Introduction to the Philosophy of the Human Person
୨— Doing Philosophy —୧ ୨— First and Highest Principles (Ramos, 2016) —୧
❱ PHILOSOPHY
- comes from two Greek words, philo, meaning ― to
love, and sophia, meaning ― wisdom.
- originally meant, ―love of wisdom, and in a broad
sense, wisdom is still the goal of Philosophy.
- begins with a sense of wonder and curiosity of the
nature of things often overlooked.
୨— Philosophy according to Ramos (2016) —୧
Philosophy is a science that by natural light of
reason, studies the first causes and highest
principles of all things.
❱ SCIENCE
- the philosophical investigations are systematic. It
follows certain steps or it employs certain
procedures. (system - with process)
❱ NATURAL LIGHT OF REASON
- a philosopher investigates things, not by using any
other laboratory instrument or investigation tools,
neither on the basis of supernatural revelation,
otherwise it becomes theology;
- instead, the philosopher uses his natural capacity to
think, that is his capacity to use simply human
reason or in other words unaided reason.
❱ STUDY OF ALL THINGS
- all other sciences concern themselves with
particular objects of investigation, while philosophy
derives ideas from any subjects to explain and
examine a certain phenomenon, this sets the
distinction of philosophy from other sciences.
(phenomenon - naturally occurring)
❱ FIRST CAUSE OR HIGHEST PRINCIPLE
- a principle is that from which something proceeds in
any manner whatsoever.
❱ PRINCIPLE OF IDENTITY
- whatever is is; and whatever is not is not;
everything is what it is. Everything is its own being,
and not being is not being.
|| Example : If it is a cat, then it is a cat. ||
❱ PRINCIPLE OF NON-CONTRADICTION
- it is impossible for a thing to be and not be at the
same time, and the same respect.
|| Example : If it is a cat, then it is not a non-cat. ||
❱ PRINCIPLE OF EXCLUDED MIDDLE
- a thing is either is or is not; everything must be
either be or not be; between being, there is no
middle ground possible.
|| Example : A woman is not "kind-of" pregnant. She
is either or is not pregnant, there is no middle
position. No neutrality. ||
❱ PRINCIPLE OF SUFFICIENT REASON
- nothing exists without a sufficient reason for its
being and existence.
- rejecting this principle leads to nonsensical notions
- things happen "just because".
|| Example : I am here, if I am here, then there's a
sufficient explanation for why I am here. ||
- For the ancient Greek thinkers, philosophy was
mainly a process of engaging cosmic realities.
- For the philosophers of the Renaissance and
Reformation, the main object of inquiry is the
concept of being.
- Philosophy also deals with questions, especially
those involved with deep thinking—life’s meaning,
one’s existence, goodness and justice, etc.
🗒 ❛ notes by rai ༉‧₊˚✧ - Page 1
୨—The Branches of Philosophy (Ramos, 2016) —୧
ETHICS
(morality; good and evil)

- a study of the nature of moral judgement.

METAPHYSICS
(being, reality and existence)
- is the branch of philosophy concerned with the
nature of existence, being and the world
- studies the state of being and the nature of reality
- study of the right, the good, and the valuable
|| Example : How should people act? What do
people think is right? How do we take moral
knowledge and put it into practice? What does
'right' even mean? ||

|| Example : What is the nature of reality? How

does the world exist? what is its origin or source of
creation? Does the world exist outside the mind?
AESTHETICS
How was the universe created? What does it mean
(beauty)
to exist? Is there a God (or many
gods, or no god at all? ||
- is the science of beauty in its various
manifestations -- including the sublime, comic,
tragic, pathetic, and ugly.
- study of beauty, judgments of sentiment, or taste
LOGIC
(correct reasoning) || Example : What is a work of art? What makes a
work of art successful? Why do we find certain
- means a treatise on matters pertaining to the things beautiful? How can things of very different
human thought. categories be considered equally beautiful? Is
- study of good reasoning, by examining the there a connection between art and morality? ||
validity of arguments and documenting their
fallacies.

|| Example : What is correct reasoning? What

distinguishes a good argument from a bad one? Additional Notes :
How can we detect a fallacy in reasoning? ||

EPISTEMOLOGY
(knowledge)

