| — os SIN SS | —_—oCoCS and Philosophy of History PRO oe non historical context. His situation in this context depends on him to a certain extent. Thus, a philosophy of history depends on one’s philosophy of man. There are as many philosophies of history as there are philosophies of man. The Materialistic concept of man aims to gain material goods such as wealth, power, personal enjoyment. The Spiritual or Asian concept of man emphasizes spiritual ends such as virtue, goodness, compassion, and charity. The Existentialist concept of man posits individual aims or objectives rather than the common objectives of humanity. The Structuralist concept of man stresses the hidden structures that manipulate human beings. The Behaviorist concept of man considers man as a machine that responds to the same stimulus every time. The Christian concept of man regards God as the be-all and end-all of history. a Section 1 re sya? 1 78 have-nots": “of the means of production, and State control Critique of Historical Theory / 91neory which is the Materialistic concep’ is called Dialectical Materialism. This : two opposing forces battle against each 0 1 thesis versus an antithesis and producing a synthes; ince feudal times, the struggle of two forces, namely the and the serf, has been evident in history. Marx has — ued that feudalism will give way to capitalism wie jIves surplus value of profit, and then it will be replaced by Socialism. Later on, Communism will result because the class war between the capitalist and the worker he exploits will end in the overthrow of capitalism itself. In the end, the ideal of Communism will be achieved, namely, a “classless” communist society where there will be equality among its members. Each one will contribute to the State according to his abilities, and receive from the State, according to his needs There is no doubt that, theoretically, Dialectical Materialism or Communism is seductive and even more Christian than Christianity it seems to steal the thunder from under Christianity itself. In theory, every human being keeps his dignity and responsibility because he is a personal contributor to the State which, in turn, takes care of his needs. In practice, this Communist style will work only for a small social group like a family ora _teligious community where the head can indeed take _ Of the needs of its members. Will it work in a soci Ps with millions of citizens? Will the head of State be abl 2 of the needs of each citizen? ; The main objection of Communism against capitali p of private property. By amassing priv:property, capitalists cause a dislocation oran of ownership. The profit and means of prodi siphoned into capitalist coffers, thus deprivi: inequality luction are ng workers of just wages because capitalists will always try to cut down wages for more profitability. As a result, animosit petween capitalists and laborers will ensue, aeeenane the balance between labor and capital, and create inequality of social classes. uM a ; g . Once they are clothed in tatters or in silk, inequality begins. Even if, for the sake of argument, all men are given equal or the same means of living, how long will they remain equal? Some men have vices; some don't. Some men are misers; some men are generous. menzi One takes care of what is his own. An object commonly owned is not well cared for. Communism aims at common ownership and not merely at sharing of property. The rich may share their bounty with the poor out of a Christian sense of generosity but it is not enough for Communism. What it aims at is equality of status, wealth, means of production, etc. The Communist or Materialist philosophy of history keeps track of all the struggles throughout history towards a future where all economic classes will be reduced to only one class. In this supposedly classless society, every man would be equal to every other man. Section Z The Spiritual or Asian concept of man emphasizes the spiritual aspects of man in its philosophy of history. The bodily or material aspects is de-emphasized. Life on earth is not considered as important as life in the next. Wealth. 's philosophy of history is a story of man’s futilit, are a alte bata until the cme he dies. : y Jean-Paul Sartre is more specific. "All existing beings are born without reason, continue to exist out of weakness, and die by accident’.®* For Sartre, man has no choice of being on earth, of existing all the way, of being free all the way. God, for Sartre, is a contradictory being. He does not only not exist but that He cannot exist, Freedom is the path to perfection. Once perfection is achieved, there is no need for freedom. But the idea of God is perfection and freedom which are contradictory terms. The fourfold theme of freedom, existence, atheism, and absurdity is evident in Huis Clos (No Exit, in English translation) which is supposed to be the Sartrean hell. A paper-knife exists but there are no books to cut; a light bulb exists but there is no switch; a bell functions when it is not needed and it does not function when needed; the door would not open when Garcin wants to leave but it opens when Garcin no longer wants to leave. Absurdity, hopelessness, cross-purposes—in a word, futility—are what characterize human reality. And to end his thick book L’étre et le néant (Being and Nothingness), Sartre summarizes his concept of man thus: “L'homme est une passion inutile” (Man is a useless passion.)