous
purpose such as to curry favor, or to acquire some gain or advantage from the other.
MEDIEVAL PERIOD
Medieval (Christian era: St. Augustine, St Thomas Aquinas) Theocentric Approach
Man is understood as from the point of view of God, as a creature of God, made in His image
and likeness, and therefore the apex of His creation.
St. Thomas of Aquinas (c. 1225-1274) – was an Italian philosopher and theologian of Medieval
time. He was the foremost classical proponent of natural theology at the peak of Scholasticism in
Europe, and the founder of the Thomistic school of Philosophy and Theology.
Aquinas adopted the four causes of Aristotle in conceptualizing man. Hence, following Aristotle,
man would be composed of rational (logos) form (morphe) and matter (hyle), which would
constitute the very nature of man as rational being, thus, rational human nature shared by all
human beings, placing them on a level of dignity superior to all other beings in the world.

7
Furthermore, this rational being, composite of rational form and matter looks back to an efficient
cause (aitia), as its source and origin.

MODERN PERIOD (Rene Descartes, Immanuel Kant) Anthropocentric Approach

Man is now understood in his own terms, but basically on reason, thus rationalistic.
Contemporary Philosophies arose as a reaction against Hegel. One reaction is Marx who
criticized Hegel’s geist, spirit, mind and brought out his dialectical materialism.
Another reaction is Soren Kierkegaard who was against the system of Hegel and emphasized the
individual and his direct relationship with God. Kierkegaard led the existentialist movement
which became popular after the two world wars.
EXISTENTIALISM
The father of Existentialism is a Danish Philosopher Soren Kierkegaard (1813-1855)
Three events in Kierkegaard’s life influence his philosophy:
a. unhappy childhood, strict upbringing by his father
b. break-up with the woman he loved
c. quarrel with a university professor
These events and his criticism of the rationalistic Hegelian system led him to emphasize the
individual and feelings.
The aim of Kierkegaard is to awaken his people to the true meaning of Christianity.
Two ways to achieve his aim: a. the direct confrontation (which is risky) b. indirect: to start from
where the people are and lead them to the truth.
Kierkegaard chose the indirect way and saw himself as another Socrates: The indirect way is the
Socratic Method. Kierkegaard started from where the people were, the aesthetic stage, the stage
of pleasure, so he wrote his first aesthetic works.
The next stage is the ethical stage, the stage of morality (of good and evil) with reason as the
standard.
The highest stage is the religious, where the individual stands in direct
immediate relation (no intermediary) with God.
Here, because God is infinite and man is finite, the individual is alone, in angst, in fear and
trembling.
What comes here is faith, the individual’s belief in God, going beyond reason.

8
The favorite example of Kierkegaard here is Abraham who was asked by God to sacrifice his son
Isaac (by his wife Sarah) to test his faith. The command was between God and Abraham alone,
cannot be mediated by others (Sarah would not understand it), and to apply the ethical would be
a murder.
Existentialism is not a philosophical system but a movement, because existentialists are against
systems.There are many different existentialist philosophies, but in general they can be grouped
into two camps: Theistic (those who believe in God) and Atheistic (those who do not believe in
God.
Theistic
Soren Kierkegaard
Karl Jaspers
Gabriel Marcel
Atheistic
Albert Camus
Jean Paul Sartre
Maurice Merleau Ponty
Martin Heidegger- (he is in-between the two camps because he refuses to talk about God)
______________________________________________________________________________
2.2 In spite of their divergence, there are common features of existentialist philosophies to label
them as existentialist.
2.3 First, existentialist emphasize man as an actor in contrast to man as spectator.
2..3.1 Many existentialists used literature like drama, novel, short story, to convey this idea.
2.4 Second, existentialists emphasize man as subject, in contrast to man as object.
2.4.1 Being as Object is not simply being-as-known but known in a certain way: conceptually,
abstractly, scientifically, its content does not depend on the knower. It is the given, pure datum,
impersonal, all surface, no depth, can be defined, circumscribed.
2.4.1 Being as Subject is the original center, source of initiative, inexhaustible. The “I” which
transcends all determinations, unique, the self, in plenitude, attainable only in the very act by
which it affirms itself.
2.4.2 Man is both Subject and Object, as can be shown in reflexive acts (e.g I brush myself, I
wash myself, I slap myself) where there is the object-me(changing and divisible) and the subject-
I (permanent and indivisible).

