Introduction to the Philosophy of the Human Person

Governor Pack Road, Baguio City, Philippines 2600

Tel. Nos.: (+6374) 442-3316, 442-8220; 444-2786;
442-2564; 442-8219; 442-8256; Fax No.: 442-6268 Grade Level/Section:
Email: email@uc-bcf.edu.ph; Website: www.uc-bcf.edu.ph

MODULE 7– Philo Subject Teacher:

INTERSUBJECTIVITY
LEARNING OBJECTIVES:
A. delineate the concept of intersubjectivity;
B. evaluate the importance of relating oneself with others;
C. answer comprehensively the questions related to the topic.

What is Intersubjectivity?

Intersubjectivity (inter – between; subjectivity – the perception of reality

from within one’s own perspective) is the condition of a man, a subject,
among other men, who are also subjects. It refers to the shared
awareness and understanding among persons. It’s all about the
experience and meaning of interhuman encounter. Our social existence
has to be defined in a much broader sense. Intersubjectivity opens us up to the nature of
commitment, the value of others, and the reality of love as the highest form of recognition.

PHILOSOPHERS OF INTERSUBJECTIVITY

The various views of the philosophers on who the human person is or what becomes of him/her
as a result of his/ her relationship with others set directions on how to understand intersubjectivity and
the human person.
EDMUND HUSSERL

Husserl significantly contributed to the philosophical method which

investigates the understanding of the minds of other people. His
phenomenology emphasizes the notion of ego or self that is outward bound
or oriented toward the world. It is by going outside or transcending the “I”
that human persons come to terms with the reality that there is a sphere
outside of themselves. It is in this world where a person encounters another
person. This is where the intersubjective happens, where people are able to
put themselves into someone else’s shoes and thereby assume what the
other thinks or feels.

EDITH STEIN

Edith Stein, or Saint Teresa Benedicta of the Cross developed her

phenomenology of empathy around this understanding of intersubjectivity:
that every individual living body, being the subject of an experience, is at
distance with all other physical bodies around them. By the fact that human
persons are at a distance with others, solidarity flourishes because when
people live together, they share their lived experiences and are thus able to
take responsibility for one another. For Stein therefore, empathy, as an
intersubjective experience, begins with the self but goes on to the
acknowledgement of the other person.
 Introduction to the Philosophy of the Human Person
Governor Pack Road, Baguio City, Philippines 2600
Tel. Nos.: (+6374) 442-3316, 442-8220; 444-2786;
442-2564; 442-8219; 442-8256; Fax No.: 442-6268 Grade Level/Section:
Email: email@uc-bcf.edu.ph; Website: www.uc-bcf.edu.ph

MODULE 7– Philo Subject Teacher:

KAROL WOJTYLA

Karol Josef Wojtyla, elected as Pope John Paul II presented two types of
anthropology that has deep repercussions on the understanding of
intersubjectivity. First, is the cosmological way of understanding the human
person implies that as beings in the world, they are a mere part of it.
Second, the personalistic way suggests a deeper understanding of the
human person as it probes their innerness and ability to transcend their own
limits. The personalistic understanding claims that the human person cannot
be compared to other creatures because as a personal subject, he/she
can transcend this natural or cosmological limitation.

MARTIN BUBER

Martin Buber, a prominent 20th century philosopher, religious thinker, political

activist and educator has developed an understanding of human relations,
human relations with reality, and human relations with God. This was
contained in his most influential work, “I and Thou” His concept of dialogue
is contained in “I-Thou,” which stresses the mutual and holistic existence of
two entities who regard each other as equals and respect the other for who
they are. For Buber, who declared that human beings are relational beings,
one becomes a person by communicating with the other and receiving
communication in return. Thus, realizing that one’s personhood happens
through the realization that the other is a person.

EMMANUEL LEVINAS

Emmanuel Levinas posited ethics as the first philosophy and thereby

highlighted responsibility toward the other from which the ego cannot
escape and which is the secret of its uniqueness. The radicality of Levinas’
responsibility toward the other is expressed in his notion of ontological
reversal where concern for oneself morphs into concern for the other. It is in
responding to the summons of the other who calls out for help that the
fullness of being or humanity is achieved.