*° The atheist Existentialist philosophy of history stresses the need for man always to rise higher than what he is now, to be constantly on the go to achieve greater. perfection, hence with no moment of respite lest he backpedal to past inauthenticity. He is likened to Sisyphus who is condemned to bring a rock up a mountain and everytime he rests, the rock falls down and Sisyphus begins all over again. The atheist Existentialist philosophy of history sees historical events as a chain of meaningless or worthless occurrences that will end in defeat. Albert Camus, while not listed among the Existentialists, upholds all existentialist themes: futility, morbidity, @ Jean-Paul Sartre, La Nausée, pp. 188-189, * Jean-Paul Sartre, Létre et le néant, p. 708mes aware of how futile life can invariable routine of working, yin and year out, will all be climaxed te mely, death. Absurdity lies in our nd a world that cannot be understood. ‘ g and universal truth, but nly becor he sudde eT nt and be. The incessa eating, sleeping, by an absurd eve wish to understand 7 Wwe seek a more encompassin: ere fragments of it. ; = te all must end in death, why should it not be “ re is only one serious hastened? oe os nd that is suicide. Judging philosophical prob em, a a fan whether life is or is not worth living amounts 2 answering the fundamental question of philosophy: There are, however, two kinds of suicide: physicalvand metaphysical. Physical suicide is a clear recognition that life is not worth living, whereas metaphysical suicide begins with futility or doubt and arrives at certainty. Metaphysical suicide is abandoning one’s commitment or one’s original position, to assume the contrary, though an absurd one. This is the suicide of Soren Kierkegaard who has committed philosophical or metaphysical suicide by his leap of faith to reach God. Camus asks if this is not a sort of escapism, an evasion, a failure to grasp reality as it is. Camus does not accept either form of suicide. To commit physical suicide is to evade the issue, or to recoil in the face of battle. To make a leap of faith is not the solution either, for it evades the problem and seeks refuge in a blind faith. For Camus, there can only be revolt. Man must face life, not run away from it; he should, in full consciousness, struggle without hope, live his life face- to-face with death; he should take things as they are, not seeing more than what there really is. Only then can one have an illusion of meaning. Camus advocates a metaphysical revolt—a protestation against the ultimate end of man. It is a revolt against heaven, a complete defiance of God. Pe "erary works of Camus, we find the theme of enhances pre estrated in different tones and further y happenstance or contretemps.In Le Malentendu (The Misy ing 4 eransation), Marth oad qerderanding, tn Bali somewhere in Europe where the sun never shines and it is gloomy and rainy all year round. Martha dreams of that other country where the “soles of the feet are pleasantly burned by sun-warmed pebbles’, but to go to that country— presumably Algeria, where Camus was born—they need money. They kill hotel guests and divest them of their money. The mother becomes weary of the killing and asks Martha that they stop. Martha pleads for just “this last one”, By happenstance, this last victim is their son and brother Jan who left home long ago to seek a fortune. He is now rich and comes home to share his fortune with his mother and sister. Jan is not recognized. Martha goes about the usual task of serving the “hospitable” tea, not with sympathy, but with poison. When Jan’s passport is found and his true identity is revealed, the mother commits suicide saying that if a mother does not recognize her own son, she has no right to continue living. In L’Etranger”, Mersault, a government employee is called abruptly to attend the funeral of his mother whom he has committed to a home for the aged and whom he has forgotten. Mersault goes through the entire ritual with no filial sentiment. He smokes unconcernedly, does not shed a tear, and does not even want to have a last glimpse of his mother. After the funeral, he does not linger and hurriedly goes to a Fernandel movie film, and laughs at the antics of the famous French comedian. One day, Mersault gets involved in a crime of which he is not even personally concerned. He kills an Arab, the brother of his friend’s girlfriend. Being sensitive to sunlight which affects his eyes, Mersault pulls the trigger of the gun and kills the Arab—a happenstance. At the trial, the prosecution finds Mersault guilty not because he has killed an Arab but because he has not shed a tear during his mother’s wake, and has not lingered at his mother’s grave after the burial. Therefore, he is presumed to be a hardened criminal. ° There are 2 translations in English: The Stranger and The Outsider” Salvation and immortality leav u ed. If all men will not be saved, then ise to be saved. Ivan pleads for an “all 2 ou rien) for it will be the height of injustice ill be saved