9
2.4.3 The existentialists, however, while not denying the reality of man as object, emphasize the
Subjectivity of man, of man as unique, irreducible, irreplaceable, unrepeatable being. E.g. as a
passenger in a crowded bus, I am treated like a baggage, but I am more than that.
2.4.5 The subjective must not be confused with subjectivism or being subjectivistic.
2.4.6 The subjective merely affirms the importance of man as origin of meaning (in contrast to
the emphasis of ancient & medieval periods on truth)
e.g. God , not the object proven but God-for-me.
e.g. values both objective and subjective (value-for-me)
2.5 Thirdly, existentialists stress man’s existence, man as situatedness, which takes on different
meaning for each existentialist.
2.5.1 for Kierkegaard, existence is to be directly related to God in fear and trembling.
2.5.2 For Heidegger, existence is Dasein, There-being, being thrown into the world as self-
project.
2.5.3 For Jaspers, to exist is not only to determine one’s own being horizontally but also
vertically, to realize oneself before God.
2.5.4 For Marcel, esse est co-esse,to exist is to co-exist, to participate in the life of the other.
2.5.5 For Sartre, to exist is to be free.
2.5.6 For Merleau-Ponty, to exist is to give meaning.
2.5.7 For Camus, to exist is to live in absurdity.
2.6 Fourthly, existentialists stress on freedom which means differently for each existentialist.
2.6.1 For Kierkegaard, to be free is to move from aesthetic stage to ethical to religious.
2.6.2 For Heidegger, to be free is to transcend oneself in time.
2.6.3 For Sartre, to be free is to be absolutely determine of oneself without God.
2.6.4 For Marcel, to be free is to say “yes” to Being, to pass from having to being in love.
2.7 Fifth, Existentialists propagate authentic existence versus inauthentic existence.
2.7.1 Inauthentic existence is living the impersonal “they” in the crowd, in bad faith (half
conscious, unreflective) e.g. D’etranger of Camus, functionalized man of Marcel, monologue of
Buber.
2.7.2 Authentic existence is free, personal commitment to a project, cause, truth, value. To live
authentically is to be response-able.

10
2.8 All existentialists make use of the PHENOMENOLOGICAL METHOD which does not
explain deductively or inductively but simply describes the experience of man as he actually
lives it.
______________________________________________________________________________
1. Traditional study of philosophy begins with logic, then metaphysics, then cosmology and ends
with philosophical psychology or philosophical anthropology (philosophy of man)
1.1 Man defined by traditional scholastic philosophy as rational animal, a composite of body of
soul.
1.1.1 Under the aspect of body, man is like any other animal, a substance, mortal, limited by time
and space.
1.1.2 Under the aspect of soul, man is rational, free, immortal.
1.1.3 The soul is deduced from the behavior of man to think and decide.
2. Our critique of the traditional definition of man is that (a) it is dualistic; ( b) it looks at man
more as an object, an animal; (c) it proceeds from external to internal.
3. The phenomenological approach, on the other hand, is: (a) holistic;
(b) It describes man from what is properly human; (c) proceeds from internal to
external.
PHENOMENOLOGY
4. Phenomenology was started by Edmund Husserl (1859-1938) whose aim was to arrive at
“philosophy as a rigorous science”
4.1 By “philosophy as a rigorous science” Husserl meant “pre-supposition less philosophy”, a
philosophy with the least number of presuppositions.
4.2.1 Unlike Descartes, Husserl was dissatisfied with the sciences of his time because they start
with some complex presuppositions.
4.3.2 In particular, he was reacting against the naturalistic psychology which treats mental
activity as causally conditioned by events of nature, in terms of S-R relationship (stimulus-
reaction). Presupposition here is that man is a mechanistic animal.
5. So, Husserl wanted philosophy to be “science of ultimate grounds” where the presuppositions
are so basic and primary that they cannot be reduced further.
6. How does one arrive at Philosophy? By transcending the natural attitude.
6.1 The natural attitude is the scientific attitude which was predominant in Husserl’s time and
carried to the extreme to become scientistic.

11
6.2 The scientific attitude observes things, expresses their workings in singular judgments, then
by induction and deduction, arrives at concrete result.
7. But this attitude contains a lot of assumptions:
7.1 It assumes that there is no need to ask how we know.
7.2 It assumes that the world (object) is out there, existing and explainable in objective laws,
while man the subject is pure consciousness, clear to itself able to know the world as it is.
7.3 It takes for granted the world-totality.
8. In short, the natural attitude looks at reality as things, a “fact world”.
8.1The way of knowing in the natural attitude is fragmented, partial, fixed, clear, precise,
manipulative, and there is no room for mystery. It was moving away from the heart of reality.
9. So, the motto for Husserl and the Phenomenologists was “back to things themselves!”
9.1 By “back to things Themselves” Husserl meant the entire field of original experience.
9.2 The ultimate root of philosophy was not to be found in a concept, nor in a principle, not in
Cogito.
9.3 Phenomenology attempts to go back to the phenomenon, to that which presents itself to man,
to see things as they really are, independent of any prejudice. Thus phenomenology is the
“Logos of the Phenomenon”.
IMPORTANT STEPS IN THE PHENOMENOLOGICAL METHOD
Epoche literally means “bracketing” which Husserl borrowed from Mathematics and applied to
the natural attitude.
What I bracket in the Epoche is my natural attitude towards the object I am investigating, my
prejudice, my clear and conceptual knowledge of it that is unquestioned.
When I bracket, I do not deny nor affirm but simply hold in abeyance: I suspend judgment on it.
Epoche is important in order to see the world with “new eyes” and to return to the original
experience from where our conceptual natural attitude was derived.
Eidetic Reduction is one of the important reductions in the phenomenological method.
“Reduction” is another mathematical term to refer to the procedure by which we are placed in
the “transcendental sphere” the sphere in which we can see things as they really are,
independent of any prejudice.
“Eidetic” is derived from “eidos” which means essence. In eidetic reduction I reduce the
experience to its essence.
Phenomenological Transcendental Reduction reduces the experience further to the very activity
of my consciousness, to my loving, my seeing, my hearing. etc.

