Download as pdf or txt
Download as pdf or txt
You are on page 1of 10

© Kamla-Raj 2014 Anthropologist, 18(2): 315-324 (2014)

A Study into Philosophical Anthropology of the Teaching of


Philosophy in Turkey
Mehmet Ali Dombayci

Gazi Faculty of Education, Gazi University, Ankara, 06500, Turkey


E-mail: dombayci@gazi.edu.tr
KEYWORDS Philosophical Anthropology, Teaching of Philosophy, Philosophy Curriculum, Conditions of
Existence

ABSTRACT The aim of this study is to analyse the philosophy course which is taught in secondary education in
Turkey from the perspective of philosophical anthropology. The emergence of philosophical anthropology in the
context of the question “What is man?” as a philosophical discipline is a remarkable process. Besides the importance
of the establishment of philosophical anthropology as a discipline by Scheler, it is also required to analyse other
views in anthropology in an interactive manner. In this study, different views on anthropology in the history of
philosophical anthropology are put forward. Takiyettin Mengusoglu’s anthropology is introduced as a philosophical
anthropology based on ontological grounds within its own systematic, in line with a critical view on these different
opinions. There are also some conclusions about the historical process, development, and content of philosophy
courses taught in Turkey. In terms of an analysis of this course, this last philosophical anthropology was preferred
as it has a holistic view about man. Some recommendations are presented from the perspective of a philosophical
anthropology, first for education and for the philosophy course for high schools.

INTRODUCTION man distinguished himself from other beings in


terms of his thoughts and emotions and is
The adventure of man is to exist, to know that considered superior to other living things with its
he exists and to try to bring into existence. unique possession of logos, in a way having a
Philosophy turned to human with Protagoras’ special bond to Divinity. During Renaissance and
saying “Man is the measure for all”. This tendency with the re-exploration of man, rather than the
became more apparent and effective with Socrates. religious and God-centred perception of man
The motto of this adventure,”Know Thyself!” is during the Middle Ages, man was perceived as
transformed into a question, and it could also be immanent. Along with Descartes, researches
expressed as “What’s man?” Questions with focused on the conscience of man rather than man
“What?” are fundamental to philosophy. The himself, and as a result, the essence of man was
distinctive quality of philosophical questions is linked with logos. This perspective made it
the fact that the philosopher asks these to himself. possible to turn to man, to the subject (Akdemir
So, in a way when a philosopher asks the question 2010). The idea of pantheism, starting from
“What is man?” to himself, he makes himself the Avicenna to Spinoza and to Hegel, emphasised
problematic, the object of research and scrutiny. that human spirit identifies with the divine spirit.
The human problem has been dealt with by a Leibniz goes one step further and says that man,
great many different disciplines. The common himself, is a sort of minor god (Cilingir 2014). Later
characteristic of these disciplines is an effort of on, together with the original thoughts of
human being to perceive himself and has varied philosopher such as Kant, Nietzsche, Scheler,
throughout history. In ancient Hindu thinking, man Camus, Cassirer, Heidegger, and Mengusoglu,
perceived himself together with the all other living philosophical anthropology became transformed
things.In ancient Greece, however, we see that into an independent field.
The most significant and distinctive act of
Address for correspondence: man, whom philosophical anthropology analyses
Dr. Mehmet Ali Dombayci from a holistic and ontological perspective, it “to
Assist. Prof.
Gazi Faculty of Education think”. The basic notion of philosophy education
Philosophy and Related Sciences is the thinking-based attempt to know oneself.
Education Department, Gazi University Man can learn how to think only when he pays
Ankara, 06500, Turkey full attention to what needs to be thought about
Telephone: +905323430580
E-mail:dombayci@gazi.edu.tr (Heidegger 2009). Learning how to think is only
316 MEHMET ALI DOMBAYCI