JEAN JACQUES ROSSEAU

Jean Jacques Rosseau’s writings reveal that he was concerned with

“equality among men,” but did not make women's equality his focus.
Women needed to rely on men for their wellbeing because they were less
rational than men. In “Emile”, he stated that if woman is made to please and
to be subjugated to man, she ought to make herself pleasing to him rather
than to provoke him; her particular strength lies in her charms; by their means
she should compel him to discover his own strength and put it to use.
 Introduction to the Philosophy of the Human Person
Governor Pack Road, Baguio City, Philippines 2600
Tel. Nos.: (+6374) 442-3316, 442-8220; 444-2786;
442-2564; 442-8219; 442-8256; Fax No.: 442-6268 Grade Level/Section:
Email: email@uc-bcf.edu.ph; Website: www.uc-bcf.edu.ph

MODULE 7– Philo Subject Teacher:

MARY WOLLSTONECRAFT

Mary Wollstonecraft addresses some of the points Rousseau made about

women in "Vindication of the Rights of Woman" and other writings in which
she asserts that women are logical and can benefit from education. She
maintains that women are human beings deserving of the same
fundamental rights as men, and that treating them as mere ornaments or
property for men undermines the moral foundations of society

SOREN KIERKEGAARD

Soren Kierkegaard states that rather than being ourselves, we tend to

conform to an image or idea associated with being a certain type of person.
People change their behavior in order to be correct and avoid punishments.
We belong to an "abstraction" (an image or idea) created by "reflection"
(self-conscious thinking). Today, the individual subsumes himself under a
universal: "an abstraction to which he is subjected by reflection".

THE INTERHUMAN

The interhuman relation speaks of two things in that I-Thou relation. In an I-Thou relation, one
hopes to make the other complete. In contrast, in an I-It relation, things are of value because of the
purpose that we put into them. An I-It relation is purely empirical. Things do not have intrinsic moral
worth. The value of things is something that people determine on the basis of some measureable
standard. In this sense, a things is useful or functional because it serves the purposes of man. Things
do not have any agency or the basic capacity to make moral choices. As such, their value is
something that is bestowed upon them by their creators or owners.

Persons precisely as human cannot live in this world on the basis of instrumentality. Persons
must always go beyond being functional. The relation between two people who have value each
other cannot be objectified. It cannot be reduced to an I-It form. In the exercise of freedom, as
persons, we explore, engage, and develop a greater sense of being by being with and for other
people. We are in communion with the other.

Martin Buber writes that “the essential problem of the sphere of the inter-human is the duality
of being and seeming.” Buber explains that the reality of human existence proceeds from two things:
what one really is and what one wishes to seem. In the first instance, there exists the personal way of
dealing with others on the basis of who the individual is, one that is without reservation. Such type of
relationship is spontaneous. In contrast, seeming proceeds from the desire to protect one’s
reputation, in the concern for one’s image or appearance. The I-Thou relation belongs to the first
type.
 Introduction to the Philosophy of the Human Person
Governor Pack Road, Baguio City, Philippines 2600
Tel. Nos.: (+6374) 442-3316, 442-8220; 444-2786;
442-2564; 442-8219; 442-8256; Fax No.: 442-6268 Grade Level/Section:
Email: email@uc-bcf.edu.ph; Website: www.uc-bcf.edu.ph

MODULE 7– Philo Subject Teacher:

I–THOU

The understanding of intersubjectivity points to the two-fold realities of the “I” and “Thou.” In
this context, the two poles are not to be understood in a dichotomized way, as if the two are
opposed to each other; rather, they must be viewed as ordered toward each other.

THE “I”

To grasp clearly what “I” means from the perspective of intersubjectivity, it helps to understand
first what the “I” is from the viewpoint of Rene Descartes. In the Cartesian Method, the “I” or the “self”
as point of reference, is the indubitable truth or the foolproof ground of reality. According to
Descartes, whenever one represents as an object different from one’s consciousness, it is always
doubtful whether that object exists or corresponds with its representation.

The “I” in the context of “I-Thou” philosophy departs from

the Cartesian method as this “I” can be understood in two ways.
First, the “I” is referred to as a subject, that is, an individual who is
unique in a way complete in his own right as a person or a
creature. This view sees the human person as endowed with
intelligence, freedom, and free will that allows them to pursue
path of truth and goodness. The “I’ in this context, sees itself as a
subject rather than an object.

Second, the “I” is open to the world and is oriented towards the “other.” Thus, this “I”
recognizes that it shares the world with others who are likewise endowed with their own perfections or
inherent values. By person open to others, the “I” opens itself to the possibility of relationship, which is
grounded on the mutual recognition of the inherent values that resides in each one. The “I” through
its experience of the community realizes the need to empathize or be responsible for others.

THE “THOU”

“Thou” or the “other” is someone who lives alongside the “I” and who
is both another and one of the others who exists and acts in common with
the “I.”