12
 Here I now become conscious of the subject, the “I” who must decide on the validity of the
object.
I now become aware of the subjective aspects of the object when I inquire into the beliefs,
feelings, desires which shape the experience.
The object is seen in relation to the subject and the subject in relation to the object.

The development of Western Philosophy is defined by the emergence of various schools of

thought in various periods in history.
WESTERN PHILOSOPHY
Historical Period School of Main Features, Beliefs Notable Philosophers
Thought
Ancient Rome (1st Stoicism Emphasis on morality, Seneca
century BCE to 5th virtue, calm, and Epictetus
century CE) emotional fortitude Marcus Aurelius

Medieval Period Scholasticism Application of St. Thomas Aquinas

(5th to 15th philosophy to define and St. Augustine
centuries) explain religious
doctrines
Renaissance (14th to Humanism Emphasis on the human Petrarch
17th centuries) person; use of Desiderius Erasmus
philosophy to Niccolo Machiavelli
understand society, Francios Rabelais
nature, and humanity
The Enlightenment Rationalism Reason and Logic Rene Descartes
(17th to 18th considered the basis of Immanuel Kant
centuries) knowledge and belief; Gottfried Leibniz
man has innate
knowledge that can be
accessed through
intuition or deduction

Empiricism Knowledge is gained David Hume

through the senses and Francis Bacon
experience; reliance on John Locke
inductive reasoning to
arrive at generalizations

Social and Discussion on the ideal Voltaire

Political human situation and Jean Jacques
Philosophy society; emphasis on Rousseau
individual rights and Thomas Hobbes

13
 liberties John Stuart Mill
th
Post Modern (19 Existentialism Human experience is Soren Kierkegaard
to 20th centuries) defined by the views, Friedrich Nietzsche
emotions, and actions of Martin Heidegger
the individual. Jean Paul Sartre
Simone de Beauvoir

Pragmatism Emphasis on the Charles Peirce

practical use of William James
knowledge and ideas John Dewey
Phenomenology Experience is studied Edmund Husserl
based on the subjective
viewpoint of the
individual.

Absurdism Man will never Albert Camus

understand the human
condition and the
meaning of life.

Postmodernism, Analysis on how Jacques Derrida

Post-structuralism knowledge, ideas, and Michel Foucault
power relations are
defined

Part 5: Eastern Philosophy

Eastern Philosophy consists of the schools of thought which are often closely tied with
religious beliefs. Eastern philosophies are often described as “wisdom” literature, where stories,
sayings and texts encourage people to adopt an ethical and harmonious way of life. There is great
emphasis on social relations, and the family and community are considered a central aspect of
life. The goal of philosophy is to achieve a balanced life and find one’s role in society.
Eastern philosophies are classified according to theistic (belief in a Supreme Being or deities)
and nontheistic philosophies. There are also a variety of indigenous philosophies or belief
systems among small indigenous communities throughout Asia.
EASTERN PHILOSOPHY
Historical Period School of Main Features, Beliefs Proponents Major
Thought, Belief Texts
System (Region
or Area
Ca. 2000 BCE Judaism Belief in one God Abraham, Moses,
(Israel, the (monotheism), who has a various prophets
Levant) role in the ultimate destiny
of mankind; Jewish

14
 people are God’s chosen Tanakh, Torah, and
people various scripture

The observance of God’s

commandments will result
in rewards. A deeper
study and understanding
of God’s laws as revealed
in the sacred scriptures
will lead to wisdom.
ca. 1500 BCE Hinduism Belief in a panteon of The Vedas
(India, South, gods, with three main
Asia) gods – Brahma, Shiva and
Vishnu

Belief in a cycle of birth

and rebirth (samsara),
which is broken when a
person achieves ultimate
union with the Divine
(moksha)

Emphasis on dharma, the

fulfillment of duties and
behavior in accordance
with the established order
in the world; individual
actions contribute to either
a good or bad effect
(karma) in a person’s life
ca. 400 BCE Buddhism Shares a number of main Siddharta Gautama
(South Asia, beliefs (samsara, dharma, (Buddha)
East Asia, moksha) with Hinduism Tripitaka
Southeast Asia)
The Four Noble Truths
describe worldy existence
as imperfect and
influences by earthly
desires and suffering
(dukkha); to rid oneself of
desire and achieve
liberation from suffering,
one must follow the Eight-
fold Path.

Divided into two major

15
 branches: Theravada
Buddhism and Mahayana
Buddhism
ca. 400 BCE Confucianism The contemplation of the Confucius
(East Asia) order of things can lead to
self-transformation. Self- The Five Classics
transformation can lead to
the betterment of the
family and society.

