IntroductiontothePhilosophyoftheHumanPerson Villaroya Enaya Fernandez

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.
net/publication/346581893
Introduction to the Philosophy of the Human Person
Book · December 2020
CITATIONS READS
0 49,383
3 authors:
Beljun Enaya Al Franjon Mendiola Villaroya

Visayas State University Visayas State University
5 PUBLICATIONS 0 CITATIONS 4 PUBLICATIONS 0 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE
Errol Fernandez
Visayas State University
3 PUBLICATIONS 0 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
Philosophy of Agriculture View project
Truth in the Spokesperson’s Interpretation of Duterte’s Utterance: A Thomist Perspective View project
All content following this page was uploaded by Beljun Enaya on 28 September 2021.
The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

INTRODUCTION TO THE
PHILOSOPHY OF THE
HUMAN PERSON
Al Franjon M. Villaroya
Beljun P. Enaya
Errol C. Fernandez
2020
Introduction to the Philosophy of the Human Person
Philippine Copyright © 2020 by Al Franjon M. Villaroya, Beljun P. Enaya
& Errol C. Fernandez
All rights reserved. No part of this work or publication may be

reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted, in any form or
by any means, without the prior permission of the authors.
Artist: Prof. Dean Ruffel R. Flandez

Editor: Dr. Jett C. Quebec
ISBN: 978-621-8155-07-7
Published by ALETHEIA Printing and Publishing House

Davao City, Philippines
peterelicor@gmail.com
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Acknowledgements
Introduction
Chapter 1: Doing Philosophy I 1
Chapter 2: Methods of Philosophizing I 14
Chapter 3: The Human Person as an Embodied Spirit I 28
Chapter 4: The Human Person and the Environment I 41
Chapter 5: Freedom of the Human Person I 55
Chapter 6: Intersubjectivity I 66
Chapter 7: The Human Person in the Society I 76
Chapter 8: The Human Person as Oriented Towards

Impending Death I 87
Glossary I 96
References I 98
About the Authors I 104

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
“We make a living by what we get, but we make a life

by what we give.”- Winston Churchill
The authors are profoundly beholden to the benevolence
bestowed, without any expectation of return, and the pure
selflessness to promote education and propagate knowledge.
We sincerely thank the Visayas State University (VSU),
through the leadership of Dr. Edgardo E. Tulin, the Office of
Vice-president for Research, Extension, and Innovation
(OVPREI) headed by Dr. Othello B. Capuno, through the
Director of Extension Office Dr. Moises Neil V. Seriño
(former), and to Dr. Antonio P. Abamo (current) for their
unwavering commitment to this endeavor by financing this
extension project: Faculty Training for the Teaching of the
Introduction to the Philosophy of the Human Person. This
learning material is an extension project of the Department
of Liberal Arts and Behavioural Sciences.
We also extend our gratitude to the senior high school
teachers of Baybay City Division for the steadfast
partnership, the inspiration given contributed greatly to the
completion of this book, and to Dr. Guiraldo C. Fernandez,
Jr. (the previous head of DLABS) for encouraging the
extension leaders to write the output of the extension.
Likewise, we thank Dr. Jett C. Quebec (the current head
of DLABS) for valuing and supporting this project by
extending his service as the book editor. We are also grateful
to Assistant Prof. Dean Ruffel Flandez for sharing his artistic
prowess by providing the artworks in this book.
Finally, to Senior High School students, the thought
that this learning material will be part of your academic life
gives the authors extra encouragement and motivation.
Those not mentioned but have sincerely sent their
goodwill and prayers, our sincerest gratitude.
INTRODUCTION
How do we explain the meaning of human person? With

seemingly complex elements of a human person, we do not
bother to know what a human person is. Sometimes, we even
complain about the difficulty of understanding the concept
of a human person because of its philosophical framework.
However, the basic challenge might not be on how it is being
explained philosophically but on how interested we are in
understanding the human person.
This book, Introduction to the Philosophy of the Human
Person, seeks to guide the teachers and students to search for
the meaning of human person. It attempts to make it more
understandable to non-philosophy enthusiasts while
maintaining the meaning of the philosophical terms. It also
integrates western and eastern philosophical perspectives in
the Philippine context. Thus, it aims to provide a more
holistic, comprehensible, and locally-contextualized
understanding of the human person.
Along with the intention of the Department of
Education, the authors hope that the students will be able to:
reflect on their daily experiences from a holistic point of
view; acquire critical and analytical thinking skills; apply
their critical and analytical thinking skills to the affairs of
daily life; become truthful, environment-friendly and
service-oriented; actively committed to the development of
a more humane society; and, articulate their philosophy of
life.
There are eight chapters in this book. The first chapter
highlights how various philosophical traditions do
philosophy, integrating western and eastern thoughts. The
second chapter selects major methods of philosophy and
focuses on how to use the methods. The third chapter
investigates the mystery of the embodied spirit, the non-
material element of the human person. The fourth chapter
explains the relationship between the human person and the
environment while highlighting the person's responsibility
towards environmental issues. The fifth chapter explores the
freedom of the human person in the hope of becoming a
responsible and authentic person. The sixth chapter
underscores the person who, while recognizes oneself, in
turn, recognizes the other as having a self. The seventh
chapter discusses the social aspect of the person and
illuminates it in a local Filipino community. Finally, the
eighth chapter highlights the meaning of life while reflecting
on the person’s impending death.
This book is a humble service to senior high school
teachers and students. It envisions to ignite the interest of
both teachers and students in engaging the world through
philosophy. Since this book only lays down the fundamental
views of the human person, the readers are invited to
investigate further the reality of the human person.
The Authors
LEARNING OBJECTIVES
1. To distinguish a holistic perspective from a partial point

of view
2. To recognize human activities that emanated from
deliberate reflection
3. To realize the value of doing philosophy in obtaining a
broad perspective in life
4. To be capable of doing a philosophical reflection on a
concrete situation from a holistic perspective
2 Doing Philosophy
INTRODUCTION
What is Philosophy? Any attempt to coin an all-

encompassing definition of Philosophy would fail because
humanity never shared a universal idea of what it is (Co,
2009). Although one of our goals in this chapter is to present
a general idea of what Philosophy means, our challenge is to
address a much more important question, that is, “What does
it mean to philosophize?” The assumption here is that
Philosophy is intimately connected with praxis. In other
words, an idea is useless if it is devoid of any practice. For
the Greeks, Philosophy or philosophia means the “love of
wisdom," but to know the idea of love and wisdom is not
enough if one denies doing it (Kenny, 2004).
This chapter explores the two major traditions of
philosophy. These traditions, while unique in various ways,
do not necessarily contradict each other. The first is the
Western tradition, which is characterized by its rigorous way
of doing philosophy and presupposes an analytic approach.
The second is the Eastern tradition, which is often used
interchangeably with religion because it treats philosophy as
a way of life.
DISCUSSION
Western Philosophy
We focus on the three most renowned Greek

philosophers, namely; Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle. These
three prominent names of Western tradition introduced
intricate ideas concerning the rational capacities of man and
how these capacities can be used and developed. The
recognition that a human person is a thinking being
fundamentally supports the idea that we all have the freedom
to explore the world.
Introduction to the Philosophy of the Human Person 3
Socrates
Socrates was born about 470 B.C. in Athens, Greece. His

appearance was frequently described as grotesque. He was
short, thick-set, and ugly. His clothes were old and poor,
which showed that he cared little or nothing for external
appearances. However, these descriptions have something to
do with his philosophy. His looks were the least of his
concern because one’s intellectual activity is far more
important for him. This is why, despite his undesirable
physical features, many young men would still gather around
him to learn from his intelligent discussions. Indeed, his
philosophy emanated from his way of life, a life that was not
concerned about wealth and worldly goods.
Socrates, as some scholars would argue, was never
concerned about philosophy in the academic sense. His way
of doing philosophy was by making dialogues with various
people. Thus, he would spend most of his time in the
marketplace and talk to people from different walks of life.
His concern was to discuss with them profound ideas, such
as justice, virtues, morality, life, and death. The philosophy
of Socrates was focused on getting at the answers to the
questions that are important and relevant in everyone’s life.
Consequently, he helped many people examine how they
lived and understood their lives because, for him, “An
unexamined life is not worth living" (Tarrant, 2010).
Unfortunately, Socrates was charged with corrupting the
minds of the youth. It can be said that his manner of doing
philosophy became the cause of his death. In the end, he
willfully accepted his death rather than renouncing his
beliefs and practices.
4 Doing Philosophy
Plato
One of the students who gathered around Socrates was

Plato. He was born on about 428 and died about 347 B.C.
It is said that Plato served as a transcriber of the past. This
means that he was the one who wrote down the dialogues of
Socrates and his interlocutors. Contrary to some critics who
argued that Plato merely copied other thinkers' thoughts,
Plato was, of the highest degree, an original thinker. His
appropriations of Socrates's thoughts, Heraclitus and
Parmenides, served as “stepping stones” for him to build his
own original thoughts. Through Plato’s works, the thoughts
of the past have become ostensible and vibrant in his new
and original principles (Stace, 2010).
One of Plato's famous stories and allegories is called the
"Allegory of the Cave," which can be found in his book The
Republic. The allegory of the Cave explains the two worlds
of Plato, the real world and the unreal. For example, consider
the digital world as the “unreal world,” while the actual
world is the “real world”. What appears on social media is
only a picture or a copy of the real; hence, unreal. What is
real then is the one who controls and decides to post
something about myriads of things on social media. In
Facebook, if there are fraudulent cases that go viral, the
authority's primary impulse is to look for the person behind
such actions, not the person that appears on the screen or
device. Although the person's digital account may be taken
down, the one who would suffer the consequences is the
person responsible, not the copy of himself. Thus, the human
person's real existence in this world is what is put into
question.
Plato's way of doing philosophy sought to solve the
question of the real and unreal. In other words, it seeks the
truth. One sometimes is tempted to capture a copy of
something since the duplicate may eventually lead one to
find the real. For Plato, the truth is often forgotten at birth.
However, a recollection of such truth happens when we
encounter actual objects.
Aristotle
Aristotle was born about 384 B.C. He studied under

Plato, and later on, put up his school called Lyceum. There
were only a few of Aristotle’s works that survived. However,
from his important works, one can sense the depth of his
intellectual pursuits.
Aristotle learned much of Plato’s philosophy but the path
he took was different from his mentor’s interests. For one,
he opposed Plato’s Theory of Forms. He did not reject the
idea of the form itself but claims that Plato was more
concerned with the abstract, referring to the world of ideas
which can be reached only by thoughts. For Aristotle, the
forms can be achieved through the senses. Thus, he
maintained that things can be known and proven using the
senses and the faculty of reason (S. M. Cohen et al., 2016).
Aristotle put forward the notion that the forms have two
categories, namely, the substance and accidents. A substance
can subsist on its own, while accidents need another thing to
exist. Both are palpable to some degree. Unlike Plato's
theory of forms, the form for Aristotle exists in this world,
which has substance and accidents.
To elucidate Aristotle's ideas, let us take this example: as
a human person, you are composed of body and mind.
Having these two as your substance, it is expected from you
to use your intellectual and physical capacities to the fullest.
What you become by using your capacity would be the
accident of your being; either you become a priest, doctor,
policeman or fireman. But your substance, that is, being a
human person with rational and physical capacity, remains
the same.
6 Doing Philosophy
Aristotle did not reject the idea of the form itself.

Aristotle purports to convey that Plato was concerned with
the abstract, referring to the world of ideas that can only be
reached by thoughts. However, the forms can be achieved by
the use of the senses. Aristotle introduced his ideas about
empirical evidence or things that can be achieved and proven
by using the senses. Centuries later, this was picked up by
St. Thomas Aquinas who said, "Nothing is in the intellect
that was not first in the senses." Thus, by using one's senses,
one can gain knowledge. Unlike Plato, Aristotle did not
subscribe to innate ideas. (S. M. Cohen et al., 2016)
Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle believed that human beings
are endowed with reason. This rational capacity facilitates a
person to discover his/her true potentials. As students, you
dream of becoming a better version of yourself and a
successful human person someday. You know for a fact that
if you use your intelligence and capacity to learn new things,
it will eventually bring you somewhere in the world. For
instance, if you want to become a doctor of medicine, you
know you have to feed yourself with relevant knowledge,
and acquire the necessary skills related to the practice of
medicine.
EASTERN PHILOSOPHY
Eastern Philosophies are centered on finding the answers

to the question “who and what am I?” They focus on
searching for the meaning of being human. The goal of their
respective philosophical enterprises is not only to understand
human nature, but most importantly, to practice how to truly
live as a human person.
It may be noted that eastern philosophy is often
understood interchangeably with religion. Buddhism, for
one, belongs to the top major religions of the world. For this
reason, these philosophies are actively practiced by its
followers. For them, philosophy and religion are intimately

connected.
Confucianism
Being one of the greatest traditions in ancient China,

Confucianism started by Kongzi or Confucius over 2500
years ago. He was born about 551 B.C. in Tuo, and died
about 479 B.C. in Qufu. Confucianism includes a wider
scope of subjects, including morality, society, philosophy
and religion, and practices and values (Littlejohn, 2010).
Confucianism attempts to craft a philosophy of peace that
could conceivably reach every corner of the world, guided
by the aim to restore peace among men and nations.
Confucius believed that if a leader sets a good example
to his constituents, to his family, and people with whom he
would have a relationship, they, in turn, will do the same.
This, for him, could prevent wars and solve many social
problems. For this reason, Confucianism is considered a
social philosophy that is grounded on the assumption that
proper social and political behavior is cultivated in the
family. For him, the love and relationship with one's family
are paramount (Liu, 2006). This philosophy is connected to
the common idea today, which says that peace starts at home.
Confucianism has similarities with the Filipinos’ concept
and experience of family. Filipinos have close family ties.
Even if there’s a feud within the family, a Filipino will insist
that blood is thicker than water. Confucius had these same
thoughts with the aim of promoting a certain societal order.
Real changes should start from the top, from the
brightest, and the ruling class to realize societal reforms.
Moreover, for Confucius, a good ruler should have perfect
virtue. If a ruler is like a sage internally, it will also manifest
externally. He wrote three principles that a ruler should abide
by: “First, manifest a clear character, second, show concern
for the people, and third, aim for the highest good. Under this
8 Doing Philosophy
mode of thinking, morality and politics are inseparable.”

Confucius firmly believed that if a leader emulated himself
a sage king, there would be peace in the world (Liu, 2006).
To know the human person as a potential leader, one
must go back to the question of character, which presupposes
that a person has inculcated in his being some essential
virtues. Two notable Confucian virtues are expected from
each and every human being of character. First is Jen (ren),
which means human heartedness, which denotes a
compassionate person. The second is called Yi, or
righteousness, which consists of doing things in the right
manner. Remember that these two virtues are the sources of
other virtues. The Chung Tzu or Junzi means that a
gentleman should possess the virtue of Jen and Yi. In other
words, a human person presupposes a man of character, that
is, a virtuous human person. And since a Chung Tzu or a
gentleman bears the possibility of becoming a leader,
becoming a superior is not because of one’s status in the
social hierarchy, but because of his knowledge of the virtues
being translated concretely in his life (Richey, 2008).
Buddhism
Buddhism is a living tradition whose roots can be traced

from the life and teachings of Siddharta Gautama, who is
also known as the historical Buddha. Buddhism is anchored
on the idea that human person lives in suffering and that he
should overcome this. This suffering refers to the deep
dissatisfaction that pervades human experience, and the
thirst for endless desires. Human beings naturally cling to
things that are impermanent and changing due to our self-
centered pursuit of happiness. However, the human person
experiences aging, sickness, and death, which only deepens
suffering.
Buddhism teaches that “all phenomena are conditioned,
transitory, devoid of any ‘essence’ or ‘self’ that remains
unchanged over time.” This means that a person is composed

of different causal patterns rather than having an underlying
essence (Emmanuel, 2013). Our existence, therefore, cannot
be reduced to a single “essence”.
Moreover, Buddhism teaches the Four Noble Truths.
The first noble truth is that human life is pervaded by
suffering. Second, suffering is a result of craving. Third,
there is a state of freedom from suffering - called Nirvana -
that we can all attain by realizing that we are not Selves, thus
abandoning the craving. Fourth, anyone can attain Nirvana
by following the Eightfold Path:
1. Right View: It consists of knowing the noble truths and

Buddha's teaching as a whole.
2. Right Resolve: It consists of the intention to renounce
sexual drive and the intention of non-ill-will, and non-
cruelty.
3. Right Speech: It involves not engaging in speech that
is false, malicious, harsh, or idle.
4. Right Action: It means not killing living beings, not
taking what is not given, and avoiding misconduct in
sexual pleasures.
5. Right Livelihood: It consists of the resolve not to earn
one's living in a way that violates the ethical code.
6. Right Effort: It means eliminating and preventing
unwholesome states and develop meditative practice.
7. Right Mindfulness: It includes various contemplations
of the body, feelings, and mind.
8. Right Concentration: It means the attainment of
progressively higher mental states.
Another fundamental feature of Buddha’s ethical

teaching is “Karma and Rebirth”. “It is said that on the night
of his enlightenment, the Buddha had attained the three kinds
of “true knowledge": First, knowledge of past lives. Second,
the cycle of rebirth is governed by Karma. Third, the four
10 Doing Philosophy
noble truths. Buddha construed that karma and rebirth is a

natural causal process in the universe. We have adopted the
word karma in the Filipino (Visayan) language, often with a
bad connotation. Thus, “Makarma pa unta ka” would mean
“may bad things befall on you.” Karma is often used
interchangeably with “gaba” when we say “magabaan pa
unta ka”, which also means “may bad things happen to you.”
However, for Buddha, good and bad actions are like seeds
that, if planted, will bear fruits in the future.
This physical world we are living in now is full of
complicated and distinct ideas. Things could be rough, and
some people would be unforgivable to us, especially when
we have caused pain and injustices to them. The freedom
from pain and suffering may be so elusive when we lack the
knowledge of easing ourselves from it. As we experience
sadness, sorrow, disappointments, heartbreaks, and many
other negative things the world could offer, Buddhism
teaches us something for our emancipation.
Buddhism is neither optimistic nor pessimistic, but
rather realistic as it describes life as it is. Yes, life includes
suffering. However, it also teaches that we can attain
freedom from suffering through total non-attachment. In
other words, it teaches us to "let go" of our attachments in
life. And if one lives a life of goodness, one will be rewarded
with goodness.
Indian Philosophy
Indian philosophy responds to the question, "Who am I?"