- it deals with the nature, sources, limitations and

validity of knowledge.
- this branch studies the nature and scope of
knowledge and belief.

|| Example : What is knowledge? How is

knowledge acquired? What do people know? What
are the necessary and sufficient conditions of
knowledge? What makes justified beliefs, justified
beliefs? ||

🗒 ❛ notes by rai ༉‧₊˚✧ - Page 2

 ୨— Holistic Perspective —୧

❱ Holistic Thinking (Abella, 2016)

- described as looking at the “big picture” when
describing and analyzing a situation or problem.
- means that one does not confine one’s
understanding of the world to one’s own perspective,
but also include the perspective of others to better
appreciate experiences which give meaning to life.

୨— Partial Point Of View —୧

❱ Partial Thinking (Abella, 2016)

- focuses on specific aspects of a situation.
- important component of analytical thinking where
an individual focuses on certain areas or aspects of a
problem in order to understand it.

Full name of philosophers / authors mentioned:

● Christine Carmela Ramos

● Roberto Abella

୨— The Thinker by Auguste Rodin —୧

Additional Notes :
“What makes my Thinker think is that he thinks not
only with his brain, with his knitted brow, his
distended nostrils, and compressed lips, but with
every muscle of his arms, back, and legs, with his
clenched fist and gripping toes.”

Meaning :

- The Thinker statue is commonly used to symbolize

philosophy because of its profound pondering and
contemplation attitude.
- The image of The Thinker is not that of a passive
dreamer, but of a man actively engaged in creative
thought. Thinking has been expressed not only
through the meditative attitude of the body, but
through the effort of every muscle.
- The thinker represents / is associated with
philosophy itself.

🗒 ❛ notes by rai ༉‧₊˚✧ - Page 3

 ୨— The Blind Men and the Elephant —୧
The Fifth, who chanced to touch the ear,
A HINDOO FABLE by John Godfrey Saxe (1872)
I.
IT was six men of Indostan
To learning much inclined,
Who went to see the Elephant
(Though all of them were blind),
That each by observation
Might satisfy his mind.
II.
The First approached the Elephant,
And happening to fall
Against his broad and sturdy side,
At once began to bawl:
"God bless me!—but the Elephant
Is very like a wall!"
III.
The Second, feeling of the tusk,
Cried: "Ho!—what have we here
So very round and smooth and sharp?
To me 't is mighty clear
This wonder of an Elephant
Is very like a spear!"
IV.
The Third approached the animal,
And happening to take
The squirming trunk within his hands,
Thus boldly up and spake:
"I see," quoth he, "the Elephant
Additional Notes:
Is very like a snake!
V.
The Fourth reached out his eager hand,
And felt about the knee.
"What most this wondrous beast is like
Is mighty plain," quoth he;
"'T is clear enough the Elephant
Is very like a tree!"
VI.
Said: "E'en the blindest man
Can tell what this resembles most;
Deny the fact who can,
This marvel of an Elephant
Is very like a fan!"
VII.
The Sixth no sooner had begun
About the beast to grope,
Than, seizing on the swinging tail
That fell within his scope,
"I see," quoth he, "the Elephant
Is very like a rope!"
VIII.
And so these men of Indostan
Disputed loud and long,
Each in his own opinion
Exceeding stiff and strong,
Though each was partly in the right,
And all were in the wrong
MORAL.
So, oft in theologic wars
The disputants, I ween,
Rail on in utter ignorance
Of what each other mean,
And prate about an Elephant
Not one of them has seen!
🗒 ❛ notes by rai ༉‧₊˚✧ - Page 4
 ➔ Six Men - Indostan - Obsolete form of Hindustan : Hindūstān, also sometimes spelt as Hindōstān,
along with its shortened form Hind, is the Persian-language name for the Indian subcontinent that later
became commonly used by its inhabitants in the Hindi–Urdu language.

Man Compared to Basis of claim:

First wall Fell to the broad and sturdy side of the elephant.

Second spear Felt the tusk which is very round, smooth, and shard.