Human relationship are

based on mutual
obligations; individuals
should perform their
intended roles and
contribute to social order.
ca. 200 BCE Taoism Emphasis on the unity and Lao Tzu
(East Asia) harmony among opposing
elements (yin and yang); I Ching, Tao Te Ching,
individuals must seek to and Zhuangzi
understand and act in
accordance with the
natural order.
ca. 610 CE Islam Belief in one God (Allah) Muhammad
(West Asia) commitment to faith is
shown through the Quran
practice of The Five
Pillars: testaments of faith
(shahada), daily prayers
(salat), alms-giving
(zakat), fating during the
month of Ramadan
(sawm), and pilgrimage to
the holy city of Mecca
(hajj).

Religion and society are

closely intertwined; all
Muslim are members of a
community (ummah)
bounded by faith.

Divided into two major

branches: Sunni Islam and
Shia Islam

16
ANCIENT PHILOSOPHERS

17
MEDIEVAL PHILOSOPHERS

18
MODERN PHILOSOPHERS

19
POST-MODERN PHILOSOPHERS

20
21
22
Sources:

Dy, Manuel B., Philosophy of Man: Selected Readings, Second Edition, Goodwill
Trading Co., Inc., 2001.
Sioco M.P.G. And Hinzons, I.H., Introduction to the Philosophy of the Human Person,
Quezon City: Vibal Group, Inc., 2016.
Abella R.D. Introduction to the Philosophy of the Human Person, Quezon City: C&E
Publishing, Inc., 2016.
Siringan, H.S., Philosophy of the Human Person, 2011.
Reyes, Ramon Castillo, Ground and Norm of Morality, Ateneo De Manila University
Press, 2009.

23
 Palmiano, Dariel, A., Logic Makes Sense, C&E Publishing, Inc. 2010.

FREEDOM OF THE HUMAN PERSON OBJECTIVES:

1.To Realize the consequences of one’s actions
2.To show situation that demonstrate freedom of choice
3.To evaluate and exercise prudence on one’s choices and will.
Learning Outcomes
This lesson highlights freedom from the intellectual, political, spiritual, and economic aspect. To
be free is a part of humanity’s authenticity. In one way, understanding freedom is part of our
transcendence. Freedom consists of going beyond situations such as physical or economic. For
instance, students can be young and poor, but they can still pursue their dreams of becoming a

24
doctor, teacher, or a stage actor. As discussed in the last lesson, critical thinking is an important
tool toward freedom and truth. Realize that “All Actions have consequences”
Introduction Back to Top
Existentialism is a philosophy that emphasizes individual existence, freedom and choice. It is
the view that humans define their own meaning in life and try to make rational decisions despite
existing in an irrational universe. It focuses on the question of human existence, and the feeling
that there is no purpose or explanation at the core of existence. It holds that, as there is no God or
any other transcendent force, the only way to counter this nothingness (and hence to find
meaning in life) is by embracing existence.
Thus, Existentialism believes that individuals are entirely free and must take personal
responsibility for themselves (although with this responsibility comes angst, a profound anguish
or dread). It therefore emphasizes action, freedom and decision as fundamental, and holds that
the only way to rise above the essentially absurd condition of humanity (which is characterized
by suffering and inevitable death) is by exercising our personal freedom and choice (a complete
rejection of Determinism).
Often, Existentialism as a movement is used to describe those who refuse to belong to any school
of thought, repudiating of the adequacy of any body of beliefs or systems, claiming them to be
superficial, academic and remote from life. Although it has much in common with Nihilism,
Existentialism is more a reaction against traditional philosophies, such as Rationalism,
Empiricism and Positivism, that seek to discover an ultimate order and universal meaning in
metaphysical principles or in the structure of the observed world. It asserts that people actually
make decisions based on what has meaning to them, rather than what is rational.
Existentialism originated with the 19th Century philosophers Søren Kierkegaard and Friedrich
Nietzsche, although neither used the term in their work. In the 1940s and 1950s, French
existentialists such as Jean-Paul Sartre, Albert Camus (1913 - 1960), and Simone de Beauvoir
(1908 - 1986) wrote scholarly and fictional works that popularized existential themes, such as
dread, boredom, alienation, the absurd, freedom, commitment and nothingness.
Main Beliefs
Unlike René Descartes, who believed in the primacy of consciousness, Existentialists assert that
a human being is “thrown into” into a concrete, inveterate universe that cannot be “thought
away”, and therefore existence (“being in the world”) precedes consciousness, and is the ultimate
reality. Existence, then, is prior to essence (essence is the meaning that may be ascribed to life),
contrary to traditional philosophical views dating back to the ancient Greeks. As Sartre put it:
“At first [Man] is nothing. Only afterward will he be something, and he himself will have made
what he will be.”
Kierkegaard saw rationality as a mechanism humans use to counter their existential anxiety, their
fear of being in the world. Sartre saw rationality as a form of “bad faith”, an attempt by the self
to impose structure on a fundamentally irrational and random world of phenomena ("the other").