This question goes into the deeper meaning of the self. Many
scholars argue that, like Buddhism, Indian Philosophy is
essentially spiritual. It is said that the human person is
conceived as spiritual in nature. This reality enables him/her
to relate to a spiritual and metaphysical destiny. But this
philosophy is also associated with practice in everyday life.
This is why Indian philosophy is pursued not as an academic

endeavor but rather as a vital guide to one’s life.
The manner of living a life is the principal priority in
Indian philosophy. It promotes a reflective approach to
reality. The physical world is not as important as the
knowledge of the inner self. Thus, the common theme of all
schools of Indian Philosophy is to “see the self”. The
realization of the highest truth is beyond intellectualization
because truth is a deep and very personal one (Frauwallner,
1973).
The theoretical aspect of living is augmented with the
obvious praxis of living. Thus, the philosophy devoid of
praxis is futile. One needs his mental capabilities to face this
sophisticated world bravely. Still, if one fails to see the value
of his/her inner self, the kind of life he/she pursues is empty
of authenticity.
Each human person has something in his/her mind to
pursue. This idea of something enables the person to direct
himself/herself to a certain goal. A student trying to cope
with the rapid dynamic change of technology, but lacks the
resources, tends to do undesirable things, like stealing to
provide the caprices or hurting people just to feed one's ego.
Consider a teenager who wants another smartphone but his
parents could not afford it. Since he/she has become so
fixated with the device, he/she insensitively demands his/her
parents to have one. In so doing, he/she forgets the real
situation; he/she refuses to care about his/her parents'
feelings. The device probably will make him/her happy,
most especially when it has become a ticket for him/her to
be accepted in society. However, a series of questions will
hunt him/her after pursuing his/her wants, e.g., does having
a thing ultimately make him/her a better person? Does being
attached to the world enable him/her to examine
himself/herself? And is it worth it to hurt others, especially
his/her parents, just to feed his caprices? Indian Philosophy
12 Doing Philosophy
reminds us that the physical world is not as important as

knowing the inner self and the right practices of living.
The brand of philosophizing in Indian philosophy,
making it an essential enterprise, is fundamentally centered
on the notion of the self. For this discipline, the value of the
self is the paramount priority. Consequently, there are two
of the most pivotal issues in Indian Philosophy that one
should encounter in studying their philosophy, namely, the
nature of causation, and the nature of the self. It has been
acknowledged in their philosophy that one of the central
metaphysical problems is causation. Unlike western
philosophy that focuses much on knowing the materialistic
cause of the universe, Indian Philosophy is more concerned
with the importance of the cause (Laine 2016).
CONCLUSION
The two immense traditions of Philosophy have taught

us a wider view of doing philosophy. In western tradition,
Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle believed that the human person
is gifted with reason. And this rationality would ultimately
facilitate the self to discover its true potentials. Socrates' way
of philosophizing was more on a dialectic way of
conversation, delving into the simplest and most
complicated questions the human mind can formulate. Plato
introduced to us the idea of two worlds and innate ideas that
requires recollection to remember them. And finally,
Aristotle reminded us that the real world refers to the things
we have now, the most palpable to the senses. Indeed, the
Socratic philosophers left us with abundant thoughts of the
past that we today keep on footnoting as we employ their
works in our day to day living.
The Eastern tradition reminds us that doing philosophy
is more on the practical practice of the different theories of
living. First, Buddhism brought us to reflect on the idea of
suffering, and a human person should overcome this deep
dissatisfaction that pervades human experience. A human

person naturally clings to impermanent things and self-
centered pursuit of happiness. Second, Indian Philosophy
reiterated the idea that the physical world is not as important
as the knowledge of the inner self and the right practices of
living. Third, Confucianism taught us the virtues of Jen and
Yi which are deemed essential to a human person, especially
if he/she envisions becoming a leader.
In general, the two great traditions, western and eastern
Philosophy, may have introduced the way of philosophizing,
but the methods of doing such are still left to be discovered
in the next chapter.
ASSESSMENT
1. Elucidate the line of Socrates, "An unexamined life is not

worth living.”
2. Compare and contrast the Philosophy of Plato from
Aristotle.
3. What are the commonalities of Western Philosophy with
Eastern Philosophies?
4. Articulate at least five questions from your everyday life
that you want to inquire about. How are these questions
connected to the various philosophical ideas presented in
the chapter?
5. As a Filipino, what kind of philosophizing you are
inclined to practice, and why?
LEARNING OBJECTIVES
1. To realize that philosophizing will lead to wisdom or

truth
2. To distinguish opinion from truth
3. To use a philosophical method in the search for truth
4. To evaluate situations that demonstrate the difference
between opinion and truth
INTRODUCTION
There are times that we react to a certain situation

without consciously understanding what we mean to say.
Sadly, when confronted with certain ideas that might be the
opposite of our beliefs, we get hurt and attack the person
instead of the argument. We tend to support only those
aligned with our beliefs, even if it lacks truth-value. Let’s
take a look at the situation below.
On a Sunday night, Juana posted his filtered picture of
her Sunday's best on Facebook with a caption: "I think there
is no class on Monday." Many of her classmates commented
on her post and asked if it was true. One of her close friends,
Pedro, shared the post. Eventually, many of their classmates
believed that there would be no class the following day since
Juana and Pedro were among the top ten students in their
class. Also, Pedro's mother is the principal of the City Senior
High School.
If you saw the post of Juana and you know her too well,
how would you react? Which button would you hit: “haha”,
“like”, “heart”, “angry” or “wow”? Why? Would you share
Juana’s post? What would be your comment?
These days, we are bombarded with a lot of information.
In social media, some information being shared and
circulated are true while some are not. How do we know that
something is true? How do we differentiate truth from
opinion? How can philosophy help us to arrive at a certain
truth?
16 Methods of Philosophizing
DISCUSSION
OPINION VS. TRUTH
When people engage in a debate and later get tired of

arguing, one of them would perhaps resort to saying, “That's
your opinion!” By saying this, it often settles the conflict of
the opposing sides. One can also observe that when one
expresses an opinion, he/she is confident to say it because
opinions are usually understood as neither ‘right’ nor
‘wrong’. Thus, many netizens would unreflectively post
something about an issue on their social media accounts and
defensively claim that it is just an opinion. Some would even
say that since we are in a democratic country, everyone is
entitled to his/her own opinion.
But what is an opinion? Generally, an opinion is a
personal claim, a belief, or a personal stance on a particular
subject matter. For instance, the statements, "My teacher is
the best!" or "I think there is no class on Monday" are
examples of opinions. These opinions are based on personal
experiences and, therefore, relative. However, opinions are
sometimes based on facts. If they are based on facts, do they
equate to the truth?
John Corvino (2015) offers a philosophical distinction
between an opinion and a fact. For him, a statement of fact
has objective content and is well-supported by the available
evidence. On the other hand, a statement of opinion is one
whose content is either subjective or not well supported by
the available evidence. In short, an opinion refers to what a
person thinks about something but is lacking evidence. In
this sense, the criterion of objectivity, which is a necessary
condition of facts, is what separates an opinion from a fact.
Another problem that arises is how to understand truth
statements. People would simply state an opinion using the
phrase, “it is true that…”, as if it automatically makes the

statement true. We have to note that not all those who claim
that they are telling the truth are revealing the truth. We see
many people on social media, claiming that their position on
an issue is correct and true. We may be deceived if we do
not verify whether these claims are indeed true or not. What
is essential is to doubt the things we see on social media to
investigate further their veracity.
Truth has been one of the main questions in philosophy,
and many theories have dealt with this question. One of these
theories is the Correspondence Theory. This theory
maintains that both the knower's mind and the thing being
perceived must correspond to each other. Truth is grasped
when there is conformity between the mind and the thing
outside the mind. However, since our senses may get easily
deceived, it is necessary always to inquire if what we have
in mind is not a mere illusion. This is why we need to discern
matters seriously to know the truth. We should consider both
what we think and what the thing reveals to us. Truth is
neither an opinion nor a fact. It is universal, undisputed,
verified through facts, and even transcendent, beyond a
reasonable doubt. In other words, the truth will always be
true no matter what a person thinks and says. Truth does not
change; an opinion, however, usually changes through time.
Thus, the truth remains, no matter how convincing an
opinion is. The question that remains now is how to seek the
truth.
METHODS OF PHILOSOPHIZING
The methods of philosophizing are the various ways of

attaining truth or wisdom. Let us not forget the literal
meaning of philosophy: "love of wisdom" or the search for
truth. But there is not only one way of searching for the truth.
In this section, we explore several methods used by
philosophers. From ancient philosophy to contemporary

philosophy, these methods are varied and evolving.
Socratic Method
The Socratic Method is named after Socrates, who was

the teacher of Plato. This method refers to a process of
asking open-ended questions that are committed to finding
the truth. It usually takes the form of a dialogue in which
people discuss and analyze a specific subject matter. It is like
a cross-examination. It is also a strategy of teaching any
subject matter between a teacher and a student. (Zack, 2010)
How does one employ the Socratic Method? Usually,
Socrates would ask questions based on what the person
believes. Let us read this dialogue:
Santiago: Maria, what is your comment on the Facebook

post of Juana?
Maria: I commented on her post, saying, "Yehey!"
Santiago: What does that mean?
Maria: I agree with her, and I am happy about the fact that
there is no class on Monday.
Santiago: Did Juana say that there is no class on Monday?
Maria: I don’t think so.
Santiago: What did she say?
Maria: She stated in the caption: I guess there is no class
on Monday.
Santiago: Will there be really no class on Monday?
Maria: I don’t know.
Santiago: Then, why did you say Yehey when Juana did
not declare that there is no class on Monday?
Maria: I was just happy to think that there is no class on
Monday.
Santiago: If you like the idea that there is no class on

Monday, do you mean to say that you like your
thought about having no class on Monday?
Maria. I think so.
Santiago: Is it correct to say that you are glad about what
you think – that is, having no class on Monday –
rather than what is posted by Juana?
Maria: Yes, I am happy to think that there is no class on
Monday.
Santiago: Do you think Juana is telling us that there is no
class on Monday?
Maria: I’m not sure about it.
Santiago: That only means that Juana is not declaring that
there is no class on Monday. Do you agree that the
"Yehey" refers to your thought of having no class
on Monday?
Maria: Mhhmm. I cannot disagree.
In this dialogue, one question leads to a series of

questions to arrive at a particular conclusion. The dialogue
may go as far as the question is satisfied or as far as the truth
is revealed. Maria's comment, "Yehey", is quite ambiguous.
Santiago discovers that her comment on Juana's post, which
expresses delight and agreement, does not totally refer to
Juana's post but to her own thought of having no class on
Monday.
In this connection, the Socratic Method may often
disappoint us when we discover something we did not intend
to say. Sometimes, we become uncertain of our beliefs once
we start to question them. That is why Socrates urges us to
examine ourselves, including our beliefs and assumptions in
life, when he said, "An unexamined life is not worth living."
At first, the Socratic Method seems to be annoying
because the questions seem to be unending. Nevertheless, a
person has nothing to be afraid of when being asked about
anything and discovers something new and realizes his

ignorance. Let us remember that Socrates' wisdom proceeds
from his awareness of his own ignorance. But asking
questions intelligently is a way to resolve our own ignorance,
and the Socratic Method will lead us to find the truth.
It has to be emphasized that this method is different
from asking questions for the sake of asking them. Rather,
the Socratic Method is the art of asking a question that is
committed to the truth. It aims for moral improvement, to
make us wise and virtuous persons (Cain, 2007; Kreeft,
2014). Sometimes this method may result in one feeling
ashamed. However, when one uses this method, he/she does
not seek to harm or destroy a person; instead, the goal is to
correct one's opinions and lead him/her to the truth.
Peter Kreeft (2014) suggests some points on how to
apply the Socratic Method, especially with difficult people,
such as those who do not believe in finding the truth
together, those who are subjectivists, or those who refuse to
believe that they lack the truth and the other has it.
1. Establish a Socratic relationship. You are not the
teacher, but you are the listener. You are not the one who
knows what is right, but you are the one who needs to be
shown what is right.
2. Get the person’s belief, contention, or conclusion
(What is the person really saying?)
3. Understand how the person uses the terms that he uses
to avoid ambiguity (What does the person really mean?).
4. Ask for reasons or supporting evidence. Take note
that you have to maintain the attitude of a person who wants
to be led by the master or teacher to clarify the claim, not as
someone who will ask for reasons for the sake of refuting it.
(Why do you say that…?)
5. Once the person has given his claim, terms, and
reasons, make sure to show your understanding of them by
rephrasing them in your own words. In this way, you will let
the person feel that you are on the same track and not letting
the person be alone, as if nobody understands him/her.
6. When the person sees that you are on his side, you
can start the next level: exploration. You may go either
'upstream' or 'downstream'. Explore the person's original
argument, that is, either go with his/her premises or reasons,
or with the conclusions and their consequences. Suppose that
the problem is not the terms or the logic of the argument but
the propositions (or the statements themselves in the given
reasons and conclusion) that need to be investigated.
Suppose you believe that the conclusion is false. In that case,
you may take either the two paths: a) Upstream strategy is
to show the person what questionable premises or reasons
are necessary to prove his claim, or b) Downstream strategy
is to show the person what questionable conclusions entail
when the claim or conclusion is taken as a reason or premise.
7. Use options to give the person a choice. You may
provide constructive dilemmas to not let the person perceive
the inadequacy of his/her reasons.
8. You may also match your style with the personalities
of the person you are inquiring.
Dialectical Method
The Dialectical method can be traced back to Socrates'

or Plato's method. The term ‘dialectics’ is derived from the
Greek word dialego, which means to debate or discuss.
Although the dialectical method has its roots in ancient
Greek philosophy, the dialectical method emphasized here is
the one developed mostly by modern philosophers, such as
Hegel and Marx. It is a method of studying and
understanding the real development and change (Cornforth,
2015).
Reality is in constant conflict. The dialectical method
arises from the opposing realities, and even contradictions
are derived from applying the philosophical categories

(Borchert, 2006). Hence the formula of the dialectical
method is a thesis versus antithesis results in synthesis. On
the one hand, a thesis refers to a claim. It may be a
hypothesis, speculation, declaration, belief, conclusion, or a
certain reality.
On the other hand, an antithesis refers to a thesis that
negates or opposes the given thesis. Once the thesis and the
antithesis clash, another thesis will arise, called a synthesis.
Synthesis is the result of the conflict of the thesis and
antithesis. However, a synthesis becomes a new thesis that
will be opposed by another antithesis, which will result in
another synthesis. This process goes on and on until it
reaches its pure synthesis.
It has to be noted that the result of thesis-antithesis
conflict should not be regarded as favoring one side as if one
side wins over the other. Unlike a debate that has a winner
and loser, the dialectic method, on the other hand, is not
concerned about winning or losing but about seeking new
ideas that arise from a conflict. Thus, the dialectical method
admits the presence of the conflicts, proceeds from the whole
truth of the conflict and gives birth to a new thesis: the
synthesis.
Philosophers may have differences in using the
dialectical method. However, they all agree on the relevance
of this method in searching for the truth or discovering a new
idea.
Phenomenological Method
The word phenomenology comes from the two Greek

words: phainomenon, which means appearance, and logos,
which means study or reason. A phenomenon is that which
appears to the consciousness of the mind. In this sense,
Phenomenology investigates the essence of nature of the
things that appear to a person. For Edmund Husserl,

phenomenology is "the science of the essence of
consciousness" (Smith, 2006).
Husserl's phenomenological method is the most original
or also called pure phenomenology. It emphasizes the
person's lived experience to get to the true meaning of
reality. One has to note that Husserl distinguishes 'natural
attitude' and 'phenomenological attitude'. Natural attitude
refers to the belief that the reality outside the person is
relative to and separate from the person who experiences it.
However, the knowledge that a person will gain from this
kind of attitude is not real or true knowledge. On the other
hand, a phenomenological attitude refers to the process
whereby a person suspends his/her beliefs or the things
he/she has learned from the natural attitude. Here is how to
apply the method of Husserl's phenomenology (Zahavi,
2002):
a. Bracketing: This process is also called epoché, which

means to abstain. The person's experience, beliefs, and
learnings are bracketed or 'set aside' to see the thing in
itself. It is like peeling an onion; one has to peel off the
outer layers to get its innermost part. In philosophy, this
refers to the unpacking of a certain reality. Thus, one has
to let go of his/her biases and prejudices, enclose them,
and put them aside.
b. Eidetic reduction. This is the movement from fact to

essence, a transcendental reality that refers to the
immateriality of things, such as thoughts, feelings,
memories, etc. This process seeks what is necessary to
a thing, such as, ‘what makes a chair a chair’ or ‘what
makes a book a book?’ It collects only those attributes
from which a thing cannot be without them.
Let us say, for instance, what is a chair? From our own

experience, a chair may be green, white, or brown; it is
also hard; it is used for sitting, etc. A person has to
bracket those ideas that do not necessarily constitute a
chair. Does it have four legs? Is it fundamentally used
for sitting? Is it made up of wood? Also, one has to ask
questions such as: Would it still be a chair without those
legs? Would it be a chair without those woods? Would
it be a chair without its shape? The more the person
investigates the chair in itself, the more that the person
finds the essence of the chair. Thus, in this example, the
chair is a four-legged tool made up of woods or hard
materials and used for sitting on. At this time, a person
will experience the 'Aha' moment, wherein he/she
realizes the meaning of the thing in itself, the essential
nature of the thing as experienced.
All these processes belong to the consciousness where

it always points at something. It is for the person to find out
the true meaning of the thing presented to him/her. In that
case, the phenomenological method helps a person to
examine his/her own experience of something. In this way,
the personal experience is taken into account to understand
a certain phenomenon better. How each person sees things
may differ from one another, but with this phenomenological
method, one can understand the essence of one's lived
experience. For instance, as a student, one will understand
his/her student life through the phenomenological method
and draw a realization that explains the universal and
necessary elements of the experience of something. Indeed,
one's experience is never taken for granted in the search for
truth.
Hermeneutics
The term hermeneutics is usually associated with the