possible through reflection which means the the data, the relevant data gathered from
thinking process bends over itself, contemplating documents were noted down in the first place,
about itself. We can see the link between reflection and these notes were analysed carefully and
and the reflexive quality of philosophical categorised to cover all aspects of philosophical
knowledge in the etymological analysis of both anthropology in terms of their relationship. The
concepts. Both the concept of flexible and the data analysed and commented within the
concept of flection are the past participle form of framework of the purpose of this study were
the concept flectere (Harper 2014). The fact that synthesised in line with the problem of this
the act of thinking questions itself means that own research and suggestions to be made.
conditions of existence of the thinking being are
questioned. Philosophical anthropology looks Philosophical Anthropology
into all these by making analyses and definitions.
Dealing with philosophy teaching from a It is likely to encounter a number of
perspective of philosophical anthropology means anthropological theories throughout the history
exploring ways of knowing oneself – questioning of philosophical anthropology. These could be
oneself – thinking about oneself. In the current listed as follows; the theory of developmental
study, methodology was given as a priority, and psychology, the Geist theory established by Max
then the emergence of philosophical anthropology Scheler, the biological theory and cultural
with the views of thinkers giving their contribution anthropology which is derived from culture and
to this discipline was introduced. Besides the its related concepts.
views of these thinkers, the philosophical The first one is the theory of developmental
anthropology of Takiyyettin Mengusoglu coming psychology. This theory maintains that there
to the fore with his original ideas was given. should only be a difference of degree between
Following that the philosophy course taught at man and other living things rather than a difference
high schools was introduced. Within the of form and quality. It tries to show that the
philosophical anthropology context of Mengu- uninterruptedness of biological development also
soglu, the evaluation of the philosophy course exists in the psychic realm. W. Kohler, an important
taught in secondary education in Turkey was figure in the frame of this theory, claims that there
realized and the results were shared. Some reco- is a concrete parallelism between the phenomena
mmendations were given depending on the of soul and body and this should be underlined in
evaluations. psychology (Ang 2006).
The second theory was put forward by Scheler.
METHODOLOGY Scheler (1988) argues that taking the historical
process into consideration, when we ask the
This study is a research which uses descriptive question “What is man?”, we could get three
survey model in order to develop a suggestion different responses pointing at three completely
from philosophy teaching based on philosophical disagreeing opinions. The first one is the opinion
anthropology. Document analysis was used as a world of the Jewish-Christian tradition, in other
tool for data collection. Document analysis words Adam and Eve and their expulsion from
includes the analysis of written material that brings Heaven; the second one is the Ancient Greek
in information about the phenomenon or thought of human which considers man as a being
phenomena subject to research (Yildirim and with logos, phronesis, ratio, etc.; and the third
Simsek 2006). In order to resolve the main problem one is the human thought of modern natural
of this research, data based on literature were sciences and psychology which believes that man
gathered. As the main purpose of the study is to is the last stage of development and evolution on
present a suggestion for philosophy teaching in earth. As projections of these three different
the secondary level in Turkey, works of Mengu- understandings of man, traditions theological,
soglu, who established an original thinking of philosophical and natural scientific anthropology
philosophical anthropology as a Turkish thinker, emerged. However, these three anthropologies do
as well as reviews of his work constitute the basis not have any commonality among one another
of this work. On the other hand, other philoso- and neither do they take each other into
phical anthropology views in literature are also consideration. Scheler, therefore, claims that no
dealt with in a comparative way. In the analysis of answer has been found to the question “What is
A STUDY INTO PHILOSOPHICAL ANTHROPOLOGY 317