and some will not be saved. Arebel mands an explanation for his misery, does not run away it, and does not resort to an explanation through h. Life on earth is all that there is, and it is precisely absence of all hope in a future existence which _ intensifies the value of life. _ What are all these protestations, metaphysical revolt, ‘the defiance and rebellion of the atheist Existentialists if not man’s desire for a happier life? By suppressing God, ‘they have merely created another God, a god of man-made justice, a kind of justice according to their specifications. The atheist Existentialist thinkers— Heidegger, Sartre and Camus—defend a philosophy of history that accentuates absurdity and the futility of life. The theist Existentialists—Marce] and Jaspers—uphold the Philosophy of history based on the existence of a _ benevolent God who accompanies man throughout history. The theists are optimistic for they see with the _ eyes of faith despite the ravages of the European war, __ Apbhilosophy of history depends on the philosophy of “man as seen in the opposite stance of the atheist and eist conceptions of man. fats Section 4 t ist concept of man holds that the human d, i.e, man merely follows hid Laon man has no will of eeucturalists, Michel Fouca are creatures of structure which is a “tho a thought which runs through art, the s religion, history like the perforated tape ofa mi piano or like the chain of chromosomes on which id is stamped."** Hence, no matter how we may diff customs and tradition, no matter how separated we geographically and historically, we are tied down underneath to a common ground which is the structure, like islands separated on the surface but are nonetheless linked at bottom } If brought into full light, some general and necessary characteristics would present themselves which are already preordained in the structure. These structures: are self-adjusting mechanisms and they keep order within a system. One example is the Innate Releasing Mechanism (IRM) of the human body which, in times of stress, releases hormones for increased body activities. Language is another product of structure. Jacques Lacan says that in the human mind there isa “logic operating by _ means of binary contrasts: high and low, heaven and earth, — masculine and feminine’ which seem to be a priori structures that defy explanation. Why do we all speak in terms of contrasts or opposites even when we are too young to have understood the Principle of Contradiction or th Law of Contrariety? Is it not possible, asks Lacan, t _ structures of language have already been in existence before conscious thought begins? Language then ait of culture but rather of an innate fixed s anach, ‘Le systéme et la personne” ‘Lacan, Ecrits, pp. 101-108.a contingent of indiv the events even after a ae! is, therefore, never rane s, race, custom, etc. f myths, for example. There are mythshim by poverty which already determines his thinking. “It is not the consciousness of righ that determines their existence but their social existence nthat determines their consciousness.”® History will then be a mere unfolding of what has alread: . ly been pre- in the structures. pre-established Structuralism is the direct antithesis of Existentialism and therefore their philosophies of history are also antithetical. Existentialism upholds human freedom to the point of denying human nature. Structuralism denies human freedom due to structures which can be another name for human nature. Are human freedom and human nature really incompatible? Does one really cancel the other? Absolutely speaking, yes; relatively speaking, the two can co-exist without question. Structurally, the eyes are made to see, the ears to hear, and yet existentially, an individual may choose to ignore what he sees or hears. Structurally animals are attracted to food and sex. Rational animals, i.e., human beings are similarly attracted but existentially, they can sometimes forego these pleasures for a higher good or purpose. Section The Behaviorist concept considers man as a machine whose behavior must be studied empirically rather than speculatively. The behavior of man consists of actions and reactions to stimuli in the environment. Man is considered an animal like Pavlov’s dog that salivated whenever the usual conditions were present. Human beings react to the same stimulus every time. They are like slot machines that act in the same way every time a coin is inserted therein. Based on this concept of man, the Behaviorist philosophy of history is a repetition of endless reactions to the same historical stimuli, a simple uncomplicated series of mechanical nexus between stimuli and reactions. © Karl Marx, Critique of Political Economy, p. 21i ras men react to the usual | Wars and eS aac aggression, etc. ct in the same way to the same e that they are also animals and men are complex animals that discern better ways of achieving their ends. They a spurn food and sex in view of a higher commitment er to a Supreme Being or to health. This ability to achieve the same ends in different ways is the distinction that puts man above the brute animals. : Behaviorism rules out freedom of man and likens human beings to cars or machines that come out