Greek god, Hermes, who was the messenger between gods
and humans. It is derived from hermêneuein or hermêneusai
and hermêneia, which means interpreting or interpretation
(Keane & Lawn, 2016 & Malpas & Gander, 2015). This
process refers to the understanding of a particular reality. As
a method, hermeneutics "offers a toolbox for efficiently
treating problems of the interpretation of human actions,
texts, and other meaningful material (Mantzavinos, 2020)."
There are various systems of hermeneutics. For this
discussion, let's focus on the hermeneutics of Friedrich
Schleiermacher. Schleiermacher's system is called
romanticist hermeneutics. The aim of hermeneutics is "to
capture the truth of the text." The truth is taken from how the
author originally meant something. To achieve this, one
starts from the subjective interpreter (or the reader himself),
then considers the historical and the cultural context to grasp
the original authorial intention (Demeterio, 2001). The
reader should check the author's historical background and
the period when the author said/wrote something. Hence,
considering those factors will make the reader/interpreter dig
out the truth of the text.
There is an interplay between the subject, object, and the
truth/meaning. This process only means that in seeking the
truth of what the person has said, one must aim for what the
person has intended to say, considering the history and
cultural background. The subjective part may come from the
interpreter because he/she is the one who reveals the
meaning. Still, the interpreter's meaning is objectively taken
from the text itself and how the author of the text (words) is
trying to convey.
CONCLUSION
The search for truth is like a vocation – a calling. There

may be only one call, but there can be different ways of
answering the call. In other words, the methods of
philosophizing may vary, but they are all guided by and
directed towards the truth. A person may encounter opinions,
facts, and truth while facing a certain problem, but it is a
challenge to determine each one of them. The methods of
philosophizing do not settle with mere opinions and facts,
but they always love to transcend and attain the truth. Hence,
a person must be open to the call for truth even if it is against
one’s opinion; and from here, he/she must consider
examining the immaterial element of the human person: the
embodied spirit.
ASSESSMENT
1. Look at the image below. In 250 words, write your

opinion about the picture.
Source:https://opinion.inquirer.net/files/2020/06/Opinion58652.jpg
2. Read the quoted statement of President Rodrigo Roa

Duterte on his 5th State of the Nation Address on July 27,
2020.
“Not to count the victims of crimes perpetrated by

people addicted to shabu. That is the reason why I‘m
so vicious in my — galit talaga ako kasi nilalaruan
tayo. Well, I don‘t know any other president might —
pero ako ayaw ko yon. Ayaw kong lalaruan ang
Pilipino. Do not do it in my country because I will
really kill you. That is a commitment.”
What does the president truly mean by saying: "I will

really kill you" in the SONA 2020? Choose a method of
philosophizing to arrive at a conclusion. Remember that it
does not matter whether you believe that your output has
arrived at ‘the truth’. The important thing is how you use the
method(s) of philosophizing in investigating the given
statement. The point of this task is to apply the method(s) of
philosophizing.
LEARNING OBJECTIVES
1. To explain the different systems of thought about man
having a body and soul
2. To recognize one’s limitations and possibilities for
transcendence
3. To determine the limitation and possibilities for
transcendence
4. To reflect on what makes man truly human
INTRODUCTION
Understanding what it means to be a human person is

arduous. This has been a perennial problem even from
ancient times. Ancient Greek philosophers made attempts to
explain what constitutes man, or what makes man different
from the other living beings in the world. Some very
common questions are about its origin, life's possibilities,
freedom, purpose, and happiness.
But what is a human person? How will you answer this
question? In explaining the essence of the human person, it
is easy to focus on its material or physical aspect. Human
persons indeed have material needs, but they also have non-
material aspects (Bernados, 2017). What then are these
material and non-material aspects of man?
Imagine that you have a motorcycle. Before buying one,
you probably have some preferences in mind. You imagine
some specifications of the bike, such as the brand,
suspension, the possible top speed, design, color, and many
other features. These specifications of the motorcycle are its
material aspect. But it also requires care, maintenance, and
attention; otherwise, it will not last for years. We can say that
this is where we can locate its non-material aspect.
Similarly, human persons have material and non-
material aspects. A person has a body with all its various
features (e.g., dark skin, flat nose, long legs, etc.). Its non-
material aspect, on the other hand, refers to his/her emotional
needs, desires, and even passions.
In doing philosophy, we give attention to the material
and non-material aspects of human persons. This brings us
to the idea that a human person is an embodied spirit.
30 The Human Person as an Embodied Spirit
DISCUSSION
THE HUMAN PERSON AS AN EMBODIED SPIRIT
What does the term “embodied spirit” mean? Probably,

the first thing that comes to mind when thinking of the term
'embodied' is that it is a quality of being materialized or a
characteristic of possessing a body. On the other hand, when
we consider the term “spirit”, we think of something
immaterial.
However, to speak of the human person as an 'embodied
spirit' does not refer to the materialization or the
personification of a human being. Rather, it refers to the
inseparable union of the body and the soul. Simply, the
human person as an embodied spirit means that his/her body
is inseparable from his/her soul, just as the soul is
inseparable from the body. In other words, the human person
is the meeting point of the material and immaterial entities
(Steph, 2018). This concept makes it possible to accept
man’s limitations and realize his potentials. Most
importantly, it helps man recognize his uniqueness.
THE UNDERSTANDING OF THE HUMAN PERSON IN THE

ANCIENT PERIOD
To speak of the human person's union of body and soul,

we need to understand some of the thoughts of the ancient
Greek philosophers, namely, Plato and Aristotle. Their
concepts are influenced by the cosmogenic model of the
world. Considering that man is part of the universe, Plato and
Aristotle attempted to explain the origin of man. They made
a great contribution to the idea of the human person as a
being with body and soul.
Plato’s Three Functions of the Soul
Plato's view of the human person rests on the dichotomy

of the body and soul. For him, the body is material and is
subject to changes and destructions, while the soul is
immaterial and unchanging. He also believed that the human
soul is an authentic part because the body is just its prison
cell (Bernados, 2017). Hence, the body's existence is
dependent on the soul, while the soul is independent of the
body.
How is it possible that the existence of the soul is
independent of the body? Plato contended that the soul
existed before the body, for it was created by the gods and
was venerable in birth (Plato, Timaeus, in Reginal Ellen,
Greek Philosophy: Thales to Aristotle, 1966). Accordingly,
the soul has a tripartite function, namely, the rational
function, the passion function, and the appetitive function
(Stumpf & Fieser, 2012). These three functions of the soul
are represented by the body parts, i.e., head, chest, and
abdomen. The head does the soul's rational function, which
enables human persons to think, analyze, comprehend, and
make decisions. This guides the passion and appetitive
functions of the soul. On the other hand, passion function
performs the actions dictated by reason and is also
responsible for various feelings, such as hatred or anger.
Lastly, the appetitive function enables a person to experience
cravings or anything that deals with man's physical wants
(Babor, 2001). For Plato, if a person allows his reason to
properly guide his passion and appetite, he/she will have a
well-balanced personality (Stumpf & Fieser, 2012).
Aristotle’s Three Types of Souls
Aristotle disagreed with Plato that the soul is separable.

For him, the soul and the body are substantially united. There
is no dichotomy between the two, for none cannot talk about
the soul apart from the body or talk about the body apart
from the soul (Stumpf & Fieser, 2012). Aristotle explained
in detail his view on man when he explained its biological
and psychological aspects. The word soul is an English
translation of the Greek word psyche. Hence, for him, the
soul is the source of life.
What gives life to a body? For Aristotle, all bodies,
living or not, are a combination of the primary elements. The
body is not the principle of life, for it is always in
potentiality. It needs a form to be in actuality. By actuality,
we mean it is alive. When the body is alive, it will then be
able to perform its functions. Like a cellphone, if it is not
charged, it would not do its functions.
The soul then is the form of the organized body. For
Aristotle, anything that lives has a soul. Does this mean that
animals and plants also have souls? Yes. Not only humans
have souls. Aristotle identified three kinds of souls found in
plants, animals, and man. These three kinds of souls are
characterized as vegetative, sensitive, and rational. They are
modeled according to the various capacities of the body.
What do we mean by vegetative souls? Plants can grow,
reproduce, and feed themselves. That is why the living soul
is found in them. It does not share the higher types of souls,
for it cannot feel and think. On the other hand, the sensitive
soul shares with the vegetative soul, for it is also capable of
growing, feeding, and reproducing. Moreover, what makes
it different is that it is also capable of sensing or feeling. A
sensitive being possesses the appetite where desire, anger,
and pain are experienced (Melchert, 1999). Meanwhile, the
rational soul shares with the other lower souls, i.e.,
vegetative and sensitive. It has the capacity for scientific

thoughts, for it can distinguish various things. With this
capacity, it analyzes and understands the relationship of
things. Moreover, aside from the scientific thoughts, it also
deliberates and discovers the truth of the nature of things and
the guidelines for human behavior (Stumpf & Fieser, 2012).
Aristotle believed then that there must be a connection
between the mind and the soul. It is from this connection that
consciousness and self-awareness arise.

MEDIEVAL PERIOD
We have discussed what constitutes the existence of

man, specifically its materiality. But there must be
something more than the material aspect of our existence.
The ancient Greek philosophers focused only on the
cosmogenic nature of human beings. Something seems to be
lacking when we think of our origin. Everything that exists
must have a beginning or a source.
The period following the ancient times is called the
medieval period or the middle ages. This period is also
referred to as the age of faith. In Philosophy, this age marks
a shift of focus from cosmology to theodicy. Thus, this
period centers on proving the existence of God based on
rational methods. Two philosophers are very much known
for this period, namely, St. Augustine and St. Thomas
Aquinas.
St. Augustine
St. Augustine of Hippo had a deep interest in Philosophy

in his search for meaning in the Christian faith. He believed
that God created the world, and this includes the creation of
the immortal soul. A human being is not only material and
rational but, most importantly, a soul embodied in a material

substance. In other words, the soul is a 'self-sustaining'
substance. Plato, therefore, believed in the soul’s
immortality, which can exist without the body. With the
soul’s self-subsistence, it is the real person in man. It is the
principle of life which is also what makes man authentic.
The authentic person of man is the soul within him. The
fact the human body moves means that it is animated by the
soul to perform its functions. The human body and its senses
outwardly express the activities of the human soul. Through
our five senses, the intellect, as a special faculty, is
enhanced, allowing human beings to understand and realize
that they are more endowed than other animals.
St. Thomas Aquinas
Another notable philosopher known as a defender of the

Christian faith and a Doctor of the Church is St. Thomas
Aquinas. He was greatly influenced by Aristotle's thoughts
since, during his time, his works were introduced and
accepted, particularly in Paris. For Aquinas, Philosophy and
Theology are not two conflicting disciplines. Rather, these
two are complementary in the quest for truth. In his view of
man's nature, Aquinas believed that the soul is dependent on
the body, in the same way as the body is dependent on the
soul. The difference between him and Aristotle was that the
latter only sees the body and soul as inseparable. For
Aquinas, however, without the soul, the body will not have
its form, and without the body, the soul will not have its
required sense organs to gain knowledge (Stumpf & Fieser,
2012). The soul then gives life and understanding, as well as
special physical features. It also accounts for man’s capacity
for sensation and the powers of intellect and will (Fisher,
2017). The intellect and will are the highest human faculties,
making humans beings higher than other animals. These
faculties are geared towards the attainment of the

contemplation of God. Through these, man can aim towards
the union and eternal fellowship with God, which is achieved
in the beatific vision. What is this beatific vision of Thomas?
It is during the cessation of breath. When the physical body
of man corrupts because of sins, the soul of man continues
to exist. From then, he can see face to face God and enjoy
the eternal happiness. This is the gift of God to all those who
follow His precepts and who in life experienced salvation
and redemption through his son Jesus Christ (Bernados,
2017).

MODERN PERIOD
The quest to understand the human person continued in

modern times. In this period, there was a huge paradigm
shift. From being theocentric, it shifted to being
anthropocentric. Modern ideas found it hard to fathom the
notion of a God that is beyond human perception. Thus, to
better understand man and his nature, modern philosophers
regarded him as the most significant being in the world. In
other words, modernity placed man at the top to distinguish
him from other animals. For this reason, anthropocentrism
became an underlying assumption of most philosophical
concepts during the modern period. In this section, we will
explore some of the ideas of Rene Descartes and John Locke.
Rene Descartes
The foremost person to have identified man on top of

the other animals is Rene Descartes. He explicitly said that
animals have no souls; they cannot think and are mere
bundles of instincts prepackaged by God. As a rationalist, he
praised the supremacy of the human mind over the human
body. “I think, therefore, I am” is his famous dictum. This

means that the fact that man can think is proof that he exists.
This kind of rationalism maintained that the human mind is
different from the human body and can exist without the
other's presence. Like Plato, he believed that the destruction
of the physical body does not mean the destruction of the
mind (Bernados, 2017).
Descartes' philosophy opened up the minds of many
thinkers after him. His thoughts on the concept of the “I” led
to the idea of man's autonomy from a divine being. If a
person allows himself to be trampled upon by another being,
conflict arises, which creates doubt. Descartes believed that
the individual is responsible for himself. Through self-
examination and contemplation, a human person can realize
that his existence is completely different from others.
John Locke
The human mind could not attain any knowledge

without perceiving it first. John Locke, an empiricist,
provided a systematic philosophy that attempts to answer
how the human person thinks. Locke disagreed with
Descartes that human persons are born with innate,
fundamental principles, and knowledge (Kleinman, 2013). If
they were, all humans should accept certain universal
principles. But since this is not the case, then such a claim
must be false.
For Locke, the human mind is a tabula rasa or blank
slates. Knowledge is acquired only through sensory
experiences. This means that the soul begins to know only
when the senses begin to perceive. To point out the relation
of the soul and the body in Locke's philosophy, we can
simply say that the soul is always in contact with the body.
The soul's task is to think and interpret what the physical
body perceives. Therefore, human knowledge is limited, and
humans should be aware of such limitations (Kleinman,

2013).
For Locke, human nature necessarily includes the
capacities for thinking, feeling, and acting. These features
distinguish us from other creatures, and make us human
persons.
THE HUMAN BODY
To speak of the human body connotes the idea of

finitude. If you recall, we mentioned that the body of a
human being is a material thing. Anything that is material is
subject to corruption or destruction. Being embodied means
human beings have certain limitations. Because of his/her
body, a person becomes constrained by time and space. Such
bodily existence is oriented towards an impending death
(Babor, 2001).
Take notice of your physicality. Everything you see on
your body is called accidents: your skin color, size, shape,
height, weight, etc. These accidental characteristics are
sometimes the basis of recognizing (or misrecognizing) the
dignity and value of persons. Identifying a person based on
his/her accidental features can have either positive or
negative effects. For instance, in any basketball league,
teams are categorized and bracketed, not just according to
geographical locations, skills, and abilities but also
according to the players’ body size and height. For this
reason, those countries that have taller players would always
have a higher chance of becoming champions.
It may be well to note that the colonial mentality that
most Filipinos imbibed is one of the problems of the
continued patronage of anything foreign. For instance, many
Filipinos aim to look and sound like the people from the
West. Some would even spend a lot of money just to undergo
various cosmetic surgeries due to dissatisfaction with their
natural physical features. These are just a few of the many

things that foreground the idea that human beings face a lot
of physical limitations.
Given these physical constraints, human beings have the
ability to transcend. In other words, these limitations could
also provide the motivation and purpose to strive harder in
realizing one's potentials and possibilities. Being embodied,
therefore, is not a hindrance to develop and advance. We can
always improve the intangible limitations of this life.
THE POSSIBILITY FOR TRANSCENDENCE
The act of surpassing our limitations is called