man?” and emphasizes the need for a new philoso- Both thinkers take culture as the centre of their
phical anthropology. According to the anthropo- views on anthropology. Although their starting
logy he presents, there is a difference inform point is different from one another, it could be
between man and other living things rather than a said that they analysed the same thing. While
difference in degree. It is emphasised that this development of culture is important for Rothacker,
difference in form should not be searched for in for Cassirer it is crucial that cultures are turned to
the bio-psychic structure of man and man is symbolic forms. According to Rothacker, cultural
divided into the two spheres of psycho-vital and life is a form of existence that gives life a content
Geist. It is further underlined that there is only a and a form. The laws on which this existence is
one degree difference between man and other based are the polar laws that keep the develop-
living things in the psycho-vital sphere, while the ment of cultures alive. Cultural anthropology can
main distinction lies in the sphere of Geist. This reach these laws by remaining in the frame of
sphere emerges as a realm in which biology and historical life style, mutual relationship among cul-
psychology cannot intervene as it does not need tures and understanding the links between the
a soul, nor a body. Geist is a principle contrary to branches of culture. Art, religion, philosophy,
life which is the consolidation of psycho-vital poetry, namely all branches of culture depend on
sphere signifying the unity of body and soul. It these laws. Cassirer, on the other hand, answer
also in holds the concept of logos and has a cer- the question “What is man?” not by defining man
tain act of perception. Hence, Geist appears as a not as an animal rationale , which has been the
pattern of acts. These acts do not take place by accepted definition so far, but as an animal
themselves and they require an actualiser. Scheler symbolicum. Man does not live in a world of
calls this actualiser “person”. Opposite to the realities, but in a world of symbols. This world is
person is “the world”. And opposite to the composed of myths, religion, language, history,
psycho-vital sphere is “the environment”. Man, art and science because man can only found the
as a being with Geist, becomes free by releasing cosmos of symbolic forms in these. This cosmos
himself from the dependence and pressure of enables man to interpret and understand his
everything that is psychic and organic. Such a experience and his life and to make links to the
being does not live in an environment, but in the world of ideas (Mengusoglu, 1988). The most
world. These ideas of Scheler imply that he divides important feature that makes man a man is his
man into two categories in a covert manner. Still ability to attach a single meaning to what exists,
the originality of his work and his being the first objects, and phenomena. Man is freed from single
in this field are enough to consider him as the meaning through symbolic forms. He can only
guru of philosophical anthropology (Ang 2006). express himself with the help of these symbols.
Biological anthropology stands out as another Symbolic form is the condition of both semantics
theory. In the scope of this theory, Arnold Gehlen and the human expression of meaning
compared the biology of human beings and (Cotuksoken 1997).
animals morphologically in order to set the These theories of anthropology derive from a
grounds for the place of man in this world. This psychological, metaphysical, or biological
comparison shows that man is a being of concept. Kant, however, does not base his ideas
deficiencies. He claims that the reason why man on any concept, but he deals with caring,
cannot adapt to his environment is the fact that education, the idea of the purpose, learning,
his organs are not specialised for specific tasks. transferring accomplishments from one generation
Man overcomes these lacking qualities with his to the other, working, founding states and actions.
intelligence, making it possible for him to live Therefore, Mengusoglu (1988) considers Kant’s
anywhere in the world. Hence, according to view on man as the fifth theory.
Gehlen, even human culture is a biological With Kant, the question “What is man?” was
concept. It depends on his biology since it is a for the first time dealt with differently when
product of biology. In this respect, it could be compared with his predecessors. The difference
said that Gehlen’s biological theory does not hang is mainly the result of Kant’s view on man which
in the ait, but is based on some real phenomena considers man as a moral being and the bearer of
(Mengusoglu 1988). freedom. Almost like for any other philosopher,
Cultural anthropology, the last theory, is for Kant also, opinions on existence and
represented by Erich Rothacker and Ernst Cassirer. knowledge form the basis for the opinions on
318 MEHMET ALI DOMBAYCI