Third snake Took the squirming trunk

Fourth tree Felt the knee of the elephant (probably reminded him of the
trunk of a tree)

Fifth fan Touched the ear (probably felt like a fan)

Sixth rope Groped the swinging tail

*tusk - elongated front teeth

Each of the blind men is a representative of people The tale later became well known in Europe, with
who can only understand and believe in a single 19th century American poet John Godfrey Saxe
perspective. These are people with utter ignorance creating his own version as a poem, with a final
who live in their own sense of reality, believing that verse that explains that the elephant is a metaphor
what they know and what they have experienced is for God, and the various blind men represent
the only truth. Likewise, all the blind men have only religions that disagree on something no one has fully
come to feel a different part of the elephant and each experienced.
took their partial experiences as the absolute truth.
The elephant represents reality, something that can
only be grasped by a person with the most open Additional Notes:
mind, one that is unbiased and truth-based - or in the
poem, the person with open eyes can only describe
and say the truth with regards to how the elephant
looks.

Reality does not come from a single perspective,

rather it is a combination of experiences from various
people. This suggests an existence of a complex
reality coexisting with all the different perspectives -
that what we see can only be the partial truth and
there is a bigger picture ahead of us.

● Partial truth
● Single perspective
● Limited experiences
● Complex reality
● Limited, subjective experiences
● Absolute truth

🗒 ❛ notes by rai ༉‧₊˚✧ - Page 5

 ୨— Plato's Allegory of the Cave —୧
Imprisonment in the cave
Plato begins by having Socrates ask Glaucon
to imagine a cave where people have been
imprisoned from childhood, but not from birth. These
prisoners are chained so that their legs and necks
are fixed, forcing them to gaze at the wall in front of
them and not to look around at the cave, each other,
or themselves (514a–b).[2] Behind the prisoners is a
fire, and between the fire and the prisoners is a
raised walkway with a low wall, behind which people
walk carrying objects or puppets "of men and other
living things" (514b).[2] The people walk behind the
wall so their bodies do not cast shadows for the
prisoners to see, but the objects they carry do ("just
as puppet showmen have screens in front of them at
which they work their puppets" (514a).[2] The
prisoners cannot see any of what is happening
behind them, they are only able to see the shadows
cast upon the cave wall in front of them. The sounds
of the people talking echo off the walls, and the
prisoners believe these sounds come from the
shadows.
Socrates suggests that the shadows are
reality for the prisoners because they have never
seen anything else; they do not realize that what they
see are shadows of objects in front of a fire, much
less that these objects are inspired by real things
outside the cave which they do not see.
The fire, or human-made light, and the
puppets, used to make shadows, are done by the
artists. Plato, however, indicates that the fire is also
the political doctrine that is taught in a nation state.
The artists use light and shadows to teach the
dominant doctrines of a time and place.
Also, few humans will ever escape the cave.
This is not some easy task, and only a true
philosopher, with decades of preparation, would be
able to leave the cave, up the steep incline. Most
humans will live at the bottom of the cave, and a
small few will be the major artists that project the
shadows with the use of human-made light.
Departure from the cave
Plato then supposes that one prisoner is
freed. This prisoner would look around and see the
fire. The light would hurt his eyes and make it difficult
for him to see the objects casting the shadows. If he
were told that what he is seeing is real instead of the
other version of reality he sees on the wall, he would
not believe it. In his pain, Plato continues, the freed
prisoner would turn away and run back to what he is
accustomed to (that is, the shadows of the carried
objects). He writes "... it would hurt his eyes, and he
would escape by turning away to the things which he
was able to look at, and these he would believe to be
clearer than what was being shown to him."
Plato continues: "Suppose... that someone
should drag him... by force, up the rough ascent, the
steep way up, and never stop until he could drag him
out into the light of the sun."[2] The prisoner would
be angry and in pain, and this would only worsen
when the radiant light of the sun overwhelms his
eyes and blinds him.
"Slowly, his eyes adjust to the light of the sun.
First he can see only shadows. Gradually he can see
the reflections of people and things in water and then
later see the people and things themselves.
Eventually, he is able to look at the stars and moon
at night until finally he can look upon the sun itself
(516a)."Only after he can look straight at the sun is
he able to reason about it" and what it is".
Return to the cave
Plato continues, saying that the freed
prisoner would think that the world outside the cave
was superior to the world he experienced in the cave
and attempt to share this with the prisoners
remaining in the cave attempting to bring them onto
the journey he had just endured; "he would bless
himself for the change, and pity [the other prisoners]"
and would want to bring his fellow cave dwellers out
of the cave and into the sunlight.
The returning prisoner, whose eyes have
become accustomed to the sunlight, would be blind
when he re-enters the cave, just as he was when he
was first exposed to the sun (516e).[2] The
prisoners, according to Plato, would infer from the
returning man's blindness that the journey out of the
cave had harmed him and that they should not
undertake a similar journey. Plato concludes that the
prisoners, if they were able, would therefore reach
out and kill anyone who attempted to drag them out
of the cave.
🗒 ❛ notes by rai ༉‧₊˚✧ - Page 6
❱ Allegory of the Cave - A discussion on how
humans perceive reality and whether there is a
higher truth.