“transcendence”. This is another essential trait that makes
man special from all other existing beings. How and when
does man experience such transcendence? To transcend is to
go beyond the ordinary. For instance, Filipinos' love for
music enables them to sing passionately, not minding if they
are out of tune or off-beat. Though they are aware that they
could not hit a single note no matter how hard they tried,
their passion and love for music keep them singing.
Moreover, we often experience hunger, fatigue, thirst,
loneliness, emptiness, and many others. These bodily
tendencies can be overcome through a proper exercise of
reason. We carry within ourselves the possibility of
transcending our limits by exerting enough effort and
perseverance. Through transcendence, a person is able to
acknowledge his/her limitations, identify possibilities for
development, and change him/herself for the better (Garcia,
2018).
CONCLUSION
In this chapter, we have understood that the soul and the

body are two active existence in the human person. Our
bodily experiences like running, talking, writing, encoding,
working are manifestations that we are living with it.
Imagining with goals and self-images and the internal
functions of our senses are the activities of the soul.
Significantly, the body and soul of the human person stand
for man’s possibilities. These possibilities are lived in
different ways. The life experience of one is not the same for
everyone. Each has his/her unique way of living his/her
bodiliness and spirituality. However, there is still the
objectivity of gradually living his/her bodiliness and
spirituality in a fuller way (Moga, 1995). The human person
learns his bodily skills like walking, dancing, eating, and
playing games of their choice.
Moreover, the human person learns to use various tools
like paper, pencil, pen, knife, laptop computers, cellphones,
and other gadgets. With the continued experiences of his
bodiliness, he is able to develop skills. These skills that are
developed in the human person are the possibilities of his
existence. As man realizes his bodily possibilities, he is at
the same time developing his soulness. The soulness is
experienced by seeing and aiming at his goals in life. While
living in the material world, the human person has
ambitions. These ambitions drive man to strive hard and
work for the best. Once his goals and ambitions are achieved,
man feels fulfilled with his life’s purpose.
The spirituality of the human person is always present
in his life. This human spirituality constantly invites and
suggests that man will continue to walk down many paths
leading to a fuller human life (Moga, 1995). To further
understand the human person’s continued path, the next
chapter will deepen our understanding of man and his

environment.
ASSESSMENT
Instruction: Answer the following questions briefly:
1. What are your limitations as a person? What are the things

that you consider as difficult or hard for you to
accomplish or believe in?
2. What are your strengths? What are the possible things or
status that you can reach or achieve in the future?
3. What are the factors affecting your limitations? How
about possibilities?
4. How can you transcend your current limitations?
LEARNING OBJECTIVES
1. To enjoy the gifts given by nature without destroying its
wellbeing in the process
2. To arrive at a holistic understanding of the state of the
natural environment in the Philippines
3. To feel empowered, to preserve and to conserve the
only planet they have
4. To draw out knowledge on how the natural environment
contributes to health, wellbeing, sustainable
development and the attainment of inner peace
42 The Human Person and the Environment
INTRODUCTION
The earliest philosophers already inquired about the

basic stuff that underlies all things in the world. Thales, for
instance, arrived at the idea that the origin of all things came
from water. He was then followed by a variety of thinkers
who also had their versions of the answer. From
Anaximander to Anaximenes to Pythagoras and Heraclitus
and Parmenides, such Philosophers gave answers to such
questions that also made a lot of sense. Yet, one common
thing about their answers was that they were all centered on
the essence of the world where the human person was living
in.
The world is very important to the human person. It is
where he/she is born, raised, and lived the life that he
chooses to live. Nevertheless, the development of things
designed to make life easy for him/her has also created
negative impacts on the things that support life, not only the
lives of humans but also the lives of other beings that are
essential to support life on earth. As the world becomes
entrenched with the economic and technological
advancements of the present, the natural environment has
been put at the receiving end of such developments.
Therefore, to live life to the fullest and ensure that the
future generation could also experience the same, it is
imperative to take care of the natural environment. When
human persons do this, nature will also take good care of
them in return. After all, the relationship between humans
and the natural environment have been reciprocal since time
immemorial.
DISCUSSION
In the last ten years, the Philippines had experienced

various catastrophes that were caused by nature. In
December 2011, Typhoon Sendong made landfall in
Mindanao, which brought heavy rains that caused flooding
in Cagayan de Oro City and Iligan City, leaving around eight
hundred persons dead. Typhoon Pablo ravaged Mindanao in
December 2012, which left around one thousand five
hundred fatalities. In November 2013, Typhoon Yolanda hit
Leyte and Samar and took the lives of more than five
thousand people.
Nature's wrath is indeed very destructive. However,
humans can do something to mitigate nature's destructive
force. This follows that humans should do their share to
preserve the environment so that Mother Nature could
protect and sustain them. It cannot be emphasized enough
that the natural environment is essential in the human
person's quest for survival. In exploring the essence of the
human person, it is essential to include how we interact with
the natural environment. After all, Mother Nature could
greatly influence the quality of human life.
Human beings have always exploited Mother Nature.
This kind of attitude is referred to as Anthropocentrism, a
belief that only human beings matter (Routley and Routley,
1982). In this belief, everything else matters only because it
has some kind of utility or instrumental value for human
beings. But while the environment is often seen only in
relation to its role in ensuring human kind's long-term
survival, human beings are nonetheless expected to give
appropriate moral consideration to the environment through
acts of respect and care, responsibility, as well as concern for
Mother Nature (Mathews, 2010). There is nothing wrong
with human persons using the environment provided that
they have to take charge of nature and ensure nature's
wellbeing (Passmore, 1974). Thus, people should cut back

their efforts towards excessive economic growth, thereby
limiting their exploitation of the natural environment (Moga,
1995).
ANTHROPOCENTRISM AND DEEP ECOLOGY
The notion of Anthropocentrism stems from the Judaeo-

Christian tradition, which maintains that humans are the
chief stewards of God's Creation, while non-human beings
have no intrinsic value since they are only valuable
depending on their utility to human beings. This concept has
a long-standing influence on how human beings treat the
natural environment. For years, humans have exploited
Mother Nature and left traces of destruction all over the
world. Yet, the extent of human beings' abuse of the natural
environment has been questioned by various sectors of our
society. One of the radical responses to Anthropocentrism is
the notion of Deep Ecology.
Deep Ecology is a new ecological philosophy
(ecosophy) that considers humanity an integral part of
nature. The ideology stresses the interdependence of nature,
humans, and non-humans, as well as the environment and its
natural processes. The Norwegian philosopher Arne Naess
coined the term 'deep ecology' in 1973 and helped give it a
theoretical basis (Naess, 1973). For him, ecological science
is concerned only with facts and reasoning and cannot
address ethical questions about how human beings can live.
He, therefore, stressed that human beings need ecological
wisdom. By concentrating on deep knowledge, deep
questioning, and deep involvement, Deep Ecology seeks to
establish an integrated structure where each gives rise to and
supports the other. Naess called this “ecosophy”, an
evolving yet consistent concept that embodies ecological
wisdom and harmony of being, thinking, and acting in the

world (Harding, 2015).
Society needs to find a middle ground between
Anthropocentrism and Deep Ecology. In as much as human
beings need to use the things found in nature, they also have
to put limits on its use to make sure that there is enough left
for everybody, both in the present and future generations.
For instance, while human beings need lumber and water,
they should use only what is needed so that these resources
could sustain other humans' needs for a longer period. This
means that human beings can enjoy the things endowed by
nature, but they must do so in moderation in order to sustain
them.
ENLIGHTENED ANTHROPOCENTRISM
Enlightened Anthropocentrism maintains that human

beings have a moral duty to set limits in the utilization of
nature's good in order to protect the needs of the future
generation (Fernandez, 2018). However, because of
unrestricted freedom, humans tend to exploit Mother Nature.
Consequently, the natural environment is being depleted
faster since nature's capacity to regenerate follows its “built-
in schedule” designed to be in harmony with the other beings
within its system. Thus, humans need to set concrete
restrictions in the use of their freedom to continually enjoy
the blessings provided by Mother Nature. This enables the
present generation to enjoy natural resources and gives
future generations the chance to relish the same
environmental resources when their time comes (Fernandez,
2019).
Anthropocentrism is governed by four principles that
define human beings' relationship with the natural
environment. First, human beings must recognize their
moral obligations to the present generation of human beings
in relation to their utilization of environmental goods.

Second, the present generation must consider the well-being
of future generations and be aware that the stability and
health of the future generations are directly affected by the
decisions that the present generation makes concerning the
environment. Third, people must understand and consider
the full value of the various ecological services provided by
the ecosystem. Finally, people must recognize that nature
has an aesthetic value (Fernandez, 2019).
Enlightened Anthropocentrism, therefore, entails moral
deliberation and sustainable actions that are grounded on the
fundamental human inclination for preservation. Humans'
willingness to balance the use of his/her freedom against the
natural tendency to fully exercise it and maximize what
he/she can get from the environment is based on a deeper
sense of moral and practical urgency. As rational beings,
humans know that irresponsible actions towards nature
could result in negative and long-lasting consequences.
Thus, humans should conserve and protect the environment
because protecting the environment is also an act of
protecting themselves and others (Fernandez, 2019).
THE STATE OF THE NATURAL ENVIRONMENT IN THE

PHILIPPINES
The biodiversity in the Philippines has been one of the

richest in the world. It has been part of the 17 mega-diverse
countries which collectively claim two-thirds of all global
species. Yet, 70% of Philippine forests had vanished from
the 1930s to 1988 (Haribon Foundation, 2016). There are
two major causes of Philippine forest loss. They are the
conversion of primary forests to secondary forests by both
legal and illegal logging, and the removal of secondary
forests cover by the expansion of upland agriculture
(Fernando, 2005). As a result, farmers have been the most
affected sector because their way of life is dependent on the

natural environment. However, the Philippine government
has not taken this phenomenon lightly; thus, massive
reforestation has been initiated. Though the government has
introduced programs aimed to rehabilitate denuded lands,
both government and private sectors' efforts are still not
enough to abate the rapid deforestation rate of Philippine
forests (Kalikasan People's Network, 2011). The decades-
long reforestation efforts using fast-growing exotic species
have led to the alteration of Philippine rainforests, which has
failed to bring back ecosystem functions (Haribon
Foundation, 2005). After all, exotic trees cannot replace
Philippine native trees because they are not suited to the
Philippine climate (Ranada, 2014).
Moreover, our marine ecosystem has likewise suffered
from a similar fate. Illegal fishing methods, such as the use
of dynamites and poisons, the indiscriminate throwing of
trash in the sea have all significantly damaged the wellbeing
of many marine ecosystems in the Philippines. Aside from
this, the emergence of state-of-the-art fishing vessels with
sonar technology and mechanized nets that reach the seabed
have depleted a significant part of Philippine fisheries due to
the destruction of corals (Fernandez & Villaluz, 2018).
Furthermore, the marine ecosystem is not only
destroyed by undesirable fishing activities. They are also
destroyed by other human activities that are carried out to
make life easier for them. For instance, reclamation projects
augment land areas in certain localities. These projects also
destroy marine ecosystems. In a study on the effects of a
reclamation site in Baybay City, Leyte, it is found out that
the process of constructing the reclamation area has greatly
damaged the surrounding fishing areas of the community
affected. The residue of the filling materials and the noise it
has created in the process of construction have caused the
fishes to go further into the seas. The seawater has turned
brown while those enclosed within the reclamation site have

stagnated, causing skin diseases for many residents in the
area (Fernandez, 2019).
A more effective way of making people understand the
effects of the destruction of the ecosystem is to enable them
to see what is really happening in the ground (Fernandez &
Villaluz, 2017). It is crucial to educate people, especially the
youth, that the natural environment is an integral aspect of
sustaining their needs and preventing natural disasters from
happening in the future. It is each person's moral
responsibility to take good care of the environment so that
they could also benefit from the things that nature gives to
them.
Moreover, Filipinos need to take care of their forests
since Philippine forests have already been grossly exploited
for decades. Failure to do so would be detrimental to the
country since said overexploitation has been going on at a
much faster pace. We have to do our share in protecting and
conserving what is left of their country's natural
environment. It is of utmost importance that people have to
know that care for the natural environment contributes to
health, wellbeing, and sustainable development (Fernandez
& Bande, 2018).
RAINFORESTATION: A WAY OF CARING FOR THE NATURAL

ENVIRONMENT
Since the natural environment has been grossly

exploited for years, it is high time for humans to care for it.
There is a need to care for nature since experience has proven
that nature's wrath is fatal when unleased. Hence, to address
this problem, people have strived to find ways to care for the
natural environment. One of the innovations that have been
conceptualized and implemented to address the gross
environmental exploitation is the technology called

Rainforestation.
Rainforestation is the answer to the problem of
rehabilitating denuded lands (Fernandez & Bande, 2019).
The Visayas State University introduced Rainforestation in
the early 1990s as a technology designed to use unproductive
lands by planting native tree species that were not widely
used in the Philippine government's reforestation program
(Milan & Ceniza, 2009). This technology found its way to
Visayas State University in 1990. The Philippine-German
Applied Tropical Ecology Project started to look into
possibilities of rehabilitating formerly forested areas to
reclaim the ecological functions of the degraded areas
needed for poverty alleviation through sustainable rural
development. This program was designed to promote
biodiversity rehabilitation, conservation of remaining
primary forests and natural resources, and the development
of a closed canopy and high diversity forest farming system
called Rainforestation. The program's directives were
formulated so that Rainforestation could replace the
widespread slash-and-burn practices and protect and
enhance biodiversity by using indigenous trees only. In
1994, the hypothesis was formulated that a farming system
in the humid tropics would increasingly be more sustainable
the closer it was in the species composition to the original
local rainforest (Goltenbot, 2005). With this, the ecological
functions of a given ecosystem were re-established, while
subsistence farmers were provided with a stable and long-
term income.
Since the 1990s, groups and individual adopters have
successfully benefitted from the results of Rainforestation.
For instance, four individuals from the Visayas have taken
the initiative of adopting Rainforestation for a variety of
motives. Mr. Manuel Posas, from Barangay Marcos, Baybay
City, Leyte had not hesitated to plant his less than a hectare
grassland with native trees following the framework of

Rainforestation in the early 1990s. He worked to take care
of it, and as years passed, the once grassland has presently
become a vibrant forest with Philippine native trees in it. The
former grassland was dry and arid at the beginning. After
fifteen years, a water source emerged from the site, which
made water available for him and his relatives all year round.
Not only that, but Mr. Posas also planted fruit trees such as
Lanzones, Durian, Rambutan, Langka together with his
native trees when he started way back then. Hence at present,
Mr. Posas does not only have water; he has also earned extra
income from the sales of the surplus harvest of his fruit trees
(Fernandez & Bande, 2019).
Aside from individual adopters, there were also group
adopters of Rainforestation technology. One of them was the
Nakahiusang Katawhan sa Esperanza (NAKASE) in Pilar,
Camotes Island, Cebu. The organization was formed in 1996
and had then engaged themselves in raising native tree
seedlings for reforestation purposes. Their active
involvement in Rainforestation innovation took off in 2008
when the group was commissioned by Mayor Eufracio
"Dodong" Maratas to initially reforest the watershed areas in
the island to address the dwindling water supply, especially
during the dry season. The organization was again
commissioned by the Philippines' Department of
Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) to raise native
tree seedlings for the department's National Greening
Program (NGP), which enabled them to earn from their
environmental activities. NAKASE was also able to reforest
more than three hundred hectares of land by the year 2014
(Fernandez and Fernandez, 2020). Mayor Maratas' vision of
mainstreaming upland and lowland collaboration to involve
many constituencies, including women and children, had
worked well for him. It had instilled in their consciousness
the significance of environmental conservation to one's life.
Lastly, Rainforestation, as an environmental

conservation innovation, also protects human beings from
infectious diseases brought about by wild animals
(Fernandez & Bande, 2020). With deforestation, wild
animals lost their homes and dispersed to areas where people
are living. There, they came in contact with domesticated
animals, which also had close contact with humans. Since
the virus from wild animals was passed on to domesticated
animals, it mutated and became contagious to humans.
However, if forests are kept intact, there would be fewer
chances for wild animals to disperse to communities; thus,
there will be fewer chances for infectious diseases to be
transmitted.
Rainforestation has been designed to reforest denuded
lands and bring back lost ecosystems, but it has also served
to contain wild animals with the potential to contain viruses
in their bodies (Fernandez & Bande, 2020). This only shows
that human beings have to do their part to care for the
environment and forests to sustain the basic ecosystem
services that the environment provides.
THE NATURAL ENVIRONMENT AND HUMAN BEINGS’

ATTAINMENT OF PEACE
The wellbeing of the natural environment is crucial to

human beings’ attainment of peace. It is evident that when
Mother Nature unleashes her fury, many people are affected
in a variety of negative ways. For example, when there is
heavy rain for hours, many places will be flooded, which
makes people's lives difficult, especially the poor.
To live peacefully, people should also leave Mother
Nature in peace so that there will be peaceful co-existence
between them. Take the peasants, for example. As people
belonging to society's lower stratum, they have strived to live
peaceful lives in their relationship with the natural
environment since their lives are intertwined with it. They

regard their lives as part of nature; hence, they have
endeavored to be in harmony with it rather than to have
mastery over it. For them, the natural environment is not an
object to be utilized without any sense of purpose. Nature
has human-like characteristics and can also reciprocate the
kind of treatment they have towards it. The natural
environment follows the law of reciprocity whereby any
good deed done to it is justly and equally compensated
(Fernandez, 2019).
Since these farmers take good care of the natural
environment, nature has also given them abundant yields and
harvests. This is a manifestation of justice. According to
Gabriel Marcel, justice always has something to do with the
humanity of laws and the totality of man's existential
relationship and the natural environment (Fieser & Dowden,
n.d.). Not only that, since these farmers live in a close-knit
farming community, they also value their relationship with
their neighbors and their fellowmen. By having good inter-
personal relationships with other community members, they
enjoy a sense of inner peace that enables them to live happy
and quiet lives (Fernandez, 2019).
THE HUMAN PERSON AND CLIMATE JUSTICE
One sad reality of the effects of the natural

environment's behavior on humankind is that the most
affected are those who have almost nothing to do with the
abusive practices towards Mother Nature. With strong
cyclones hitting many Global South countries, it is unjust
that some people suffer from the consequences of the
economic activities of rich and highly industrialized
countries. This is where climate justice becomes relevant
and important. According to Simon Caney (2020), there is
overwhelming evidence that human activities are changing
the climate system. The emission of greenhouse gases results

in increased temperatures, rising sea levels, and severe
weather events (such as storm surges).
These climatic changes raise several issues of justice,
such as a) how to assess the impacts of climate change, b)
what climate responsibilities current generations have to
future generations, c) how political actors ought to take into
account the risks and uncertainties involved in climate
projections, and d) who takes responsibility in addressing
climate change (Caney, 2020).
It cannot be emphasized enough that human beings need
to think deeply and decide to do something that can mitigate
climate change. As rational beings, human beings should do
the things that can bring welfare to their fellow human
beings with regard to climate justice. In particular, people
who have a say in government and corporate policies should
be concerned about climate justice since it affects a
significant number of the world's population. As moral
agents, it is their responsibility to decide what is right even
if their behavior and decisions are influenced by the culture
of global corporations (Gallinero, et al., 2018).
CONCLUSION
The human person is not an entity that could not live and
survive on its own. He/she needs supporting mechanisms to
enable him/her to live and enjoy life to the fullest. One of
these important life-supporting mechanisms is the natural
environment. The services that Mother Nature gives to
humankind are free and irreplaceable. Yet, human persons
have just taken Mother Nature for granted for quite some
time now. Nevertheless, there is always the good side of
human beings. Though they may have contributed to the
destruction of the natural environment, they also have the
power to preserve, conserve, and restore Nature to its