25
This bad faith hinders us from finding meaning in freedom, and confines us within everyday
experience.
Kierkegaard also stressed that individuals must choose their own way without the aid of
universal, objective standards. Friedrich Nietzsche further contended that the individual must
decide which situations are to count as moral situations. Thus, most Existentialists believe that
personal experience and acting on one's own convictions are essential in arriving at the truth, and
that the understanding of a situation by someone involved in that situation is superior to that of a
detached, objective observer (similar to the concept of Subjectivism).
According to Camus, when an individual's longing for order collides with the real world's lack of
order, the result is absurdity. Human beings are therefore subjects in an indifferent, ambiguous
and absurd universe, in which meaning is not provided by the natural order, but rather can be
created (however provisionally and unstable) by human actions and interpretations.
Existentialism can be atheistic, theological (or theistic) or agnostic. Some Existentialists, like
Nietzsche, proclaimed that "God is dead" and that the concept of God is obsolete. Others, like
Kierkegaard, were intensely religious, even if they did not feel able to justify it. The important
factor for Existentialists is the freedom of choice to believe or not to believe.
History of Existentialism
Existentialist-type themes appear in early Buddhist and Christian writings (including those of St.
Augustine and St.Thomas Aquinas). In the 17th Century, Blaise Pascal suggested that, without a
God, life would be meaningless, boring and miserable, much as later Existentialists believed,
although, unlike them, Pascal saw this as a reason for the existence of a God. His near-
contemporary, John Locke, advocated individual autonomy and self-determination, but in the
positive pursuit of Liberalism and Individualism rather than in response to an Existentialist
experience.
Existentialism in its currently recognizable form was inspired by the 19th Century Danish
philosopher Søren Kierkegaard, the German philosophers Friedrich Nietzsche, Martin
Heidegger, Karl Jaspers (1883 - 1969) and Edmund Husserl, and writers like the Russian Fyodor
Dostoevsky (1821 - 1881) and the Czech Franz Kafka (1883 - 1924). It can be argued that Georg
Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel and Arthur Schopenhauer were also important influences on the
development of Existentialism, because the philosophies of Kierkegaard and Nietzsche were
written in response or in opposition to them.
Kierkegaard and Nietzsche, like Pascal before them, were interested in people's concealment of
the meaninglessness of life and their use of diversion to escape from boredom. However, unlike
Pascal, they considered the role of making free choices on fundamental values and beliefs to be
essential in the attempt to change the nature and identity of the chooser. In Kierkegaard's case,
this results in the “knight of faith”, who puts complete faith in himself and in God, as described
in his 1843 work "Fear and Trembling". In Nietzsche's case, the much-maligned “Übermensch”
(or “Superman”) attains superiority and transcendence without resorting to the “other-

26
worldliness” of Christianity, in his books “Thus Spake Zarathustra” (1885) and “Beyond Good
and Evil”(1887).
Martin Heidegger was an important early philosopher in the movement, particularly his
influential 1927 work “Being and Time”, although he himself vehemently denied being an
existentialist in the Sartrean sense. His discussion of ontology is rooted in an analysis of the
mode of existence of individual human beings, and his analysis of authenticity and anxiety in
modern culture make him very much an Existentialist in the usual modern usage.
Existentialism came of age in the mid-20th Century, largely through the scholarly and fictional
works of the French existentialists, Jean-Paul Sartre, Albert Camus (1913 - 1960) and Simone de
Beauvoir (1908 - 1986). Maurice Merleau-Ponty (1908 - 1961) is another influential and often
overlooked French Existentialist of the period.
Sartre is perhaps the most well-known, as well as one of the few to have actually accepted being
called an “existentialist”. “Being and Nothingness” (1943) is his most important work, and his
novels and plays, including “Nausea” (1938) and “No Exit” (1944), helped to popularize the
movement.
In “The Myth of Sisyphus” (1942), Albert Camus uses the analogy of the Greek myth of
Sisyphus (who is condemned for eternity to roll a rock up a hill, only to have it roll to the bottom
again each time) to exemplify the pointlessness of existence but shows that Sisyphus ultimately
finds meaning and purpose in his task, simply by continually applying himself to it.
Freedom
Freedom is a political concept which refers to the freedom of an individual from oppression,
compulsion or coercion. Political freedom entails recognition of the rights and civil liberties of
individuals. Theology views freedom as living a life free from sin and living according to God’s
will.
Philosophers define freedom as being based on free will or the capacity of persons to choose
their owns actions and decisions. The exercise of free will should be based on sound judgment
and rational thinking.
Free Will which is the capacity to choose from alternative courses of action or decision.
Free Action the freedom to perform an action without any obstacles or hindrances.
Faculties Model refers to free will as the use of our mental faculties. It assumes that we have
free will due to our intellect and that each human action is base on rationality and sound
judgment.
Hierarchical Model argues that free will is based on human wants and desires. An individual is
faced with various wants and desires that need to be met.
Reasons-responsive View believes that man has free will because he or she is able to entertain
reasons not to enact a certain decision and act upon them when the need arises.