❱ Allegory - a story, poem, or picture that can be

interpreted to reveal a hidden meaning, typically a
moral or political one.

Representation and symbolism:

❱ The fire in the cave - represents the sun, what they

believe is the real sun
❱ The sun outside of the cave - signifies philosophical
truth, knowledge, the form good, and justice.
|| Both sources represent knowledge, however, they
have two different levels of knowledge: the fire in the
cave represents the sun, and the sun outside of the
cave signifies philosophical truth, knowledge, the
form good, and justice. ||
❱ Cave - represents the world, the region of life which
is revealed to us only through the sense of sight.
Plato uses the cave as a symbolic representation of
how human beings live in the world, contrasting
reality versus our interpretation of it. These two ideas
reflect the two worlds in the story: the world inside
the cave, and the world outside.
❱ The ascent out of the cave - the journey of the soul
into the region of the intelligible.
❱ Dark cave - the contemporary world of ignorance.
❱ Chained people - ignorant people in this world.
❱ The raised wall - the limitation of our thinking. The
raised wall symbolizes the limitation of our thinking
and the shadow symbolically suggest the world of
sensory perception which Plato considers an illusion.
In his opinion, the appearance is false and reality is
somewhere, which we cannot see.
❱ The shadows - the world of sensory perception
which Plato considers an illusion. The shadows are
the prisoners' reality, but are not accurate
representations of the real world. The shadows
represent the fragment of reality that we can
normally perceive through our senses, while the
objects under the sun represent the true forms of
objects that we can only perceive through reason.

🗒 ❛ notes by rai ༉‧₊˚✧ - Page 7

 Philosophy Reviewer || Methods of Philosophizing || Week 2
୨— Truth and Philosophy —୧
Corpuz et al. (2016)
- Nowadays, it is more and more difficult to discern what is
true from what is false; it seems that everybody can claim
to hold the truth.
- Philosophy as a discipline will not claim to be the sole
bearer of truth.
- It is not so much “the Truth” that concerns philosophy,
but rather the way or process by which we can
distinguish claims that are true from those that are
false.
୨— Domains of Truth —୧
Jürgen Habermas (1979)
- argues, in his universal pragmatics that apart from
scientific truths, there are other domains in life in which
we understand truth differently.
❱ PRAGMATICS
- the study of the structure of communicative language as
we use it everyday.
WHAT TRUTH? (Corpuz et al., 2016)
1. OBJECTIVE DOMAIN
- scientifically proven or backed by data-gathering,
analysis and repeated verification.
- knowledge of the natural realm/ totality of the physical
realm (biology, matter, energy, etc.)
- point to descriptions of “state of affairs” which remain
true regardless of who is viewing them.
2. SOCIAL DOMAIN
- truth is analogous with a general agreement or
consensus on what is right and wrong.
- products of agreement in society established over time
embedded in society
- can be changed through a critical examination and
deliberation among the members of a community
3. PERSONAL DOMAIN
- analogous with sincerity or consistent with our inner
thoughts and intentions
- precarious in nature due to exclusive access to one’s
inner self
- need corresponding actions that will establish trust.
Richard Rorty (1989)
- according to him, truth can be understood as what has
passed “procedures of justification.”
HOW TRUTH IS TESTED (Corpuz et al., 2016)
1. OBJECTIVE TRUTH
- tested against empirical evidence and justified by data
gathered from careful observation and analysis.
- passed procedures of justification if scientific claim is no
longer questioned or criticized.
2. SOCIAL TRUTH
- tested against their acceptability to a particular group in a
particular time in history.
- takes longer time involving people from varying
backgrounds and history.
- painful but we cannot simple resort to the easy way out
by saying “anything goes”.
3. PERSONAL TRUTH
- tested against the consistency of the person who claims
it and take a whole lifetime of consistency in the actions
and decisions of a person who makes a claim about
himself.
- constantly proven from point of conversion onwards
- Rosseau (1953) said that conversion must be declared
publicly.
୨— Methods of Philosophy —୧
↗ Phenomenology
↗ Existentialism
↗ Analytic Tradition
↗ Logic
PHENOMENOLOGY : ON CONSCIOUSNESS
Ramos, 2016
❱ PHENOMENOLOGY
- main Proponent: Edmund Husserl
- from the Greek word φαινόμενον or phainomenon,
meaning ― appearance.
- focuses on careful inspection and description of
phenomena or appearances, defined as any object of
conscious experience, that is, that which we are conscious
of (Johnston, 2006).
🗒 ❛ notes by rai ༉‧₊˚✧ - Page 8