pristine state.
Insofar as human persons are rational beings and can
distinguish good from evil, they could always channel such
powers to save the natural environment. After all, it is not
too late to save what is left of the natural environment. With
the harmonious co-existence of the human persons with the
natural environment, the path of attaining personal inner
peace, health, wellbeing, and sustainable development
would no longer be impossible to attain.
ASSESSMENT
1. As a student, how could you express acts towards the

natural environment manifesting enlightened
Anthropocentrism?
2. Is the philosophy of “deep ecology” still possible to
practice given this pluralistic and materialistic society?
3. What is your take on Rainforestation as a conservation
innovation designed to express human beings’ care for
Mother Nature? Expound your answer.
4. In your understanding, in what ways can the natural
environment disrupt the experience of peace among
people? Explain your answer.
5. Explain how you understand the notion of climate justice.
LEARNING OBJECTIVES
1. To realize that the human person is free and all actions
have consequences
2. To appreciate and exercise prudence in one’s choices
3. To show situations that demonstrate freedom of choice
and the consequences of their choices
4. To become a responsible and authentic person in the
exercise of freedom
56 Freedom of the Human Person
INTRODUCTION
When the COVID-19 pandemic affected your

hometown, you most probably experienced several
quarantine measures. You are prohibited from moving
anywhere you like. You are obliged to wear your facemask.
And you have to physically distance yourself from others to
stop the spread of the virus.
In the scenario above, are you free? Do you know the
consequences of your actions whenever you choose to do
something during the quarantine period? How responsible
are you in your choice of action?
Generally, people want to exercise their freedom.
Nobody likes to be forced to do things, be imprisoned in an
unwanted place, or be stuck in a miserable situation.
However, when we think about freedom deeply, we realize
there are problems with its nature that we are not aware of.
The classic problem of freedom is whether there is
freedom or not. This is the controversy between freedom and
determinism. Some people believe that we are free, while
others believe that our behavior is predetermined. That is to
say, our past actions predict our future behavior.
Determinism rejects the idea of freedom because, according
to this theory, human behavior is determined by many
factors, such as history, socio-economic context, and
physiological makeup, among others.
There is also another problem with freedom. If we
assume that human beings have freedom, is it limited or
absolute? Some people gladly embrace the idea that a human
person can do anything he/she wants to do, while others
believe that there are certain limitations on what humans can
do. When we are in a situation where we cannot do the things
we want, we seem to think that freedom is limited. There are
many other issues concerning the concept of freedom, but

one thing is certain: freedom is essential in a human person.
DISCUSSION
FREEDOM
As a human person, freedom is vital to human existence.

Aside from reason, what distinguishes human beings from
animals is freedom. Birds and other wild creatures are said
to be free, but do they choose what they do? When dogs poop
on the street, it is nonsense to question their 'responsibility'
because they do not have the same freedom and
responsibility humans have. Indeed, only human beings have
the capacity to choose, to be free from and to be free for.
In this chapter, we’ll draw some ideas of freedom from
Jean-Paul Sartre. One of his famous maxims is that “man is
condemned to be free.” For him, the concept of freedom is
ontological. That is to say, it focuses on the study of being.
The human person for Sartre has no essence or intrinsic
nature. Rather, he creates his/her own essence. In short, the
human person is freedom.
Freedom is the very being of the human person (as
being-for-itself), and "to be free" does not mean "to obtain
what one has wished" but rather "by oneself to determine
oneself to wish" (Sartre, 1965). This means that a person
cannot escape from freedom. He cannot choose not to be free
because not choosing is even a choice. Not doing anything
is actually choosing to do something, and that is doing
nothing. For example, when you enroll yourself in college,
you were faced with many choices of degree programs.
Perhaps your parents or friends told you what course to take.
Later on, when you found out that you do not like your
chosen course, you may say that it was not your choice in the
first place and claim that others pressured you. What you are
trying to say is that you were not free during the time of
decision-making.
For Sartre, even when somebody tells you what program
to take, you cannot deny that it is you who chose the degree
program in the end. In short, you are free what to choose. In
this case, what you chose for yourself was the choice of your
parents or friends.
Is the freedom of the human person limited? For Sartre,
the limitation of freedom is a product of our being conscious
of things; it is our choice of limitation. For example, when
you go to a mall which is located in a city that is very far
from your place, you may think that you are not free to go
there because you do not have money or you are busy with
your studies. The limitation that you think does not limit
freedom itself. Why? It is because you are still the one who
chooses that limitation. In other words, you decide to limit
yourself with those factors and that very fact means that you
are free to choose in any way. You think that those factors
can hinder you from going there. Even so, you still cannot
deny that you choose to think that way. Most often, we stop
thinking and creating possibilities, so we immediately say
that we are not free. Why do people say that poverty is not a
hindrance to success? And why do people blame poverty for
being unsuccessful? There are unlimited choices for the
person to think, but what limits is the thought of limiting our
actions.
Taylor Carman (2019) explains the example of Sartre in
a situation where the person is seemingly confronted with an
obstacle. When a person climbs up the mountain and
encounters a boulder, that person would see it as an obstacle
and perhaps say that the mountain is not climbable.
However, the obstacle in front of the person is only a
limitation as far as the person's goal is concerned, that is, to
climb up the mountain. For another person who may also
encounter the same boulder and who does not have the same
goal of climbing the mountain, he/she may see the boulder

as an ugly thing, but not an obstacle. In this case, the seeming
limitation of freedom is an outward expression of freedom,
that is, the person's choosing of goal in climbing the
mountain. Freedom is still present in that situation where you
can see that the person still chooses how he/she sees the
boulder. Of course, the boulder becomes either an obstacle
or anything else because the person has chosen a certain
goal.
For instance, in the case of fatigue or any physiological
challenges, fatigue is not a choice. The choice lies in what
the person does with it. How? When the person stops
walking, stopping is the choice but not the natural
occurrence of the physiological fatigue. However, one has to
note that fatigue can also be the consequence of a pre-choice.
That is to say, it is only a result of what has been chosen
before, such as taking a walk or climbing the mountain with
the given physical condition.
The only thing that the person cannot be free is not being
free. Not choosing is still choosing. This sounds paradoxical.
In that case, is it acceptable to do whatever one wants? Well,
whatever you do, you are free. Does this mean that one can
take an enemy's life? This question sounds alarming,
especially when the justification is that the said enemy is a
criminal. In this case, is the person still free to do the act?
There is no denial of freedom here. However, being free also
means being responsible. We should never forget the
concept of responsibility when talking about freedom.
RESPONSIBILITY
When people talk about freedom, what is being

emphasized is how a person is free. However, for Sartre,
when there is freedom, there is responsibility. We have
established that the person is freedom, and that is, he/she
cannot escape from freedom, he/she cannot do away with

responsibility. The absolute responsibility of the person is
freedom itself.
Sartre defines responsibility as the "consciousness (of)
being the incontestable author of an event or an object
(Sartre, 1993). When a person is free, the person is also
responsible. Whatever the person chooses, he/she is the
author of the choice. For instance, Laura stays at home
because she does not want to get infected with the virus.
Laura's choice to stay is a manifestation that she is free. Is
she free when, in fact, there is a policy to stay at home? Of
course, she is free because she chooses to stay or to follow
the policy. She is the author now of her choice to stay at
home. In other words, her responsibility is her free choice. If
she owns her choice and does not deny that she truly is free
to make such a decision, she is responsible.
To understand the concept of responsibility is to
recognize freedom. For this reason, Sartre argues that the
person is condemned to be free. He explains that when a
person chooses, he/she chooses himself/herself because, as
implied earlier, the choices make the person what he/she is.
Sartre adds that when "man chooses his own self, we mean
that every one of us does likewise; but we also mean that he
also chooses all men in making this choice." Everyone
wants to choose the good, not evil, which cannot be good
without being good for all. This means therefore that the
person consequently carries the load of the world. Sartre
says,
Furthermore, this absolute responsibility is not

resignation; it is simply the logical requirement of
the consequences of freedom. What happens to me
happens through me, and I can neither affect myself
with it nor revolt against it nor resign myself to it.
Moreover, everything that happens to me is mine.

(Sartre, 1965)
Responsibility is being the owner of one's choice. Many

clamor for freedom or demand that they should be given
absolute freedom. However, we forget that being free comes
with responsibility. Some people, however, disown their
freedom, thereby neglecting their responsibility. They forget
that their choices have consequences.
AUTHENTICITY
Before we explain the meaning of authenticity, let us

first understand what bad faith (or to be irresponsible)
means. For Sartre, bad faith is a self-deception. It is the
denial of one's freedom. When you chose your college
course, and later on, deny that you chose it and instead
accuse your parents or friends of choosing it for you, you are
in denial of your freedom. In his explanation of bad faith,
David Weberman (2011) notes:
It is worth noting that bad faith, as described by

Sartre, is not an uncommon occurrence. How often
do we deny or overlook the fact we are not truly
trapped by circumstances but are indeed much more
free than we are inclined to believe and more
responsible for our lives than we might like to
admit? And how often do we deny or fail to
appreciate that many of the unpleasant things in our
lives are simply beyond our control?
It is often easier for us to deny what we do than to claim

our own choice, especially when the consequences are not in
our favor. Blaming other people for the misery we choose
(or for the consequence of our choice) is a manifestation of
irresponsibility because it deceives us that our freedom has

nothing to do with it. We forget that our circumstance is also
the product of our free choice. Again, responsibility is about
owning our choices, and the consequences of our choice are
covered in that responsibility. When we believe that the
action we choose is the only choice we have, we are being
inauthentic.
Authenticity refers to being honest with oneself, which
is, being truly free. To be authentic is to project what a
person is in relation to his/her own choosing, rather than
trying to be somebody else other than what he/she is. This
also means that when being true to oneself, he/she accepts
the responsibility of freedom. The person is conscious of the
choices and actions, and so he/she cannot deny the
consequences. He/she becomes what he/she is according to
his/her own choosing – that is the consequence of his/her
freedom – and so he/she creates the meaning of his/her
human life. Facing the consequences means being authentic
because the person does not escape from his responsibilities.
When you copy your classmate's assignment because
you think the task is hard, and when your teacher catches and
reprimands you, you immediately defend yourself by saying
that you have no choice during that time. Saying that you are
left with no choice is bad faith, which means you are not true
to yourself. You could have other options other than copying
from your classmate. In this case, you are not authentic since
you deny the other possible choices that you could have
taken. People tend to blame the situation they are in. This
'blame game' does not show one's authenticity and
responsibility.
FREEDOM AND CONSEQUENCES
It must be clear now that because of freedom, the

consequences of our actions are inevitable. Let us look at the
situation at the beginning, where you experience the

quarantine protocols due to the COVID-19 pandemic.
Staying at home to avoid getting infected with the virus is a
matter of choice. As a human person who is freedom, one
may look at the situation as something that limits his/her
choices. However, looking at the quarantine protocols as a
hindrance shows that the person is not limited in interpreting
the protocols. This only means that even during the
pandemic period, the person is still free (ontologically).
Besides staying at home, one can also enumerate many
activities he/she can do at home. Of course, violating the
protocols could be one option. Nevertheless, when one
violates the rules as a matter of free choice, he/she cannot
escape from the responsibility of the consequences.
Moreover, when he/she excuses himself/herself by telling
the authorities that he/she has no choice left, he/she is guilty
of denying his/her freedom. So, what should the person do?
First of all, the person has to commit himself to a certain
goal. What is his/her direction? What is his/her choice of
action? From there, the person can evaluate the possible
choices that he/she may take to reach that goal. Anything the
person chooses becomes part of the self. Secondly, choosing
oneself is also choosing all human persons. When one
chooses, he chooses his/her world, and that world includes
other people and the environment. Lastly, the consequences
of the choice are inevitable. The fact that all other human
beings are freedoms, they also react or choose from the result
of your choosing. One must always be ready to face what
lies ahead, which means he/she has to be responsible for
his/her choices.
The freedom of the human is paradoxically a gift and a
burden at the same time. It is a gift because it makes us what
we are, but it is also a burden because it makes us anxious
for not escaping freedom and responsibility.
CONCLUSION
There can be no doubt that freedom is crucial in a human

person. Despite the philosophical debates on freedom, it
remains vital in human life. Freedom always goes with
responsibility. No matter how free the person is, he/she must
be responsible for his/her freedom. Then, born with freedom
and responsibility, a human person may become an authentic
human being, a true person who consciously chooses his/her
action and courageously face the consequences. Therefore,
individual freedom involves the world and freedom of other
individuals, and that leads us to the idea of intersubjectivity.
ASSESSMENT
Read and understand carefully the tasks below. Follow the

tasks mindfully.
A
1. Set your goal in life. You may choose your goal as a
student, as a child, or just as a human person.
2. List down five (5) concrete actions that will help you reach
your chosen goal.
3. For each concrete action, list down all possible
consequences. The more list of consequences, the better.
4. In at least one paragraph, explain how you will face all the
challenges of the consequences.
B
1. Choose one person whom you think is successful in life
amidst a difficult challenge.
2. Ask permission to interview the person and record your
interview. Inquire what the successful person has done to
overcome the challenges and achieve his/her goal.
3. Write your report in a dialogue format.
4. Next to the written dialogue, write your reflection based

on the interview in relation to the freedom of the human
person.
LEARNING OBJECTIVES
1. To understand that intersubjectivity requires accepting
differences and not imposing things on others
2. To appreciate the talents of persons with disabilities and
those from the underprivileged sectors of society
3. To realize that engaging in an authentic dialogue requires
accepting others even if they are different from one’s self
4. To realize that the other has a self of his own, therefore a
subject
INTRODUCTION
Do you agree that before helping others, one should help

oneself first? When we help others, are we not helping
ourselves too? Meanwhile, can a person live alone, or is
“being alone” only an idea?
In this Chapter, we will try to acquaint ourselves with
the idea of intersubjectivity. Intersubjectivity deals with the
human person as a subject in relation to an other. You will
be introduced to some philosophers who emphasized the
idea of the "subject" as a being who recognizes the other.
The "other" here refers to the other person, such as a
neighbor, stranger, or simply another subject than the self.
However, the other does not only pertain to a human being.
It could refer to other beings, inanimate or animate, such as
animals, plants, or the environment.
Furthermore, as we familiarize ourselves with the
different ideas of intersubjectivity, it is best also to prepare
ourselves to become the subject in question since
intersubjectivity does not only point to the other but also, and
most importantly, to the "self" that recognizes it. In other
words, the self in relation to the other is also a pivotal topic
for a better understanding of the other.
Here are the three philosophers with their central ideas:
Paul Ricoeur’s “Oneself as Another-Selfhood”, Martin
Buber’s “I and Thou”, and Emmanuel Levinas’ “Philosophy
of the Other.”
PAUL RICOEUR
Man is this plural and collective unity in which the unity of

destination and the differences of destinies are to be
understood through each other (Ricoeur, 1986)
68 Intersubjectivity
Ricoeur’s complete name is Jean-Paul Gustave Ricoeur.