Recognizing the other enables the mind or the self to be conscious of

something other than itself but only when the “I” detaches itself from its own mental concept. The
closest expression of the western “other” in Filipino context is the term kapuwa loosely translated as
“fellow person” and “other person,” which means the perceived state of shared identity and
interdependence relationships. The sense of interdependence means that just as both have
something to give to each other, both also have something to receive from each other. In this
context, otherness implies that no one is self-sufficient but is almost always in need of other. Moreover,
interdependence implies empathy, where one “suffers” with the neighbor in need.
ETHICAL IMPLICATIONS

The encounter between human persons compels actions that promote what is good. Good in
this context pertains to the flourishing of the human person insofar as they are a member of the
community. Intersubjectivity as a reality of human existence calls each one to do to others what is
right and avoid what is evil.
Empathy is an expression of intersubjectivity. Through empathy, the
EMPATHY human person is able to put himself in another’s shoes. Empathy
begins with an acknowledgement of the other person and
proceeds to approximate the experience of this person.
 Introduction to the Philosophy of the Human Person
Governor Pack Road, Baguio City, Philippines 2600
Tel. Nos.: (+6374) 442-3316, 442-8220; 444-2786;
442-2564; 442-8219; 442-8256; Fax No.: 442-6268 Grade Level/Section:
Email: email@uc-bcf.edu.ph; Website: www.uc-bcf.edu.ph

MODULE 7– Philo Subject Teacher:

RESPONSIBILITY Intersubjectivity demands that the human person be responsible.

Responding to the needs of others or encountering them in their
vulnerability leads to the transcendence of self-consciousness.

In the “I-Thou” relationship, dialogue is engendered. Dialogue

DIALOGUE evokes the task of participation, that each must continually set
themselves the task of actually participating in the humanity of
others, or experiencing the other as an “I” and as a person.

DIFFERENCE AND MORAL RESPONSIBILITY

Intersubjectivity finds itself intertwined in social and political relations. Our social existence is
grounded in the basic idea of mutuality. The very purpose of society is the realization of that moral
ideal in which each human being is truly respected and is able to realize most fully and in a concrete
way the basic meaning of this humanity. But unjust hegemonic relations in our society which
undermine people due to their otherness is a big problem that we must address.

Our social existence implies belonging to a hierarchy. In the order of things, people assume
positions in society on the basis of their positions of power or a person’s material achievement. The
unequal situation of people may result to the experience of misrecognition. For example, the
dominance of a patriarchal culture and the preference for able-bodied persons are two forms of
oppression which reveal the reality and the evil of human indifference.

RESPONSIBILIT Y FOR THE OTHER

In our present social order, the other is the powerless who is under the domination of the self.
Our society forgets the people in the margins because they are weak. Infinite responsibility refers to a
term used by Emmanuel Levinas, which means to that to be human is to be ultimately responsible for
the other. For any responsibility to be ethical, it has to reach beyond one’s being in order to
recognize the otherness of the other.

The face of the other bespeaks of our moral responsibility. The human person is this face. For
Levinas, it is through the other that the self realizes itself. The face of a slave completes the being of a
master. In this sense, the subject that we are depends on a moral demand. In the midst of the
violence, that one finds in the world, whereby power totalizes all into a homogenous identity, the
face of the other presents itself as an ultimate mandate ---- “Thou shall not kill”. The other is that
suffering being who demands that the self should hold itself morally responsible.

According to Leovino Garcia, the self’s moral responsibility for the other is concrete because
the other, the face, is concrete. It is what defines us and determines for us the quality of our choices.
But it is one that is above any norm or standardization. Levinas reminds us that the responsibility for
the other is a movement from “a home that we inhabit toward that place which is an alien outside-
of-onself, toward a yonder.”
 Introduction to the Philosophy of the Human Person
Governor Pack Road, Baguio City, Philippines 2600
Tel. Nos.: (+6374) 442-3316, 442-8220; 444-2786;
442-2564; 442-8219; 442-8256; Fax No.: 442-6268 Grade Level/Section:
Email: email@uc-bcf.edu.ph; Website: www.uc-bcf.edu.ph

MODULE 7– Philo Subject Teacher:

REFERENCES:
➢ Sy, Dennis B. and Basas, Allan A. (2018). Philosophy of the Human Person An Introduction. Abiva
Bldg., 851 G. Araneta Ave., Quezon City: Abiva Publishing House, Inc.
➢ Maboloc, C. (2016). Introduction to the Philosophy of the Human Person. The Inteligente
Publishing, Inc.