27
Positive Liberty refers to a person taking control of his or her own life and fulfilling one’s
potential.
Negative Liberty is a freedom from external restraint, barriers, and other interferences from
other people.
Liberalism upholds the preservation of individual rights and stresses the role of the government
in protecting these civil liberties. Liberalism, on the other hand, believes that individual, not the
government, is the best judge in upholding and exercising rights.
Socialism considers freedom as the freedom to acquire economic resources and the ability to
work and act according to one’s desires.
Human Agency which refers to the capacity of a person to act and exert control over his or her
behavior.
Determinism is a philosophical view that believes that every event in the world is brought about
by underlying causes or factors. If man is indeed free, how can he exercise his free will and
action in a world where events are already determined by outside forces?
Pan-Determinism is the view which disregards his/her [human] capacity to take a stand toward
any conditions. Specifically, it states that a human person is not free because his/her decisions,
actions and behavior are determined by his/her biological, psychological, and sociological
conditions.
a. Biological Determinism
Human genetic make-up plays a big role in human behavior, attitude, and personality.
What humans are and what they will be is determined by their biological make-up.
Humans are biologically pre-disposed to decide, act, or behave in a certain way.
b. Psychological Determinism human actions, according to Freud, are not free. Human
actions may appear free, but they are nothing but a manifestation of the various mental
states, which humans are not aware of and have no control. These mental states, in turn,
govern human decisions, actions, and behaviors.
According to Freud, there are three levels of the mind: the conscious level, the pre-
conscious level and the unconscious level. The conscious level pertains to a person’s
current awareness. The Preconscious level pertains to the memories and stored
knowledge that a person is not currently aware of but can be brought to the present
awareness easily by the process of remembering. The unconscious level pertains to those
fears, motives, sexual desires, wishes, urges, needs and past experiences that a person is
not currently aware of and which cannot be easily brought to the conscious level.
c. Sociological Determinism According to B.F. Skinner (1971), there is no autonomous
agent in humans that determines their actions. Human behavior is shaped by external
conditions (the surrounding environment) and not by the so-called inner self. Actions that
produce good consequences are reinforced; conversely, actions that yield negative effects
have the tendency not to be repeated. Human actions then, depend on their consequences
and not on deliberate choices. Positive or negative reinforcement (reward or punishment
mechanism) is, therefore imperative to shaping and changing human behavior.
28
 Human Person as a Self – Determining Being
a. Against Biological Determinism
If we are nothing more than our biological endowment, how can we explain the triumphs
in life of those persons who suffer from physical disabilities, and the failures of those
who got what it takes to succeed in life?
Argument: “Biological destiny is the material which must be shaped by the free human
spirit.” (But a human person may also deliberately ignore it, which is also an act of
freedom.) Physical challenged individuals can go far beyond what their biological
conditions permit them to go.
b. Against Psychological Determinism
Freud says that human freedom is impossible because human behavior is determined by
mental states that human persons have no awareness and control. Freud is correct that
there exist mental states such as instincts and drives, hopes and wishes, past frustrations
and successes.
Argument: Plato says that reason has the power to govern both our appetite and emotion.
Kant states that humans may sometimes act according to the dictate of their desires but
they have the capacity to choose what is right. This capacity is clearly a proof of human
freedom.
c. Against Sociological Determinism
Karl Marx argues that, “it is not the consciousness of men that determines their existence,
but their social existence that determines their consciousness.” This means that a person’s
perspectives, attitudes, values, and beliefs, according to this view, are nothing but a
product of his/her social condition.
Argument: Frankl negates this idea by saying that while it is true that a person is
unavoidably influenced by his/her environment, the environment does not completely
determine his/her behavior.
A human person, according to Frankl, is not a mere object in the world. That is, a person
cannot and should not be compared to any mechanical beings because unlike them,
he/she is ultimately self-determining. What becomes of a person is a product of his/her
decisions and creations.

A. Aristotle
The power of Volition
The imperative quality of a judgment of practical intellect is meaningless, apart from will.
Reason can legislate, but only through will can it legislation be translated into action. The task of
practical intellect is to guide will be enlightening it. Will, in fact, is to be understood wholly in
terms of intellect. If there were no intellect, there would be no will. This is obvious from the way
in is rationally denominated. The will of humanity is an instrument of free choice. It is within the
power of everyone to be good or bad, worthy or worthless. This is borne down by;

29
  Our inner awareness of an aptitude to do right or wrong
 The common testimony, of all human beings;
 The reward and punishment of rulers; and
 The general employment of praise and blame
Moral acts, which are always particular acts, are in our power and we are responsible for them.
Character or habit is no excuse for immoral conduct.
Example: Attending class is a student’s responsibility. Should the student cut the class, then
he/she is responsible for the consequences of his actions. As a result, he/she must be held
responsible for any accident or failure in grades that will befall on him/her. The student may
regret that he/she had done but all the regrets in the world will not call it back. The point is
student should not have cut class in the first instance. When the matter is sifted down, the
happiness of every human beings his own hands, to preserve and develop, or to cast away.