He was born on February 27, 1913, at Valence, France and
he died on May 20, 2005, at Châtenay-Malabry. He is a
French philosopher and historian who studied various
linguistic and psychoanalytic theories of interpretation. Even
a glimpse of Ricoeur's life, one could sense the breadth of
his philosophy, particularly his contribution to Hermeneutics
or the art of interpretation.
How is the philosophy of Ricoeur connected to the
concept of intersubjectivity? Ricoeur accentuated the idea of
a “text”. He said that the world now becomes discoverable,
not behind the text but in front of the text, then the work
unfolds, discovers, and reveals. He continues that for one to
understand is to understand oneself in front of a text. In other
words, the text is necessary for the development of the self
and paves the way to discover the world. Through
hermeneutics, one can be a better version of himself. The
realization of the development of the self presupposes that a
reader of a text will realize to be a good and responsible
person, not only for himself but for others (Ricoeur, 2008).
Ricoeur may not have seemed to be so sympathetic
concerning the “other” in his works. Still, Ricoeur has
underlined the idea of the self in his book Oneself as
Another. For him, if one stretches out the idea of the self or
self-hood, one cannot exclude the idea of the other.
Consequently, oneself implies such an ostensible event that
one cannot be thought of without the other. In other words,
oneself has its title as a self because of the other. This
thought is not a comparison between the self and the other,
rather this is an illustration of the subject and intersubject
that, there is an implication that oneself is similar to another
or oneself since being other (Ricoeur, 1994).
As mentioned above, something cannot be called a self
without the other. This scenario does not necessarily demand
a comparison nor a competition between the two. The reality
of the self and the other does not compromise each other’s
representativeness. Ricoeur’s idea of the self brought
Descartes’ famous dictum “I think, therefore, I am” into the
limelight. Rene Descartes is a philosopher who lived during
the Scientific Revolution, the era of rapid advances in the
sciences. He is best known for his "Methodic doubt" and the
concept of the "Cogito". Since we are employing Descartes
here, it is best to know some of his essential works in
philosophy, i.e., the "thinking being" and the self. For
Descartes, man can doubt everything except the self. Using
doubt as a standpoint, one can attain knowledge and
certainty. When talking about the self, "I think, therefore, I
am" means that man is a thinking being, and that a thinking
being exists (Ricoeur, 1994).
Even in one of Descartes' seminal works, Meditations,
it has been written in first-person to emphasize that it is his
journey, the self's journey. Descartes lived his philosophy of
the self, and in this manner, the reader of his work is brought
to a meditation and reflection. The book reminds us of
Socrates' way of philosophizing, which leads the interlocutor
to a better understanding of things. The purpose of
discussing Descartes' ideas here is to emphasize the
importance of the self. If one knows the self well,
understands the self, then the act of reaching out for others
is not a farfetched reality (Ricoeur, 1994).
Taking into account the subject-self paves the way for
understanding the idea of the other. The self is present
because the other presupposes as a being that also recognizes
not only oneself but also the self of the other human persons.
Thus, to realize the existence of the self serves as an impetus
for reaching out to others. The self does not necessarily
mirror the other; rather it recognizes that the other also has a
self of its own.
This kind of realization broadens the horizon of not only
having a solipsistic point of view of survival. One has also
to learn to take care of the self to take care of the self of the
other. Selfishness can be a temporary phase may lead one to
become a selfless human being the moment he/she realizes
the other.
MARTIN BUBER
The content and relation of these two worlds is the theme of

I and Thou. The other person, the Thou, is shown to be a
reality – that is- it is given to me, but it is not bounded by me.
(Martin Buber, 1923)
Martin Buber was born on February 8, 1878, and died on

June 13, 1965. He is a prolific writer, author, scholar, and
political activist. His works were mostly written in German
and Hebrew, like the Jewish mysticism to social philosophy,
biblical studies, and phenomenology.
Among his many works, the most celebrated and
influential is the I and Thou (1923). This book provides us
with his ideas concerning intersubjectivity. Buber
differentiates the "I and It" and the "I and Thou." The I-It
relationship points to the existence of the self and its relation
to an other, which is not necessarily a human being, e.g.,
plants, animals, and objects. On the other hand, the I-Thou
relationship points to the existence of the self and its relation
to an other entity that has a human self, that is, another
human being, or simply the "other". This I-Thou relationship
presupposes that each participant is concerned for each other
and each person turns fully and equally towards the other
with openness and ethical engagement. It is important to
know that this kind of relationship is characterized by
dialogue and by "total-presentness". For Buber, honoring the
other not because of its usefulness is of paramount priority
and importance (Buber, 2012).
Buber maintains the importance of the relationship of

person to person. The assumption here is that one's existence
is situated and enclosed, thus contained in a group existence.
This existence is heightened by the act of dialogue, leading
to the realization of total-presentness. Moreover, it is said
that the I and Thou relationship presupposes the silver lining
in every difficult situation. For example, a woman who
washes dishes for a living is reflected as a strong
independent woman or a mother who is optimistic that her
family can survive despite the difficulties that life could
possibly offer (Friedman & Buber, 1967).
The philosophy of dialogue pours much concern on
wholeness, decision, presentness, and uniqueness. These
boil down to the question of the authenticity of the self or
authentic existence. For Buber, one becomes a person by
engaging or entering into a relationship with a Thou.
“One cannot be human at all except in the I-Thou

relation. But it is quite possible to be human without
being fully human, to fall short of realizing what we
might, of authenticating one's own humanity, and
that is where the normative grows imperceptibly out
of the descriptive. Valuing is the growing point of
human existence because we live in the present
pointed toward the future, aware of possibilities,
having to make decisions between "better" and
"worse," having to create our own future through
our response to the day-by-day address of
existence” (Friedman & Buber, 1967).
To know how to address human existence vis-à-vis the

self's existence is the key to achieving the state of being fully
human. If the self is only at the play of discovering his own
existence, he might fall short in becoming fully human.
However, if the self engages with others and enters into an
I-Thou relationship, becoming fully human becomes a

reality. The pursuit of becoming truly human is attained in
the I and Thou relationship.
EMMANUEL LÉVINAS
To approach the Other in conversation is to welcome his

expression, in which at each instant he overflows the idea a
thought would carry away from it. Therefore, it is to receive
from the Other beyond the capacity of the I, which means
exactly: to have the idea of infinity. But this also means: to
be taught (Emmanuel Levinas, 1979).
Emmanuel Levinas was born December 30, 1905,

Kaunas, Lithuania and died on December 25, 1995, in Paris,
France). He is a Lithuanian-born French philosopher
renowned for his powerful critique of ontology's
preeminence in the history of Western philosophy (Huxley,
2002).
For Levinas, “Ethics is the first philosophy because it is
only by acknowledging the command in the ‘face’ of the
other that we can account for the sensitivity to the normative
distinctions that structure intentional content.” (Crowell,
2015). Thus, the human person is intentionally directed to
the world; and in the face of the other, he/she does not find
superiority over the other. Ethics calls for a vivid and wide
scope of responsibility towards the other.
This idea of intersubjectivity presupposes the equality
and inclusiveness of every individual. For instance, in a
classroom setting where most armchairs are designed only
for a right-handed person, being responsible for the other
presupposes that the left-handed students will also be
provided with armchairs that are purposefully built for them.
This way, these students will not feel outcasted from the
majority. Also, those malls and parking lots where ramps for
wheelchairs intended for Persons with disabilities are

provided to demonstrate such responsibility for the other.
These examples show that the other's concern and
responsibility are expressed not only in words but, most
importantly, translated into concrete actions.
For Levinas, one should go out of the self and see the
vulnerable in the face of the other. He challenges the notion
of the idealistic transcendental “ego” as man's ultimate goal.
For him, one should not focus on the question of being's
essence, but rather which responsibility has it awoken to. He
continues that this is no longer considered as justification,
rather construed as an ethical response to the other (J. Cohen,
2012).
Levinas encourages to go out from the self and opens
one's heart and mind to see the face of the vulnerable other.
This means that recognizing the sense of responsibility is the
paramount priority in engaging oneself with the other. If one
sees a homeless, he/she should think of giving alms.
Although some may believe that there are people who do not
deserve to be helped, especially if these individuals have
wronged and caused them pain, these kinds of situation
require sincerity to be responsible for others. In other words,
being responsible is taking care for the others.
This “other” that we have been discussing is not limited
to the other person. The other does not only mean the alterity
of the self or as the other person, but also those who are weak
and vulnerable whose existence is interconnected with the
environment. Levinas asserts that “the Other's ‘exteriority’
does not consist in the difference between my appearance-
systems and his or hers, but in the Other's ability to call me
(normatively) into question: ‘The presence of the Other is
equivalent to this calling into question of my joyous
possession of the world” (Boorse, 2008).
The self's task is no longer centered on the development
of the self, because the other, in one way or another, affirms
the selfless self. It cannot be emphasized enough that the self

may still want to attain its perfection, but not at the other's
expense.
CONCLUSION
Intersubjectivity includes fundamentally the ideas of the

self and the other. For Ricoeur, as he employed Rene
Descartes in elucidating the concept of the self and other
reiterates, one should learn how to develop oneself before
one reaches out for the other. It is safe to say that, self-care
is the stepping stone for taking care of others. For Buber, he
distinguished the "I and It" and "I and Thou". The former (I-
It) presupposes the interaction of the self with different
things but having a self. In contrast, the latter (I-Thou)
connotes the "other" and must enter into a relationship with
others because reaching out for others leads to becoming a
full human being. For Ricoeur, self-preservation seems to be
our task, but on the contrary, for Levinas, we should go out
of ourselves to see the vulnerable in the face of the other.
The responsibility towards the other is the key concept of his
philosophy.
The philosophy of Ricoeur, Buber, and Levinas
prepares the human person for society as he goes out of his
comfort zones. The next chapter will broaden our
understanding of the subject-the human person as part of a
bigger picture called society.
ASSESSMENT
Explain in your own words your understanding of the

following lines of the philosophers.
1. Man is this plural and collective unity in which the unity

of destination and the differences of destinies are to be
understood through each other (Paul Ricoeur).
2. The content and relation of these two worlds is the theme
of I and Thou. The other person, the Thou, is shown to be
a reality – that is- it is given to me, but it is not bounded
by me (Martin Buber).
3. To approach the Other in conversation is to welcome his
expression, in which at each instant he overflows the idea
a thought would carry away from it. It is therefore to
receive from the Other beyond the capacity of the I, which
means exactly: to have the idea of infinity. But this also
means: to be taught (Emmanuel Levinas).
LEARNING OBJECTIVES
1. To understand the concept of society according to its
characterizations in different moments of history
2. To learn the characteristics that make human persons as
social beings
3. To reflect on the importance of harmoniously relating
with others, particularly from people from the local
fishing and farming communities
4. To show respect for the others regardless of their
gender, race, social status and beliefs
INTRODUCTION
The human person is a being who does not exist only

for itself or (himself or herself) but a being that is naturally
destined to relate with others in society. Though the human
person has the freedom to do otherwise, there is that natural
penchant to be drawn to be with others. This tendency of the
human person has been documented through the course of
history. Nevertheless, the history of humankind has also
manifested many atrocities between and among human
persons. This chapter is designed to make students realize
that for the human person to fully actualize himself/herself
fully, it is more advantageous for them to live harmoniously
with others as they live in the midst of society. Self-
actualization does not mean the destruction of others but
rather a process of immersing oneself with others to make
each one better, happy and contented members of society.
Drawing inspiration from the experiences of people from the
margins, the fisherfolks and farmers, this chapter aims to
make students realize that as they live in a society, they also
have roles to play to actualize themselves fully to live a life
worth living together with others in their respective
communities.
DISCUSSION
There is an old saying that says, "No Man is an Island."

This statement may be questionable to some since there are
individuals who chose to distance themselves from others.
However, human beings always tend to relate with other
groups and individuals, which constitute what is referred to
as a society. Society refers to individuals' voluntary
association for common ends, especially an organized
group working together or periodically meeting because of
common interests, beliefs, or profession. “A society is a
78 The Human Person in the Society
group of interacting individuals sharing the same territory

and participating in a culture,’ and thus, “a society is any
organisation that enables people to carry on a common
life” (Lund, 1979).
PLATO’S CONCEPT OF SOCIETY
Plato has argued that societies are invariably formed for

a particular purpose. Individual human beings are not self-
sufficient; no one working alone can acquire all of the
genuine necessities of life. In order to resolve this difficulty,
human beings gather together into communities for the
mutual achievement of their common goals. This succeeds
because people can work more efficiently if they specialize
in the practice of a specific craft: I make all of the shoes; you
grow all of the vegetables; she does all of the carpentry, etc.
Thus, Plato held that separation of functions and
specialization of labor are the keys to establishing a
worthwhile society (Martin, 2017).
Plato envisions that a society should be divided into
three social classes, namely, a) the producing class, which
includes the farmers, merchants and laborers/workers, b) the
soldier class, which comprises the warriors, and c) the ruling
class, which includes philosopher-thinkers as well as rulers
and kings who are selected to lead the entire society.
COMTE’S THREE STAGES OF A GLOBAL SOCIETY
In the modern period, the sociologist Auguste Comte,

like Plato, also places differentiating factors in the concept
of society. But unlike Plato, who divided society into three
social classes, Comte argues that there are different stages of
the development of a global society. The first and earliest
stage is called the theological stage. Starting at the very
beginning of human beings and social groups, Comte
believes that in this stage, people viewed the world and the
events in that world as a direct expression of the will of
various gods. In other words, ancient people believed that
everything around them was a sign of active gods
influencing their lives. For example, ancient people actually
believed that planets were gods in the sky, looking down on
Earth. Even the sun was part of the world of the gods; ancient
Greeks believed the sun was one wheel on the massive
chariot steered by Apollo. If something bad happened, like
when a community experienced bad weather or
an earthquake, people in the theological stage would explain
that such an event was a result of god’s anger to the people.
In short, the theological stage meant that people used
supernatural or divine explanations to understand society
and the world (Comte's 3 Stages of Society & Theory of
Positivism, 2013). This is one of the reasons why ancient
people built temples and churches. They were intended to
honor the Supreme Being whom people perceived as
"Greater than themselves".
Comte's second stage of society is called
the metaphysical stage. Comte argues that this stage started
around the Middle Ages in Europe, or somewhere around the
1300s. In the metaphysical stage of society, people viewed
the world and events as natural reflections of human
tendencies. People in this stage still believed in divine
powers or gods, but they believed that these beings were
more abstract and less directly involved in what happens
daily. Instead, problems in the world were due to defects in
humanity. An example of a kind of thinking in this stage was
the belief that the planets were physical objects in space but
that they influenced people's lives via astrology. The idea
here was that societies still believed in some supernatural or
magical aspects of life, but they were also rooted in the
concrete parts of life (ibid.).
The third stage of society refers to the positive stage.

This stage is when the mind stops searching for the causes
of phenomena and realizes that laws exist to govern human
behavior, which can be explained using reason and
observation, both of which are used to study the social world.
This stage relies on science, rational thought, and empirical
laws. Comte believes that sociology is "the science that
[comes] after all the others; and as the final science, it must
assume the task of coordinating the development of the
whole of knowledge because it organizes all of human
behaviour" (Delaney, 2003).
There have been a variety of views that attempt to define
the essence of a society. Yet, of all these different views,
there is one common entity that is involved in the idea –
human beings. When one thinks of society, the idea cannot
stand without humans being involved since we are, after all,
social beings.
THE HUMAN PERSON AS A SOCIAL BEING
Aristotle, the Greek philosopher, writes, “Man is a

social animal. He who lives without society is either a
beast or God” (Jowett, 1885). Every human being is
presumably social and always has the penchant for relating
to others. As humans connect with each other, such relation
is accompanied by responsibility. An example is the parable
of the Good Samaritan. This story captures human beings'
imagination on who their neighbors are or the extent to
which they are responsible. Here is a scripture passage from
Luke 10: 25-37.
Just then, a lawyer stood up to test Jesus. ‘Teacher,’

he said, ‘what must I do to inherit eternal life?’ He
said to him, ‘What is written in the law? What do
you read there?’ He answered, ‘You shall love the
Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your
soul, and with all your strength, and with all your
mind; and your neighbor as yourself.’ And, he said
to him, 'You have given the right answer; do this,
and you will live.'
But wanting to justify himself, he asked Jesus, ‘And

who is my neighbor?’ Jesus replied, ‘A man was
going down from Jerusalem to Jericho, and fell into
the hands of robbers, who stripped him, beat him,
and went away, leaving him half dead. Now by
chance, a priest was going down that road; and
when he saw him, he passed by on the other side.
So, likewise a Levite, when he came to the place and
saw him, passed by on the other side. But a
Samaritan while traveling came near him; and when
he saw him, he was moved with pity. He went to him
and bandaged his wounds, having poured oil and
wine on them. Then he put him on his own animal,
brought him to an inn, and took care of him. The
next day he took out two denarii, gave them to the
innkeeper, and said, “Take care of him; and when I
come back, I will repay you whatever more you
spend.” Which of these three, do you think, was a
neighbor to the man who fell into the hands of the
robbers?’ He said, ‘The one who showed him
mercy.’ Jesus said to him, ‘Go and do likewise.’
The parable speaks a lot concerning human beings’

relationship with others in any given society. Since humans
are moral subjects, their social nature entails an obligation to
the other. Humans play a vital role in the world and the
unfolding of this world depends upon the meaning that
humans bring into it.
In relation to the story of the Good Samaritan, it can be

noted that before he comes to the rescue of the robbed man,
two others, a priest and a Levite, happened to pass by and
have opted not to save him. It should be noted that Jewish
culture, at that time, looked at dead bodies as unclean.
Hence, a person who touched an unclean body would also
himself become unclean. The priest and the Levite,
presuming that the robbed man was dying, did not take the
risk of helping him, probably afraid that he would die in the
process.
The priest and the Levite could not be blamed for their
actions towards the 'half-dead man' since their society
expects them to avoid getting in contact with unclean objects
like dead bodies and corpses. The act of the Good Samaritan,
on the other hand, is a response based on his nature as a
moral subject. In other words, the Good Samaritan
transcended his society's expectations and did what was
expected of him as a moral person.
BEING FOR OTHERS IN THE LOCAL CONTEXT
The notion of "being for others" can be observed in the

local context, particularly among the fishing and farming
communities in Baybay City, Leyte. For instance, the
members of the fishing community at Sitio Lapawon,
Barangay Santo Rosario demonstrate this through their
notion and practice of Gugma sa Isig ka Tawo. This concept
is understood in connection with pagtambayayong, pagpa-
ambit, and pagsinabtanay. In a fishing community where
homes are built very close to each other, the essence of
“being for others” through good interpersonal relations are
very crucial in achieving, maintaining, and sustaining peace
among people living in the same community.
Gugma sa isig ka tawo translates in English as “love for
others”. The fisherfolks express this in a variety of ways in
relation to their way of life. Since fisherfolks get their source

of livelihood from the sea, their expression of gugma sa isig
ka tawo is concretely manifested in helping and supporting
each other in earning their keep amidst the uncertainties of
what the seas would bring them. Fisherfolks feel assured that
their neighbors are also looking after their own welfare. This
brings peace among fisherfolks since the love present among
them could easily be reciprocated. After all, fisherfolks live
in a close-knit community where everybody knows
everybody. They are a family of people whose common goal
is to live life side by side with the sea. With the presence of
that common goal, the spirit of oneness would eventually
develop which eventually leads to the development of love
for others (Fernandez, 2017).
Among the fisherfolks, pagtambayayong is
synonymous to peace. Pagtambayayong para gaan signifies
the community members’ willingness to extend a helping
hand to a neighbor in need, most especially in times of
distress. In Sitio Lapawon, this manifests in the community’s
collective efforts to put to ground the small fishing boats
from the sea during southwest monsoon wind seasons
(habagat) to ensure that everybody is evacuated from their
homes. It also manifests in their collective effort to rescue
and save a fellow fisherman whose fishing boat capsized in
the open sea during a fishing venture. These actions show
their concern for their fellow human beings, consequently
bringing peace to the community (Fernandez, 2017).
Pagtambayayong is also related to pag-unong sa mga
lisod nga pananahon, which likewise signifies peace. The
community in Sitio Lapawon would do this by standing for
each other in times of dire need. For instance, during
typhoons, every member of the community has to see to it
that no one is left behind during evacuations. During fires
and other disasters, the community members would see to it
that no one will leave unless the concerned person or family
has already received enough help. This brings strength to the