Process of Reduction or Suspension
❱ BRACKETING
-brackets all questions of truth or reality and simply
describes the contents of consciousness
❱ INTENTIONALITY
- which, eliminates merely empirical contents of
consciousness and focuses instead on the essential
features, the meanings of consciousness.
NATURAL ATTITUDE and PHENOMENOLOGICAL
STANDPOINT
❱ NATURAL ATTITUDE (ordinary POV)
- According to Solomon and Higgins (2010), the natural
world is our ordinary everyday viewpoint and the ordinary
stance of the natural sciences, describing things and the
state of affairs.
- This way of seeing things is also called the natural
attitude or the ― ordinary and ― everyday way of ―
being-in-the-world (Applebaum, 2012).
|| Example : the concept of time being measured in terms
of days, hours and minutes • the fixed past ||
❱ PHENOMENOLOGICAL STANPOINT (special POV)
- the special viewpoint achieved by the phenomenologist,
as he or she focuses not on the things but our
consciousness of thing.
- is achieved through a series of phenomenological
“reductions” that eliminate certain aspects of our
experience from consideration.
|| Example : the concept of time as an opportunity or threat
to the attainment of true justice • the fluid past as it is
influenced by opposing narratives ||
EXISTENTIALISM: ON FREEDOM
Ramos, 2016
❱ EXISTENTIALISM
- main Proponent: Jean-Paul Sartre & Søren
Kierkegaard
- is not necessarily a method. This is more of a worldview
or outlook on how we understand the essence and
existence of things.
- there are themes of existentialism as stated by Ramos
(2016, p. 30) and include:
↗ The human condition or the relation of the
individual to the world and; the human response to
that condition;
↗ Being, especially the difference between the being
of person (which is ― existence) and the being of
other kinds of things;
↗ Human freedom; The significance (and
unavoidability) of choice and decision in the
absence of certainty and;
↗ The concreteness and subjectivity of life as lived,
against abstractions and false objectifications.
SARTRE
❱ EXISTENTIALISM
- According to Solomon and Higgins (2010), it
emphasizes the importance of free individual choice,
regardless of the power of other people to influence and
coerce our desires, beliefs, and decisions.
- Consciousness (being-for-itself) is such that it is always
free to choose (though not free not to choose) and free to
“negate” (or reject) the given features of the world.
- To be human, to be conscious, is to be free to imagine,
free to choose, and responsible for one’s life.
KIERKEGAARD
❱ KIERKEGAARD
- argues that the authentic self is the personally chosen
self, as opposed to public or “herd” identity.
- In Provocations, he states that: “Even though every
individual possesses the truth, when he gets together in a
crowd, untruth will be present at once, for the crowd is
untruth. It either produces impenitence and irresponsibility
or it weakens the individual’s sense of responsibility by
placing it in a fractional category.”
ANALYTIC TRADITION: ON LANGUAGE
Ramos, 2016
❱ ANALYTIC PHILOSOPHY
- main Proponent: Ludwig Wittgenstein
- analytic philosophy is the philosophical problems,
puzzles, and errors are rooted in language and can be
solved or avoided by a sound understanding of language
and careful attention to its workings.
- for Wittgenstein, language is a public tool for
understanding private life or improve our self-knowledge.
- language cannot objectively describe truth since
language is socially conditioned.
- we understand the world solely in terms of our language
games — that is, our linguistic, social construct.
Misunderstandings arise when we fail to see which kind of
game someone is involved in.
- “The limits of our language means the limits of our
world.”
|| Example : “I need my space” can either be: they want to
be alone or they want to say the opposite ||
🗒 ❛ notes by rai ༉‧₊˚✧ - Page 9
 LOGIC AND CRITICAL THINKING
Ramos, 2016
❱ LOGIC AND CRITICAL THINKING
- both of them serve as paths to freedom from half-truths
and deceptions.
❱ LOGIC
- is centered in the analysis and construction of
arguments.
❱ CRITICAL THINKING
- is distinguishing facts and opinions or personal feelings.
- helps us uncover bias and prejudice and open to new