of an assembly line. This means that all men are alike with no individual differences in behavior. Does Béhaviorism conform to experience? Is it true that human beings always react in the same way to the same stimulus? If so, there should be no rewards or punishments because retribution depends on freedom which does not exist according to Behaviorists. Do men always real stimuli? While it is tru react to food, sex, etc., Section b The Christian concept admits the dual composition of man as soul and body and puts equal importance on both. The body must be cared for on this earth; at the game time, the soul must work for its salvation in the next. The Christian philosophy of history accepts God to be the creator and end of human history. Man’s life on earth is but a prelude to a Christian heaven where there _ will be a union of the human soul with its Creator. No matter what good or evil happens in life, it will end as _ God has ordained it to be. However, beware to anyone who claims that God “predestines” in the way of fatalism. Man has free will to act the way he wants, even if it be to subvert a Higher _ Will. Predestination is not fatalism. The former is salutary, the latter is destructive; the former means that God accompanies man i: i C n every step of history; the latter dooms man to failure. P 7not only a ono ist of no mean dimensions. T logist and paleontologist who ha oing paleontological research. volumes: La vision du p. ne, Le phénoméne humain, Li al matter or radial energy. — lhard teaches a type of evolnot a dualism but a monism (one ip the universe: matter-spirit, elemend) eens form of spirit and vi a a zt ther is no pure matter or pure spirit, Sane level in his ladder of evolution is Pre-Life te he evolved from the elemental stulf and has complexified into this inorganic state. Teilhard calls Geogenesis the evolution of the elemental stuff into Pre- Life. Teilhard’s law of complexification states that there is a continuous evolution from the elemental stuff into higher levels in such a manner that spirit and matter are always in inverse proportion. Teilhard speaks of a within (dedans) and a without (dehors). The outside or the without of every being is the peripheral, the perceivable (or matter), whereas the within (dedans) is consciousness. Every being in the universe carries a within and a without which implies that there is a consciousness (or spirit) even in the lowest sphere of being as in the case of stones, minerals, and non-living beings belonging to Pre-Life. From Pre-Life evolves Life which he calls Biogenesis. In this stage, there is a higher form of consciousness (or spirit) than in Pre-Life. What Teilhard means is that consciousness does not just appear from nowhere. If it bursts forth in a higher stage, it is because it has already been present, albeit in a primal state, in the lower stages of evolution. The highest form of consciousness is found in the next stage, namely, the Rational stage, called Psychogenesis, which is the human stage. The Pre-Life, Life and Rational stages (Geogenesis, Biogenesis and Psychogenesis respectively) comprise what Teilhard calls hominization. Evolution, however, does not end in man as other evolutionary theories do. Man is still capable of rising higher by means of a non- scientific power called Love. Man can become a Hyper- Person in a Hyper-Life which is preparatory to union with the Cosmic Christ or the God-Man which ‘Teilhard calls the Omega Point. Teilhard uses Love instead of freedom to enable man to be with the Cosmic Christ or the Christ For Teilhard, it iswho loves man. If he uses the appell js it not to blaspheme; on the contr. y, he wa that Christ is involved in man’s history pean to show his final end or objective. y and evolution as The Hyper-Person or 2 : : together of humanity, a ee “ coming interpenetration, a plurality within unity “a a in unity. The Omega Point is the convergence pi from non-Life, pre-life, life, i.e., everything will cul ore in God, who is Christ, the God-Man. Tmunate a Teilhard’s philosophy is Christian even if he has been initially misunderstood and even castigated by the Vatican. Teilhard is not a heretic, nor is he irreverent to the Christ. He is way ahead of his time. His books are now widely read and discussed. The Christian concept emphasizes teleology, i.e., purpose. Man has a purpose, an objective, an end which is God. The Christian God is personal, one with whom a person can communicate unlike in other religions like Hinduism where Brahman is an impersonal Totality that includes all or is All. In other religions, fear of God is the emphasis whereas in Christianity, it is Love. Freedom is of the highest importance in Christianity because love ent on freedom. Love is freely given, it cannot ation Cosmic Christ is depend be forced. The Christian philosophy of history is optimistic. No matter what happens in the course of history, in the end, it will be salutary to mankind, for God is the Alpha and the Omega, the beginning and the end of human history. The idea of creation is already implied in the Christian concept of man; likewise, the end of man as God. Christianity considers God as Love: He created man out of love, and man can reach God also through love.