relationship among community members. With this, an
atmosphere of peace prevails in the community (Fernandez,
2017).
Finally, pagsinabtanay among neighbors is a key factor
in attaining peace within the community. Pagsinabtanay
presupposes the existence of an atmosphere where people
manifest a willingness to understand and respect others.
With pagsinabtanay, disturbances to the ambiance of peace
within the community are avoided. This is also achieved by
sharing one's graces and blessings with one another. This is
a manifestation of pagpa-ambit. It nurtures a sense of
connectedness with each other, which greatly contributes to
peace in their community. (Fernandez, 2017).
Moving forward, gugma sa isig ka tawo is also observed
among farmers through their practices of pagtambayayong,
pagsinabtanay, and pagpa-ambit.
For farmers, pagtambayayong means the spirit of
collectively helping each other to make a certain task a little
bit lighter. It takes the form of their willingness to help a
neighbor in his or her task, like harvesting of coconuts,
preparing the field for planting, and transporting copra to the
buying stations. Also, pagtambayayong expresses the
attitude of reciprocating to others what one has done to them
by helping others in their work the moment they need help
from neighbors. It also promotes camaraderie among
farmers and develops good interpersonal relations among
members of the same community. For this reason, bonds
among farmers are strengthened and the attitude to look after
the welfare of each community member is developed. This
leads to the ambiance of peace in the community since
pagtambayaong builds up the spirit of oneness among
farmers (Fernandez, 2017).
For farmers, pagtambayayong is closely connected to
pagpa-ambit. This is the act of sharing what one has to
others. In a farming community, where members are not

materially affluent, acts of sharing naturally strengthen the
bond among community members. Its essence is not so much
on the value of the thing shared, but rather on their
willingness to share what they have to a neighbor. As Lilia
Silongan would put it: “naa ang gugma ug kalinaw sa pakig-
ambit sa mga grasya nga nadawat” (there is love and peace
in the act sharing of the graces one received) (Silongan,
2015). It is natural for farmers to think of pagpa-ambit as
synonymous with peace since it manifests acts of giving,
which also translates to the essence of giving oneself to
others (Fernandez, 2017).
Finally, “being for others” is also expressed in
pagsinabtanay. This is an attitude demonstrating
understanding for each other. It is accompanied by a person's
capacity for tolerance, enabling him/her to weigh things out
before making a decision or an action. This brings peace to
the community since each member tries understand each
other and evaluate things according to their merits. Indeed,
pagtambayayong and pagpa-ambit are concrete expressions
of being for others.
CONCLUSION
This chapter concludes that the human person is an

integral part of the development of a society. Though some
opted to cut themselves out from others, man is basically a
social being. The concept of the human person as a social
being has been confirmed from ancient thinkers until
contemporary times. Yet, human beings relate to each other
in a variety of ways. Hence, this chapter also concludes that
social relations are more understood in a given context.
Thus, in the thrust to enable students of the course on the
Philosophy of the Human Person to appreciate and
understand the importance of good inter-personal relations
with others, it would be beneficial to look at people's

experiences within the bounds of the community that they
are living in. In sum, the people in the communities taken
into consideration look at the notion of pagtambayayong
(collaboration with others in work) pagpa-ambit (sharing
what one has with others) and pagsinabtanay (understanding
each other). In sum, this is referred to as gugma sa isig ka
tawo (love for others), which the holy scriptures refer to as
the highest among all the virtues. In concluding this chapter,
it might be beneficial for students to read a verse from 1
Corinthians Chapter 13. This could inspire them to relate
with others with love for them to attain peace in their
respective families and communities.
ASSESSMENT
1. Express your view/opinion on the saying “No Man is an

Island”. Expound your answer.
2. In Auguste Comte’s Stages of society, do you agree that
the present society is now in the “positive stage”? Defend
your answer.
3. For Paul Ricoeur, man is a being whose being is social
for man lives and exists with and for the others. Man is
a moral subject. As such, his social nature implies an
obligation to the other. How do you personally
understand this passage? Expound your answer.
4. Upon reading the context on how the fishermen of Sitio
Lapawon, Barangay Santor Rosario interact with each
other in their community, what is your take on this
context in relation to the lesson on “the human person in
society”? Expound your answer.
5. Make a short reflection on 1 Corinthians Chapter 13 that
is found in the conclusion of this chapter. In your
reflection, relate the message of this bible chapter to the
lesson on “The Human Person in Society”.
LEARNING OBJECTIVES
1. To recognize the meaning of life
2. To explain the meaning of life under cultural consideration
3. To define the projects he/she wants to do in his/her life
4. To reflect on the meaning of his/her own life
88 The Human Person as Oriented Towards Impending Death
INTRODUCTION
Death is a topic that does not get the interest of many

people. It connotes an inner feeling of fear, pain, grief,
sadness, anxiety, and sympathy. As much as people would
not want to speak about it, yet death comes along the way.
In other words, it is inevitable not to talk about death, for it
is part of the cycle of life. None is certain yet as to what
happens to the human person after death. But at least, the
scriptures give an assurance that there is eternal life.
There have been many cases of near-death experiences.
Some believe in their stories, some others do not, while some
remain skeptical. It is normal to always doubt something
unusual. To start the topic on death, read the story below and
let you be the judge.
..there is a story about a Cebuana, Laura D.

Banzon, who was clinically dead for one hour and
then came back to life. The writer, Charisse Ursal,
described the extraordinary incident in the January
19, 2013 issue of the Inquirer. The 87-year-old
Banzon recounted that when she was 26, she was
afflicted with acute pneumonia and brought to the
Sacred Heart Hospital in Cebu in 1952. Two days
later, she was dead. An hour after she was declared
clinically dead, she came back to life. Her
physician, Dr. Dayday Borbon, considered it a
miracle because her patient recovered from her
ailment and didn't suffer any side effects, although
her heart stopped beating for 60 minutes.
While “dead,” she found herself outside her
lifeless body lying on the bed, while her family
started crying. Then she saw a narrow bright road
which she followed. She then heard a man’s voice
telling her to sit beside him. She described the man
as “tall with deep-set brown eyes, wearing a snowy

robe with a blue-green shroud.”
The man told her it was not her time yet and she
had to go back, escorted by an angel. “The
experience strengthened Banzon’s faith, especially
in the Holy Child Jesus,” concluded the story.
(Licuaco, 2013)
This is not the first time that we encounter such story.

The question lies in whether we believe in such. Despite that,
this is one way of realizing that death is indeed part of the
human person's journey. Death is the possibility of man, a
“not yet” which will be. (Dy, 2001) Hence, it is outstripped.
How open are we to accept death as part of life’s
possibilities? If death is a reality, why waste making the
most of our lives? These are some of the questions that we
can reflect on when we discuss death. This chapter aims to
make us recognize that death is part of life’s journey.
DISCUSSION
Most Filipinos are not much open to talk about death.

Some are not comfortable listening to someone who makes
jokes or fun about it. But death is an inevitable reality;
everyone cannot escape from it. In this time of pandemic,
everyone is trying to keep themselves safe from the virus. Of
course, who would want to get infected with this deadly
virus attacking the world? The question is, why should we
be afraid if we are certain and confident that our immune
system is strong? There are varying reasons why people are
afraid of being infected.
In most cases, such fear is associated with the reality of
death. If one gets the virus, probably death follows. The
statistical reports of positive cases cause fear and anxiety.
This is a normal reaction, for everyone is afraid of being

infected, and worst, encounter death.
This virus does not only cause the death of the mortal
body; it also stops many business establishments from
operating. Workers are laid off from work; hence, they
would not be able to support their families. Small-time
workers like those jeepney drivers, sidewalk vendors, street
vendors, carpenters, and many others are very much
affected. Despite the risks, many are forced to go out of their
home to find a living.
This pandemic has brought fear and anxiety to our
society. Such fear arises not only from the imminent
possibility of death from the virus, but also from the
inevitable effects of the governmental measures to prevent
its spread, such as lockdown. Indeed, many lives,
particularly the poor, have been materially and
psychologically affected by the pandemic.
THE MEANING OF LIFE
Is there a universal meaning of life? Is the meaning of

life dependent on the person maneuvering his wheel?
Observe the well-known aphorisms or mottos concerning
life. Do they provide an answer to the question of the
meaning of life? For example, a motto says: "It is better to
die on a rocky river than to see my love in the hands of
another." How does this motto speak of the meaning of life?
It probably means that the lover could not bear the pain of
seeing his/her love has someone else. This can be true in the
experience of lovers.
How about the maxim that says, “Do not do unto others,
what you do not want others to do unto you.” This is
common wisdom in the Confucian tradition. Moreover,
another maxim states, “the early bird catches the worm”,
which is a very common saying. Do these sayings speak of
the meaning of life? Others might say yes, and others no.
These mottos in life do not provide a concrete meaning of
what life is. Rather, they provide clues, insights, and
suggestions about what one must do to attain a meaningful
life. The assumption here is that there is no universal
definition of what life is, and no single statement can capture
life’s meaning.
HEIDEGGER AND THE NOTION OF BEING-TOWARDS-DEATH
To understand the meaning of life, let us look at its

limitations determined by the reality and experience of
death. One notable philosopher who made a great
contribution to the discussion of death is Martin Heidegger.
Heidegger is known for his book Being and Time. This book
introduces a unique perspective on the daily experiences of
the human person. Humans, Heidegger argues, should live
with authenticity. This authenticity means Dasein's
understanding of the world to something that exists and
potentially does not exist.
What makes this interesting is that Heidegger does not
speak about the afterlife. Contrary to the story at the
beginning of this chapter, none can speak of what life is after
the cessation of breath. From birth, man is expected to live
his life to the fullest as he journeys towards his death. This
is what Heidegger means by being-towards-an-end. Being-
at-an-end is that which is a non-existent human being.
Dasein is what Heidegger refers to as the Human
Person. To hone his/her potentials, the human person has to
be in the world, for he/she has the power to be with it. To be
in the world means involvement with other things and being
with others. In this way, the human person is able to actualize
his/her potentials and possibilities of existence (Dy, 2001).
For example, for a person to become a teacher, one should
exert all his/her efforts to realize such ambition. However,
efforts will be useless without the use of other things like

attending school, complying with school requirements,
school materials, gadgets, and many others. All these other
existences are necessary for the person to realize his
potentials. However, the potentials of the human person
while living in this world are never exhausted.
As the human person continues his/her journey in this
world his/her ambitions never cease. This is part of his/her
life’s cycle. For instance, you aim to finish your studies to
get a job; once you get a job, you travel and support your
family, buy your wants, get married, buy a house, have
children, buy family needs, send your children to school,
your children become successful, you get old, then you
expire. With the attainment of one ambition or goal, another
one awaits. With all these ambitions and possibilities, care is
the fundamental element of Dasein. This is what impending
death means. It is not something that happens to man.
Heidegger also wants to make clear the word impending.
“Impending” is not something that one expects like
expecting a family member to go home from abroad, or a
friend visiting your house, or waiting for your girlfriend to
arrive at your rendezvous. For if so, then death is something
of an objective experience. We may have an idea of what
death is, but we do not know what it is like. Impending is
something distinct only to the individual man. This death is
ownmost. Authentic living is a necessary response to man's
awareness of facing the possibility of his death. This
possibility does not mean actualizing and calculating it, for
it forfeits the very purpose of his potentiality. For example,
since the person could no longer bear the pain of depression
or that the world is already against him/her, he/she willingly
takes his/her life. This is not what Heidegger suggests
because calculating death would mean that it only comes to
older people, and young ones still have a long life to
experience. Nonetheless, this possibility is about
anticipating that man comes close to death to understand the

possibility of the measureless impossibility of existence (Dy,
2001).
HISTORY, CONTEXT AND EXISTENCE
One way of looking at the meaning of life is from the

lens of history. History is the witness of all human activities.
Life has a historical character, for it is time-bound. The kind
of life in different generations are very different from each
other. That is why people cannot help but compare the
experiences they have had. People born in their era would
always prefer to say that their time was better than the other.
Looking at life from the lens of history signifies
meaning as an external causal attribute. That is to say,
meaning is dependent on external conditions, which also
does not have an inherent quality. The values and definitions
that history offers to humans are dependent on the outside
variables and other societal relationships. Culture, for
instance, is always affected by the change of time. Some
values that were accepted in the past decades have changed.
Some norms that were not acceptable in the past are now
accepted and seem to be ordinary.
Meanwhile, the meaning of life can be viewed
according to context. This means that life has an intrinsic
value which depends on the location. This objectivity of
experience has exclusivity. That is why the experience of
one person is different from another even if they live in the
same location. We may be living in the same world, but it is
absurd to think that your experiences in Baybay are the same
experiences of another person who lives in Ormoc. A
person's experience from the province is not the same as the
kind of life in highly urbanized areas.
The reason why we differ in experiences is because of
the life-context. They differ in language, social value, and
many other things that make their respective lives distinct

from each other. Indeed, different contexts cause different
ways of viewing the meaning of life.
Moreover, the meaning of life can be interpreted based
on one's existence. This implies that life has significance and
purpose. The choices made by the human person is geared
towards a certain goal. The choice one makes should always
be authentic because that is what defines him. According to
existentialist philosophers, the human person is the master
of his/her self. His/her choices define his/her humanness.
Existentialists like Jean Paul-Sartre and Martin
Heidegger thought a lot about living an authentic life. This
kind of life entails the exercise of freedom. Humans have the
freedom to make choices for themselves. In this sense, death
allows the person to be aware of himself/herself and makes
him/her responsible for his/her actions (Harris, 1972). They
also emphasized that each person has a unique way of
valuing, interpreting, and viewing what makes life
meaningful. For example, an artist would aim to produce a
masterpiece that could add meaning to his/her life. It may be
said that his/her masterpiece creates a sense of fulfillment.
There are cases in which certain people or groups share the
same aspirations, but this does not deny the fact that the
meaning of life for each of them differs because of the
existential situation one finds and one wants to be in.
CONCLUSION
In sum, we can say that the meaning of life does not have
one definition. It does have a lot of variables before one can
define it. It can be seen either objectively and subjectively,
depending on the person defining it. The way things appear
around us varies. Likewise, the way individuals experience
things also varies. It is noteworthy that as we try to learn the
meaning of life, we have to be conscious of its varied

manifestations and expressions.
Looking at these approaches in understanding the
meaning of life does not imply that each is independent of
the other. Rather, combining these themes provide a more
concrete and clearer understanding of life. The meaning of
life is not only exclusive to history, context, or existence.
However, combining these approaches makes us gain a
wider perspective of what life is. We may not arrive at a
single or universal definition of the meaning of life, but what
is certain is that the process of searching for the meaning of
life is a philosophical adventure.
ASSESSMENT
Answer the following questions:
1. What is your personal definition of life? How do you

appreciate life?
2. Will a person feel regret if there is no death?
3. Express your view and opinion on this statement: “A man
who knows death, also knows life. The converse is true,
too: the man who is forgetful of death, is forgetful of life
also.” – Ladislaus Borros, S.J.
GLOSSARY
Anticipation – In Heidegger’s term, it is the possibility of

comprehending one’s uttermost and ownmost potentiality – the
possibility of authentic existence. It is in contrast with expectation
which means the waiting for actualization.
Anti-thesis – It is a thesis that opposes another thesis.
Anthropocentric – It is an approach that is centered on man as the
most significant being in the world.
Authenticity – It is the integrity of the person to be true to what
he/she is. It is the fulfillment of one's freedom and responsibility
for making choices.
Bad faith – It is a concept of Jean-Paul Sartre that refers to the denial
of one’s freedom in a situation.
Being-at-an-end – It is a term used by Heidegger to refer to non-
existent human; it does not mean death.
Being-towards-an-end – It is a term used by Heidegger to signify
what an existing human person can be; the person is a possibility.
Correspondence theory – It is a theory of truth which proposes that
truth is found in the conformity between the intellect and the
object outside the mind.
Cosmology – a study on the origin of the world and the universe.
Determinism – It is a belief that human behavior can be determined
and, therefore, be predicted.
Dialectical method – It is a philosophical method that draws a new
idea (synthesis) from the opposing sides – between the thesis and
anti-thesis.
Dichotomy – is defined as a sharp division of things or ideas into two
contradictory parts; e.g., body and soul.
Eidetic reduction – It is a process in the phenomenological method
that focuses on finding the essence of a thing/reality. It is in this
process that the person finds a meaningful experience of a thing.
Epoché – It is a process in the phenomenological method that puts
the biases aside to focus on the essential elements.
Existentialism – is a belief that man's choices define his existence.
Fact – It is a claim that is founded on evidence. A fact also refers to
real things.
Free for – It is a distinctive feature of freedom that refers to the
person's natural choices, such as the freedom to live, to be free
and to own something. It refers to the natural rights of the person.
Glossary 97
Free from – It is a distinctive feature of freedom that emphasizes the

liberation of the person from anything that disables him/her to be
free. It focuses on the transition from being imprisoned by a thing
or circumstance to being out of the imprisonment of such thing or
circumstance.
Freedom – It is a vital feature of the human person that enables
him/her to make choices. For Sartre, it is the human person.
Hermeneutics – It is a philosophical method that focuses on the true
interpretation of something.
Methodic Doubt – Cartesian doubt, which means to doubt things that
can be doubted.
Objective – It describes a claim or statement that is based on the
things outside the mind.
Ontological – It comes from the word ontology, which focuses on
the study of being, e.g., human being.
Opinion – It is a personal claim, a belief, or a stand that expresses
the thoughts of the person.
Phenomenological method – It is a philosophical method that uses
the experiences to draw an essential conclusion.
Socratic method – It a philosophical method developed by Socrates
to arrive at a certain knowledge through asking questions in a
form of a dialogue.
Subjective – It describes a claim or statement based on a personal
thought or an individual's perspective.
Synthesis – It is a new thesis that results from the conflict between
the thesis and anti-thesis.
Theocentric - centered on the existence of God
Thesis – It is a claim, a proposition, a reality, an idea or any belief
that is present at hand.
Transcendence - going beyond one's limitation
Truth – It is a claim that is universal, undisputed, verified through
facts, and transcendent.
Wisdom – It is a virtue that encompasses all knowledge.
REFERENCES
Babor, E. R. (2001). The Human Person: Not Real, but Existing.