ideas not necessarily in agreement with previous thought.
- In making rational choices, first, we suspend beliefs and
judgment until all facts have been gathered and
considered.
- Though facts are important, critical thinking also takes
into consideration cultural systems, values, and beliefs.
- use either inductive or deductive reasoning (syllogism)
❱ DEDUCTIVE REASONING
- is an act of drawing a conclusion from usually one
broad judgment or definition and one more specific
assertion, often an interference.
❱ SYLLOGISM
- an instance of a form of reasoning in which a conclusion
is drawn (whether validly or not) from two given or
assumed propositions (premises), each of which shares a
term with the conclusion, and shares a common or middle
term not present in the conclusion
❱ OPINION
- belief or judgement that falls short of absolute
conviction. It is a conclusion that certain facts, ideas, etc.,
are probably true or likely to prove so
❱ BELIEFS
- statements that express convictions that are not easily
and clearly explained by facts.
❱ CONCLUSION
- judgment based on certain facts
❱ ARGUMENTS
- series of statements that provide reasons to convince
the reader or listener that a claim or opinion is truthful
❱ PRPOSITION
- is a statement or assertion that expresses a judgment or
an opinion.
❱ PREMISE
- a statement in an argument that provides reason or
support for the conclusion.
VALIDITY AND SOUNDNESS
❱ VALIDITY
- According to Reed (2010), If the two premises are
constructed logically, then the conclusion must follow
logically, the deductive argument is valid.
- This does not necessarily mean that the conclusion is
true or false. Validity comes from a logical conclusion
based on logically constructed premises.
|| Example : • All math teachers are rich. (Major premise) •
Mr. V is a math teacher. (Minor premise) • Mr. V is rich.
(Conclusion) ||
❱ SOUNDNESS
- The syllogism earlier is logically constructed which
means that it is a valid argument. But the conclusion is not
necessarily true since not all Math teachers are rich.
Therefore, the argument is only valid but not sound.
- It can only be sound if it is both logically constructed
and the conclusion is true.
|| Example : • Fruit trees are plants. (Major Premise) •
Mango trees are fruit trees. (Minor Premise) • Mango trees
are plants. (Conclusion) ||
- ADDITIONAL NOTES -
❱ RENE DESCARTES
- Father of Modern Philosophy
- he was a mathematician, philosopher, and scientist.
- he developed rules for deductive reasoning, developed a
system for using letters as mathematical variables, and
discovered how to plot points on a Cartesian plane
Doubt → Think → Exist
- premise of what Descartes said, one of the thinkers
who proposed the thought ; the nature of reality is
existing outside the mind.
❱ Cogito Ergo Sum - “I think, therefore I am”
- Because in the act of doubting, you are thinking.
Therefore, you are existing
❱ IDEALISM vs REALISM
- Idealism (knower) and Realism (known)
- attempts to fill the gap
❱ ABSURDITY
- search for meaning in a world without meaning
❱ AMOR FATI
- from Nietzsche — acceptance of our faith
❱ SARTRE
- we are free to choose but not free not to choose.
🗒 ❛ notes by rai ༉‧₊˚✧ - Page 10
 Chapter 3 || The Human Person As An Embodied Spirit || Philosophy
୨— What makes us human persons —୧
(Abella, 2016)
❱ MAN
— a general term commonly used to refer to the entire
human race
❱ HUMAN
— refers to man as a species – Homo Sapiens Sapiens
or modern human beings
❱ PERSON
— refers to a human being granted recognition of certain
rights, protection, responsibilities, and dignity above all.
❱ PERSONHOOD
— the state of being a person
— may also be understood in terms of “what one must
possess to be part of our moral community, to be
deserving of our moral consideration” .
❱ HUMAN NATURE
— characteristics that distinguish humans from all other
creatures that iinclude thinking, feeling and acting.
Philosophers believe that the human being is not a mere
animal. There’s something in humans that sets them apart
from other beings. These special traits make a human
distinct individual person. Both a dog and a person can feel
things, but can a dog reflect philosophically? That’s what
defines us as a human person — different from others.
❱ GENETIC CRITERION (John Noonan)