For Aristotle, human being is rational. Reason is a divine characteristic. Humans have the spark
of the divine. If there were no intellect there would be no will.
B. St. Thomas Aquinas
Love is freedom All creatures of God, human beings have the unique power to change
themselves and the thing around them for the better. He consider that the human as moral agent.
A human being, therefore, has a supernatural, transcendental destiny. This mean that he can rise
above his ordinary being of self. This is in line with the idea of St. Thomas that in the plan of
God, a human being has to develop and perfect himself by doing his daily tasks. Hence, if a
human being perseveringly lives a righteous and virtuous life, he transcends his mortal state of
life and soars to an immortal state of life. The power of change, however, cannot be done by
human being alone, but it achieved through cooperation with God. Between humanity and God,
there is an infinite gap, which God alone can bridge through his power perfection by
participation here means that it is a union of humanity with God, Change should promote not just
any purely private advantage, but the good of the community.

30
FOUR-FOLD CLASSIFICATION OF LAW by Aquinas
Human beings, as rational, have laws that should not only be obeyed but also obeyed voluntarily
and with understanding (for instance, in following the traffic rules). The natural law, then in its
ethical sense, applies only to human being. The first principle and precept of the natural law is
that good is to be sought and evil avoided (this is the instruct of self-preservation). There is
inherent in every human being an inclination that he shares with all other being, namely, the
desire to conserve human life and forbids the contrary. For instance, if there is fire and its
burning heat is felt, then it is but a human tendency to avoid it Since the law looks to the
common good as it end, it is then conceived primarily with external acts and not with the interior
disposition. A person, thus, should not be judged through his actions alone but also through his
sincerity behind his acts.
Both natural and human laws are concerned with ends determined simply by humanity’s nature.
Eternal Law is a decree of god that governs all creation. It is that law which is supreme reason
cannot be understood to be otherwise than unchangeable and eternal “natural law is the human
“participation” in the eternal law and is discovered by reason.
Natural law is based on “first principles”. St. Thomas Aquinas wisely and aptly chose and
proposed Love rather than law to bring about the transformation of humanity. For love is in
consonance with humanity’s free nature, for law commands and complete; Love calls and invite.
Aquinas emphasizes the freedom of humanity but chooses love on governing humanity’s life.
Since God is love, then Love is the guiding principle of humanity toward his self-perception and
happiness-his ultimate destiny.
Human Law is law that is made by humans, usually considered in opposition to concepts
like natural law or divine law.
Divine law is any law that is understood as deriving from a transcendent source, such as the will
of God or gods, in contrast to man-made law. Divine laws are typically regarded as superior to
man-made laws, sometimes due to an understanding that their source has resources beyond
human knowledge and human reason. They are accorded greater authority and cannot be
changed by human authorities.
C. St. Thomas Aquinas: Spiritual freedom
The Spiritual Freedom

The existence of God as a

first cause. Of all God’s
creations, human beings have
the unique power to
change themselves and things
around them for the better.

31
As humans, we are both material and spiritual. We have a conscience because of our spirituality.
God is Love and Love is our destiny.

D. Jean Paul Sartre: Subjective / Individual freedom

Sartre’s Philosophy is considered to be representative of existentialism. For him the human
person is the
desire to be God; the desire to exist as a being has its sufficient ground in itself. There is no
guidepost along the road of life. The human person builds the road to the destiny of his/her is the
creator.
Sartre’s theory stem from this principle: Existence precedes essence
 The person, first, exists, encounters himself and surges up un the world then defines
himself afterward. The person is nothing else but that what he makes of himself.
 The person is provided with supreme opportunity to give meaning to one’s life
 Freedom is therefore, the very core and the door to authentic existence. Authentic
existence is realized only in deeds that re committed alone, in absolute freedom and
responsibility and which, therefore the character of true creation.
 On the other hand, the human person who tries to escape obligations and strives to be
envoi (i.e., excuses, such as “I was born this way” or “grew up in a bad environment”) is
acting on bad faith.
 Sartre emphasize the importance of free individual choice, regardless of the power of
other people to influence and coerce our desires, beliefs, and decisions. To be human, to
be conscious, is to be free to imagine, free to choose, and be responsible for one’s life.

E. Theory of Social Contract

A Law of nature (lex naturalis) is a precept or general rule established by reason, by

which a person is forbidden to do that which is destructive of his life or takes away the
means of preserving the same; and to omit that by which he thinks it may be best
preserved.
(Look for Social Contract by Thomas Hobbes)

F. Jean-Jacques Rosseau
In his book the social contract, the state owes it origin to a social contract freely entered
into by its member (ex. EDSA Revolution)
The two Philosophers differed in their interpretations. Hobbes developed his idea in favor
of absolute monarchy, while Rousseau interpreted the idea in terms of absolute
democracy and individualism.