C&E Publishing.
Bernados, S. (2017). Introduction to the Philosophy of the
Human Person. Malabon City: Mutya Publishing.
Boorse, D. (2008). Creation care: Religion and environmental
action. The Review of Faith & International Affairs, 6(3), 33–
37.
Borchert, Donald (2006). The Encyclopedia of Philosophy, 2nd
ed. USA: Macmillan Reference.
Buber, M. (2012). I and Thou. eBookIt. com.
Cain, Rebecca Bensen (2007). The Socratic Method: Plato’s Use
of Philosophical Drama. Continuum Publishing Group.
Carman, T. (2019). Sartre and Merleau-Ponty on Freedom. In K.
Becker & I. Thomson (Eds.), The Cambridge History of
Philosophy, 1945–2015 (pp. 365-374). Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
doi:10.1017/9781316779651.031
Co, Alfredo (2009). Across the Philosophical Silk Road: The
Blooming of a Hundred Flowers Philosophy of Ancient
China. Manila: University of Santo Tomas Publishing House.
Cohen, J. (2012). ‘Introduction: Emmanuel Levinas’-From
Philosophy to the Other. International Journal of
Philosophical Studies, 20(3), 315–317.
Cohen, S. M., Curd, P., & Reeve, C. D. C. (2016). Readings in
ancient Greek philosophy: From Thales to Aristotle. Hackett
Publishing.
Comte's 3 Stages of Society & Theory of Positivism. (2013,
January 8). Retrieved from
https://study.com/academy/lesson/comtes-3-stages-of-
society-theory-of-positivism.html.
Cornforth, Maurice (2015). Materialism and the Dialectical
Method. USA. Retrieved from
https://redstarpublishers.org/cornforth1953.pdf.
Corvino, John (2015). The Fact/Opinion Distinction. The
Philosophers’ Magazine. Retrieved from
https://www.philosophersmag.com/essays/26-the-fact-
opinion-distinction.
References 99
Crowell, S. (2015). Why is Ethics First Philosophy? Levinas in

Phenomenological Context.
Delaney, T. (2003). Classical Social Theory: Investigation and
Application. Oswego, New York: Prentice Hall.
Demeterio, F.P.A. (2001). Introduction to Hermeneutics.
Diwatao. Vol.1, No.1. Retrieved from
http://www.geocities.ws/philodept/diwatao/introduction_to_h
ermeneutics.htm
Duterte, Rodrigo Roa. Fifth State of the Nation Address. July 27,
2020. Retrieved from
https://www.officialgazette.gov.ph/2020/07/27/rodrigo-roa-
duterte-fifth-state-of-the-nation-address-july-27-2020/.
Fernandez, F. Y., & Fernandez, G. C. (2020). Rainforestation as
an Instrument for Sustainable Development: Narratives from
the Nagkahiusang Katawhan sa Esperanza (NAKASE) of
Pilar, Camotes Island, Cebu. Social Ethics Society Journal of
Applied Philosophy, 6(1), 45-70.
Fernandez, G. C. (2017). Integration of Ethnolinguistic Peace
Perspectives for Peace Education in the Introductory
Philosophy Course for K to 12 Senior High School
(Unpublished doctoral dissertation). The University of San
Carlos.
Fernandez, G. C. (2018). Enlightened Anthropocentrism in the
Filipino Visayan Fisherfolks’ Notion of Pagbulig sa Tawo sa
Kinaiyahan. Social Ethics Society Journal of Applied
Philosophy, 4(2), 31-52.
Fernandez, G. C. (2019). The Peasants’ Notion of Peace:
Kinabuhi sa Kinaiyahan ug Gugma sa Isig ka Tawo. Social
Ethics Society Journal of Applied Philosophy, 5(2), 63-84.
Fernandez, G. C. (2019). The Social, Environmental and
Economic Effects of a Reclamation Project: From the Lived
Experience of the Residents of an Affected Local Coastal
Village in the Philippines. Asia Pacific Journal of
Multidisciplinary Research, 7(2), part iii, 98-106.
Fernandez, G. C., & Bande, M. M. (2018). Rainforestation
Implementation and Durkheim’s Notion of Mechanical
Solidarity: From the Experiences of the Pioneering Adopters
of the Cienda San Vicente Farmers Association in Baybay
100 References
City, Leyte. Journal of Agriculture and Technology

Management, 21(1), 8-16.
Fernandez, G. C., & Bande, M. M. (2018). Sustainable
Development through Environmental Education: From the
Perspectives of Past and Present Group and Individual
Rainforestation Adopters. International Journal of
Environmental and Rural Development, 9(2), 47-52.
Fernandez, G. C., & Bande, M. M. (2019). Rainforestation and
Sustainable Development: From the Lens of the Four
Individual Adopters from the Visayas Region in the
Philippines. Recoletos Multidisciplinary Research Journal,
7(2), 29-46. doi:10.32871/rmrj1907.02.03
Fernandez, G. C., & Bande, M. M. (2020). Anthropocentrism,
Forest Loss, Corona Virus 2019 and Rainforestation. Social
Ethics Society Journal of Applied Philosophy, special issue,
53-72.
Fernandez, G. C., & Villaluz, G. (2018). The Natural
Environment as a Significant Factor in Farmers and
Fishermen's Notions of Peace. Annals of Tropical Research,
40(1), 124-136. doi:https://doi.org/10.32945/atr40110.2018
Fernandez, G. C., Purog, R., Betarmus, V., Garciano, M., &
Garciano, J. (2018). The Contemporary World. Mandaluyong
City, Philippines: Mutya Publishing House.Fernandez,
Fernando, E. (2005). Restoring the PhilippineRainforests. In
Haribon Policy Paper No. 2.Manila, Philippines: Haribon
Foundation
Fisher, K. A. (2017). Thomas Aquinas on Hylomorphism and the
In-act Principle. British Journal for the History of Philosophy,
1-27.
Frauwallner, E. (1973). History of Indian Philosophy: The
philosophy of the Veda and of the epic. The Buddha and the
Jina. The Sāmkhya and the classical Yoga-system (Vol. 1).
Motilal Banarsidass Publisher.
Friedman, M. S., & Buber, M. (1967). The Philosophy of Martin
Buber. Open Court.
Fernandez, G. C., & Villaluz, G. D. (2017). Teaching Indigenous
Peace Concepts from Visayan Fisherfolks and Farmers
through the Course Philosophy of the Human Person.
References 101
Recoletos Multidisciplinary Research Journal, 5(1), 1-17.

doi:https://doi.org/10.32871/rmrj1705.01.04
Gallinero, W., Morte, A., Salado, F., Fernandez, G., Fernandez,
E., Villaroya, A., Enaya, B., Balotol, R. (2018). Ethics.
Mandaluyong City, Philippines: Mutya Publishing House.
Garcia, J. M. (2018, July 17). Discover.Share.Learn. Retrieved
from https://www.slideshare.net/:
https://www.slideshare.net/jomarienel/lesson-3-the-human-
as-an-embodied-spirit?from_action=save
Harding, S. (2015, May 21). What is Deep Ecology? Retrieved
September 17, 2020, from
https://www.schumachercollege.org.uk/learning-
resources/what-is-deep-ecology
Haribon Foundation. (2016). Classifying Natural and Restored
Forests Containing Primary, Secondary Growth, or Residual
Forests. PANAO.Rain Forest Restoration Initiative, 3
Harris, K. A. (1972). The political meaning of death: An
existential overview. OMEGA-Journal of Death and Dying,
2(4), 227–239.
Huxley, W. G. (2002). The Cambridge Companion to Levinas.
Cambridge University Press.
Jowett, B. (1885). The politics of Aristotle (Vol. 1). Clarendon.
Kalikasan People's Network. (2011, November 5). Where are the
Trees? Examining the State of the Philippine Forests.
Retrieved August 2, 2017,
fromhttp://www.kalikasan.net/features/2011/06/05/where-are-
the-trees-examining-state-philippine-forests
Keane, Niall & Lawn, Chris, ed. (2016). The Blackwell
Companion to Hermeneutics. UK: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Kleinman, P. (2013). Philosophy 101 From Plato and Socrates to
Ethics and Metaphysics, An Essential Primer on the History
of Thought. Massachusetts: Adam's Media.
Kreeft, Peter (2014). Socratic Logic. USA: St. Augustine’s
Press.
Laine, J. (2018). An Introduction to Indian Philosophy. By Roy
W. Perrett. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2016.
261 pp. ISBN: 9780521853569 (cloth, also available in paper
102 References
and as an e-book). The Journal of Asian Studies, 77(2), 563–

565.
Littlejohn, R. (2010). Confucianism: An introduction.
Liu, J. (2006). An introduction to Chinese philosophy: From
ancient philosophy to Chinese Buddhism.
Malpas, Jeff & Gander, Hans-Helmuth (2015). The Routledge
Companion to Hermeneutics. New York: Routledge.
Mantzavinos, C., "Hermeneutics", The Stanford Encyclopedia of
Philosophy (Spring 2020 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.),
URL =
<https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2020/entries/hermeneu
tics/>.
Martin, T. R. (2017). An Overview of Classical Greek History
from Mycenae to Alexander Guardians in the Republic.
Retrieved September 20, 2020, from
http://www.oocities.org/baja/mesa/8511/guardians1.html.tmp
Mathews, F. (2010). Environmental Philosophy. Melbourne:
Monash University Publishing.
Melchert, N. (1999). The Great Conversation: A Historical
Introduction to Philosophy - Aristotle (De Anima). Mountain
View, California: Mayfield Publishing Company.
Milan, P., & Ceniza, J. (Eds.).(2009). Rainforestation Trainers
Manual. Baybay City, Leyte, Philippines: Visayas State
University Institute of Tropical Ecology
Moga, M. D. (1995). What Makes Man Truly Human: A
Philosophy of Man and Society. Metro Manila: St. Pauls
Philippines.
Plato, Timaeus, in Reginal Ellen, Greek Philosophy: Thales to
Aristotle. (1966). New York: The Free Press.
Ranada, P. (2014, February 21). Is the Government Reforestation
Program Planting the Right Trees? Retrieved August 2, 2017,
from http://www.rappler.com/nation/51200-nationalgreening-
program-native-trees. Accessed: 2 August 2017.
Ricoeur, P. (1986). Fallible man (Vol. 2). Fordham Univ Press.
Ricoeur, P. (1994). Oneself as another. University of Chicago
Press.
Ricoeur, P. (2008). From text to action: Essays in hermeneutics,
II (Vol. 2). Bloomsbury Publishing.
References 103
Routley, R. and Routley, V. (1982). “Human Chauvinism and

Environmental Ethics” in Don Mannison, Michael McRobbie
and Richard Routley (eds), Environmental Philosophy.
Canberra: Australian National University 96-189.
Sartre, Jean Paul (1965). Essays in Existentialism. Ed. Wade
Baskin. New Jersey: The Citadel Press.
_________ (1993). Being and Nothingness: A
Phenomenological Essay on Ontology. (Original Ed.) Hazel
E. Barnes. New York: Washington Square Press.
Smith, David Woodruff (2006). Husserl. New York: Taylor &
Francis e-Library.
Stace, W. T. (2010). A critical history of Greek philosophy. The
Floating Press.
Steph. (2018, December 1). Philo-notes: Learn Philosophy
Online. Retrieved from https://philonotes.com:
https://philonotes.com/index.php/2018/12/01/the-human-
person-as-an-embodied-spirit/
Stumpf, S. E., & Fieser, J. (2012). Socrates to Sarte and Beyond:
A History of Philosophy. Mc Graw-Hill Education.
Tarrant, H. (2010). The last days of Socrates. Penguin UK.
Weberman, David (2011). Sartre on the Authenticity, Required if
my Choices are to be Truly Mine. Filozofia 66, 2011, No 9, p.
879-899. Retrieved
http://www.klemens.sav.sk/fiusav/doc/filozofia/2011/9/879-
889.pdf.
Zack, Naomi (2010). The Handy Philosophy Answer Book.
USA: Visible Ink Press.
Zahavi, D. 2002. Phenomenology of self. In A. David and T.
Kircher (eds). The Self and Schizophrenia.A
Neuropsychological Perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
ABOUT THE AUTHORS
Al Franjon M. Villaroya is a Philosophy

and Social Science Instructor of the
Department of Liberal Arts and
Behavioral Sciences at the Visayas State
University-Main Campus in Baybay City,
Leyte, since 2009. He earned his
baccalaureate degree in Philosophy at
the San Carlos Seminary College,
Mabolo, Cebu City. He earned his Master of Arts in Philosophy at
the University of San Jose-Recoletos and is finishing his Ph.D. in
Philosophy at the University of San Carlos, Nasipit Talamban, Cebu
City. He is currently the PRO for Visayas of the Philosophical
Association of Visayas and Mindanao and the Philosophy
Coordinator for DLABS. He presented papers in the philosophical
community and organizations. His published works include Ethics
and Philosophy of Technology. His research interests are Ethics of
Care, Legalization of Medical Use of Marijuana, Philosophy of
Technology, and Aesthetics. He paints occasionally and plays
guitar because he believes what Nietzsche said: “Without music,
life would be a mistake.”
Beljun P. Enaya is a faculty member of

the Department of Liberal Arts and
Behavioral Sciences, Visayas State
University. He finished his Bachelor of
Arts in Philosophy at San Carlos
Seminary College. After taking up
some professional education units at
Cebu Normal University, he passed the
Licensure Examination for Teachers (LET). He graduated Master of
About the Authors 105
Arts in Philosophy from the University of San Jose-Recoletos. His

thesis examines Jean-Paul Sartre’s freedom & responsibility and
Jean-Jacques Rosseau’s philosophy of education. He is now taking
up Doctorate of Philosophy in Philosophy at the University of
Santo Tomas, Manila. He co-authored a textbook in Ethics for
college students. He was also a project leader in 2019 for his
department's extension project entitled Faculty Training for the
Teaching of the Introduction to the Philosophy of the Human
Person. His research interest includes moral philosophy, political
philosophy, and existentialism.
Errol C. Fernandez is an instructor of

the Department of Liberal Arts and
Behavioral Sciences, Visayas State
University. He finished his Bachelor of
Arts in Philosophy at San Carlos
Seminary College. He is finishing his
Master of Arts in History at the
University of San Carlos, Nasipit
Talamban, Cebu City. He has co-
authored textbooks in Ethics and The Life and Works of Jose Rizal.
His ongoing thesis exposes the historical narrative
of Hanginan's journey of the faithful through a hermeneutic
phenomenological perspective. He is one of the component
Leaders for the extension project of DLABS entitled Faculty
Training for the Teaching of the Introduction to the Philosophy of
the Human Person. His research interest includes local history, for
he believes that it reflects the people’s local identities, which are
closest to their hearts and consciousness. He is also interested in
subjects of human rights and care for the environment.
View publication stats

IntroductiontothePhilosophyoftheHumanPerson Villaroya Enaya Fernandez

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

IntroductiontothePhilosophyoftheHumanPerson Villaroya Enaya Fernandez

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

Introduction to the Philosophy of the Human Person

Book · December 2020

Beljun Enaya Al Franjon Mendiola Villaroya

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Philosophy of Agriculture View project

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

All rights reserved. No part of this work or publication may be

Artist: Prof. Dean Ruffel R. Flandez

Published by ALETHEIA Printing and Publishing House

Chapter 1: Doing Philosophy I 1

Chapter 2: Methods of Philosophizing I 14

Chapter 3: The Human Person as an Embodied Spirit I 28

Chapter 4: The Human Person and the Environment I 41

Chapter 5: Freedom of the Human Person I 55

Chapter 7: The Human Person in the Society I 76

Chapter 8: The Human Person as Oriented Towards

About the Authors I 104

“We make a living by what we get, but we make a life

How do we explain the meaning of human person? With

1. To distinguish a holistic perspective from a partial point

What is Philosophy? Any attempt to coin an all-

We focus on the three most renowned Greek

Socrates was born about 470 B.C. in Athens, Greece. His

One of the students who gathered around Socrates was

Aristotle was born about 384 B.C. He studied under

Aristotle did not reject the idea of the form itself.

Eastern Philosophies are centered on finding the answers

followers. For them, philosophy and religion are intimately

Being one of the greatest traditions in ancient China,

mode of thinking, morality and politics are inseparable.”

Buddhism is a living tradition whose roots can be traced

unchanged over time.” This means that a person is composed

1. Right View: It consists of knowing the noble truths and

Another fundamental feature of Buddha’s ethical

noble truths. Buddha construed that karma and rebirth is a

Indian philosophy responds to the question, "Who am I?"

This is why Indian philosophy is pursued not as an academic

reminds us that the physical world is not as important as

The two immense traditions of Philosophy have taught

dissatisfaction that pervades human experience. A human

1. Elucidate the line of Socrates, "An unexamined life is not

1. To realize that philosophizing will lead to wisdom or

There are times that we react to a certain situation

OPINION VS. TRUTH

When people engage in a debate and later get tired of

phrase, “it is true that…”, as if it automatically makes the

The methods of philosophizing are the various ways of

philosophers. From ancient philosophy to contemporary

The Socratic Method is named after Socrates, who was

Santiago: Maria, what is your comment on the Facebook

Santiago: If you like the idea that there is no class on

In this dialogue, one question leads to a series of

anything and discovers something new and realizes his

The Dialectical method can be traced back to Socrates'

are derived from applying the philosophical categories

The word phenomenology comes from the two Greek

things that appear to a person. For Edmund Husserl,

a. Bracketing: This process is also called epoché, which

b. Eidetic reduction. This is the movement from fact to

Let us say, for instance, what is a chair? From our own

All these processes belong to the consciousness where

The term hermeneutics is usually associated with the