— you’re a person if you have human DNA.
❱ COGNITIVE CRITERION (Mary Ann Warren)
— you’re a person if you possess consciousness,
reasoning, self-motivated activity, capacity to
communicate and self-awareness.
❱ SOCIAL CRITERION
— you’re a person whenever society recognizes you as a
person or whenever someone cares about you
❱ SENTIENCE (Peter Singer)
— you’re a person if you have the ability to feel pleasure
or to feel any pain.
❱ GRADIENT THEORY
— states that personhood comes in degrees, and you can
have more or less of it.
— example : a fetus would slowly grow in personhood
throughout pregnancy, as cognition develops
We could further understand personhood in terms of:
● embodiment
● transcendence
THE HUMAN PERSON AS AN EMBODIED SPIRIT :
● Philosophers consider the human person as
defined by the union of the body and spirit.
● Embodiment helps us to do and experience all
the things that make us human persons.
● Love may be simply a result of various
biological reactions associated with an
increase in hormones, which may have certain
effects on the body. But philosophy offers more
profound meanings and these meanings allow us
to enhance the quality of our human experiences.
● Our body stands as the mediator between the
material world and the spiritual world. Being an
embodied spirit, the person is able to encounter
the world of objects (and other personal subjects)
in a manner that transcends the physical. This
feature allows him to form intimate relationships to
those outside him.
● This allows persons to attach certain feelings or
ideas not only to people but also to objects.
● We have a unique relationship with the world.
● As an embodied spirit, it is our right and
responsibility to give our Spirit its fullest
expression in this body. The opportunity to
become embodied and whole begins at birth and
continues throughout life.
TRANSCENDENCE :
❱ TRANSCENDENCE
— transcendental (adj.)
— convey the basicground concept from the word’s literal
meaning (from Latin), of climbing or going beyond, with
varying connotations in its different historical and cultural
stages; exceeding limitations.
● Appreciating art — has transcendent existence.
● Knowledge and law — will also require
transcendence. Scientific knowledge and laws are
transcending simple, phenomenal things to
abstract.
● A soul that is capable of coming to life and
experiencing profound and hidden values —
which the flesh and its senses can never discover
alone.
● Spirituality — is identified with the divine image
in our soul.
🗒 ❛ notes by rai ༉‧₊˚✧ - Page 11
 ୨— 8 Concepts on How the Human Body Imposes
BUDDHISM : From Tears to Enlightenment
Limitations and Possibilities for Transcendence —୧
Course Hero (n.d.); Pardi (2011)
— ultimate aim of the Buddha’s teachings is thus to help
1. DREAD individuals attain the good life.
— his analysis of the source of suffering centrally involves
— man is simply thrown into the world and is left alone to claims concerning the nature of persons, as well as how
face what he can do because he did not will for it. we acquire knowledge about the world and our place in it.
2. BEING OTHERS-RELATED
୨— Four Noble Truths —୧
— he has to establish relationship with others in this world.
3. CONCERN 1. Life is full of suffering.
2. Suffering is caused by passionate desires, lust,
— moral duty to care for the “other”. and cravings;
4. GUILT-FEELING 3. Only as these are obliterated, will suffering cease
4. Such eradication of desire may be accomplished
— “Guilt, remember, is the bind that man experiences only by following the Eightfold Path of earnest
when he is humbled and stopped in ways that he does endeavor:
not understand… Guilt results from unused life, from ‘the
unlived in us” (Becker, 1973). a. Right belief
b. Right aspiration
5. CONSCIENCE
c. Right speech
— conscience plays a primary role in recovering from d. Right conduct
being “lost or fallen” in this world. e. Right means of livelihood
6. RESOLUTENESS f. Right endeavor
g. Right mindfulness
— man’s readiness to be called by conscience. h. Right meditation
7. TEMPORALITY
❱ THE WAY TO SALVATION
— imposes limits to one’s human body.
— lies through self-abnegation, rigid disciple of mind and
8. DEATH body, a consuming love for all living creatures, and the