32
Sovereign/ Ruler

(state)
 Freedom

(General will or mutual

transferring of rights)

Citizens

(Individual Rights)

In order to restore peace, bring his freedom back, and as he returned to his true self, he saw the
necessity and came to form the state through the social contract whereby everyone grants his
individuals rights to the general will. There must b e a common power of government which the
plurality of individuals (citizens) should all their power and strength into (freedom) one will
(ruler).

G. Gabriel Marcel
Freedom, for Marcel, is critical—but it is a discovery of the self as a being-receptive-to-others. 
Freedom cannot be without participation in community or with others, which means that one
must be receptive to being encountered by others’ needs.  (In contrast, freedom for Sartre, etc.,
hinges upon a solitary commitment to one’s own authenticity—thus, one is free when one is
wholly independent.)  What spawns our exercise of freedom, he argues, is that we recognize our
own meaninglessness, yet are driven to prove ourselves to be meaningful.  This often manifests
as a desire to have, instead of to be—we think that we make ourselves meaningful by possessing
things of meaning (be they objects or careers, etc.).  The result is that one says: “I am ____”—be
it rich, a doctor, a mother, a singer, etc.  This is a misidentification, however, for we are saying
that we are something that we are not … we are equating ourselves with an object.  This isolates
us from our own participation in being.  This interferes with the actual true experience of
humanity.  Negative freedom, then, is the absence of this alienation; positive freedom is when
one’s intentions are from what is essentially one’s own self.  In whole, freedom is about one’s
own possibilities as understood within the confines of one’s being with others. 
(http://www.aquestionofexistence.com/Aquestionofexistence/Existentialism./Entries/2013/12/27
_Gabriel_Marcel.html/October 15,2018)

H. Maurice Merleau-Ponty
Freedom is not regarded as the central thesis of the Phenomenology of Perception (“PP”),
Merleau-Ponty dedicates its final chapter solely to this issue, and tries to draw conclusions about
33
it based on his position about experience and perception. Merleau-Ponty links Sartre with other
rationalistic theories of thought, arguing that he fails to provide a phenomenology of concrete, as
opposed to abstract freedom and, as such, improperly ignores the reciprocity of humans with
their environment as the center of human reality and action. First, Merleau-Ponty argues that
Sartre’s theory renders the very idea of freedom unintelligible. He argues that if every action is
free then the very concept of freedom would collapse, since a free act would not be possible,
writing that “if indeed it is the case that our freedom is the same in all our actions, and even in
our passions, if it is not to be measured in terms of our conduct, and if the slave displays freedom
as much by living in fear as by breaking his chains, then it cannot be held that there is such a
thing as free action,” Thus, for Merleau-Ponty, to conceive of freedom as the background for all
human existence, to make freedom independent of any particular action destroys the very
concept of freedom. For Merleau-Ponty, we must develop criteria to determine when an action is
free and when it is not, and if we do not then the concept of freedom is rendered meaningless.
We must be able to identify a sphere of non-free actions against which the free ones can stand
out.
Further, if we characterize freedom as our fundamental way of being in the world, then there is
nothing that could constitute a genuine obstacle to it. In this case, there would be “merely
intentions immediately followed by their effects.” This destroys the notion of freedom by
removing the possibility of those elements that could stand in the way of its being exercised. If
freedom “is to be describable as freedom, there must be something to hold it away from its
objectives.” Otherwise, we lose the distinctions between possibility and actuality, intention and
action. From this argument, Merleau-Ponty proposes his “field” theory, asserting against Sartre
that “this is no reason to surrender all that is exterior and to confine ourselves to our thoughts,
which are always free, even in the mind of a slave. This division of interior and exterior is
abstract.”
For Merleau-Ponty, Sartre’s account is empty, limited only to the realm of thought, and this is
not a good account of freedom at all. For Merleau-Ponty, this is a kind of stoic escapism, which
cannot account for real freedom, appearing only as “the reveries of captives.” In contrast, he
believes that freedom only makes sense if it is accompanied by real possibility, as evidenced in
by him saying “no effective freedom exists without some power,” that his notion of freedom is
“interwoven with that of others by way of the world.”

Sources:
Camiloza L.G., Granace E.B., Mazo R.M., and Perez E.D. (2016) Philosophy of the Human
Person, Quezon City, The Phoenix Publishing House, Inc.
Sioco M.P.G. And Hinzons, I.H. (2016) Introduction to the Philosophy of the Human Person,
Quezon City: Vibal Group, Inc.
Abella R.D. (2016) Introduction to the Philosophy of the Human Person. Quezon City: C&E
Publishing, Inc.

34
Siringan, H.S. (2011) Philosophy of the Human Person, Reyes,
Ramon Castillo. (2009) Dy, Manuel B. (2001), Philosophy of Man: Selected Readings, Second
Edition, Goodwill Trading Co., Inc
Internet Sources:
https://www.scribd.com/document/356139089/Freedom-as-Human-Person/October 17, 2018/
3:17 PM.
http://www.aquestionofexistence.com/Aquestionofexistence/Existentialism./Entries/2013/12/27_
Gabriel_Marcel.html/October 15,2018/ 10:48 AM

35