— the human person’s temporal existence will find its end final achievement of the state consciousness which marks
on death. an individual’s full preparation for entering the Nirvana
(enlightened wisdom) of complete selflessness.
— In that state (Nirvana), the effects of the Law of
୨— The Spiritual Philosophies —୧ cause and Effect (Karma) are overcome; the Cycle of
Rebirth is broken; and one may rest in the calm assurance
Ramos (2016, pp. 49-55)
of having attained a heavenly bliss that will stretch into all
eternity.
HINDUISM : Brahman is Self - Hood
CHRISTIANITY
— Hinduism : the human being has a dual nature
1. The spiritual and immortal essence (soul); ❱ KNOWING THE DIVINE
2. Empirical life and character ● capacity and love for investigation are both due to
▪ Between the two natures, however, it is maintained that it is the fact that “there is a Spirit in man: and the
the soul that is ultimately real. inspiration of the Almighty gives [him]
▪ The existence of the body, in the fact, is considered as understanding.”
nothing more than an illusion and even an obstacle to an ● philosophy of Christianity is the love of Divine
individual’s realization of one’s real self. Wisdom. Its cornerstone is the maxim of John: “In
▪ Hindus generally believe that the soul is eternal but is the beginning was the Word, and the Word was
bound by the law of Karma (action) to the world of matter, with God and the Word was God.”
which it can escape only after spiritual progress through ● "This is life eternal, that they might know thee
an endless series of births. (you), the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom
▪ God allots rewards and punishments to all beings according thou has sent.”
to their karma (Puligandla 1997). Similar to prisoner
enclosed within the wall of his body. For this reason, ❱ SALVATION
humanity’s basic goal in life is the liberation (moksha) of
● Christian philosopher, Augustine (354
spirit (jiva).
▪ This Hindu view of reality place a lot of emphasis on the
AD-430AD) opposed the idea that those in power
attainment of self-knowledge. The goal of human life as are God’s instruments to establish Christianity on
conceived by the different Upanishads to overcome earth. He defines the concept of “original sin”
congenital ignorance.
🗒 ❛ notes by rai ༉‧₊˚✧ - Page 12
 which is man’s natural inclination to sin or what he
calls, libido dominandi or the desire to dominate.
● evident in brutal and merciless way we treat
others, characterized by egoism and pride, lusts,
failure to understand ourselves and our anxieties.
● it is not for humans to judge each other by
outward markers of success (meritocracy).
● The Gospel of Jesus Christ, "good tidings of great
joy," was the announcement of a Saviour, who
should "save his people from their sins.
● His purpose was neither to destroy nor to change
the divine methods of education, but to:
○ fulfill typical prophecies
○ to throw a stronger light upon the
relationships of man to his Maker
○ to temper personal independence by a
clearer sense of personal responsibility
○ to communicate a knowledge of the
personality of God, His personal interest
in His intelligent creatures, and the
personal help (Holy Spirit), which He
grants to all who feel a need of help and
are willing to accept it.
● God as the source of all truth and all power
● the highest wisdom in the great truths of religion,
he counted all earthly knowledge and all earthly
possessions as dross in comparison with the
heavenly inheritance. "For what shall it profit a
man, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his
own soul?"
❱ LOVE BEYOND DEFORMITY
● For contemporary philosopher and author C.S.
Lewis (2016), “Man does not exist for his own
sake. ‘Thou hast created all things, and for thy
pleasure they are and were created.’ We were
made not primarily that we may love God (though
we were made for that too) but that God may love
us, that we may become objects in which the
Divine love may rest ‘well pleased’.”
● God already loves us, so He must labour to make
us lovable.
● “What we would here and now call our ‘happiness’
is not the end God chiefly has in view: but when
we are such as He can love without impediment,
we shall in fact be happy.”

୨— End of Philosophy Quarter 1 —୧

🗒 ❛ notes by rai ༉‧₊˚✧ - Page 13