ethics, metaphysics, history and others. Kant The developmental psychology view which
classifies the world of existence into two as is mostly based on biological data has shown that
“appearance” and “thing-in-itself”. He also there cannot be any difference or distinction
categorizes knowledge as a priori and a posteriori, between a man and an animal in terms of existence,
while dividing the moral realm into the elements but there could only be a difference of degree.
of freedom, personality and moral law. These This idea does not correspond to philosophical
elements point out to a dual understanding of man anthropology’s need to find solutions to the
in which Kant divides his ideas on man into two; problems arising in the man’s world and its desire
natural and reasonable being (Mengusoglu 1949). to reach a correct understanding of man. This new
However, the duality here, unlike that of Descartes discipline trying to identify the difference of
and Scheler, does not divide man into two existence tries to overcome this unproductive
categories ontologically. Hence his ontic view is state presented by the “developmental” under-
standing with the help of Scheler’s view. This view
gnoseologic and is referred to for knowledge. On
identified a sphere of existence which is in the
the other hand, Kant was the first philosopher to
authority of neither psychology nor biology as a
show that man is an autonomous being. Yet, the field of research for man. Finding Scheler’s view
autonomous side of man is only his reason. Man insufficient as well, Mengusoglu criticised the
is a natural being with his other aspect. Like all division of existence into two heterogeneous
other natural things that exist in time and space, spheres which are irrelevant ontologically.
man is also subject to the laws of nature. Being Scheler’s view fragmented its being and left Geist,
subject to the laws of reason, on the other hand, which cannot be associated with body and soul,
means being human, free and autonomous, as well vulnerable and hanging in the air. As a way out
as making law by oneself. The autonomous was sought, Gehlen, in his view based on biolo-
sphere makes both Kant’s philosophical gical grounds, drew attention to the fact that man
anthropology and his ethics possible. In this way, is a being of deficiencies with primitive organs.
man can be divided into two heterogeneous He was also criticised by Mengusoglu as he
spheres; autonomous and heteronomous reached metaphysical conclusions based on the
(Mengusoglu 1988) Kant’s adding one more fact that man is a defenseless being in terms of his
question to the already existing three ancient natural equipment and tried to explain all human
questions of philosophy shows that he prioritizes actions on biological grounds. This point of view
anthropological problems. These questions are: fails to explain the values governing human acts.
What can we know? What should be do? What It is not possible either to compensate for the
can we expect? and the fourth one What is man? negativity of man’s being deficient by using
While metaphysics deal with the first question, concepts of ethicising and rationalising. Another
morality takes the second, religion attempts to view that falls insufficient is cultural anthropology.
answer the third and anthropology tries to tackle Cultural anthropology may rather identify the
with the fourth. The first three questions pave the characteristics of nations. Philosophical anthro-
way for the fourth one.Takiyyettin Mengusoglu pology is not interested in identifying the various
deals with the fourth question in detail. characteristics that emerge in nations (Iyi 2006).
Thus, cultural anthropology also divides man
which is the field of study of philosophical
Philosophical Anthropology of
anthropology (Mengusoglu 1988).
Takiyettin Mengusoglu Kant’s anthropology is the closest view to the
philosophical anthropology established by
Mengusoglu criticises the major philosophical Mengusoglu and is based on ontological grounds,
anthropologies that have been established in our and it is, at the same time, a transition. Still,
century in order to acquire correct knowledge although Kant defines man as a free being who
about the existence of man and to set the ground wants and ideates, the fact that he divided natural
for his own philosophical anthropology. The and spiritual aspects of man with thick lines caused
anthropologies he criticises are the theory of him to fall in a duality. Mengusoglu’s anthro-
developmental psychology, Scheler’s Geist theory, pology does not divide man neither ontologically
biological theory and cultural anthropology that nor gnoseologically, while it does not abandon
takes culture and its concepts as the starting point. autonomy. Ontology is not necessary for reason,
A STUDY INTO PHILOSOPHICAL ANTHROPOLOGY 319

but it is needed for the wholeness of man. Hence, he should be considered together with the existing
in the coherent anthropology of Mengusoglu and changeable human characteristics (Ornek
there is no duality. 1997).
Mengusoglu presents an anthropology, in his Such kind of a philosophical anthropology
own words an anthropology based on ontology, considers the opportunities of man as a species,
against these views he criticizes. Leaving Kant’s as well as the characteristics of man, presenting a
theory aside, when the starting point is concepts starting point to deal with problems in other fields.
like development, Geist, deficient being, culture, Kucuradi (1997) explains that this starting point
etc. in anthropological problems, the ontological enables her to make a distinction which Mengu-
basis is lost. This would be a forced speculation soglu does not do, and that it constitutes a refer-
(Mengusoglu 1988). The main objective of ence point to approach problems in other fields.
Mengusoglu, who carefully sets the starting point In her work regarding human rights, she
of this new anthropology is to understand man as distinguishes between human characteristics and
what he really is. Hence, he takes an unbiased human possibilities based on philosophical
and plain view as a basis without referring to any anthropology. Conditions of existence preceded
presuppositions. He deals with the phenomena the idea of human possibilities, just like this idea
which are found in the concrete human existence, led the way to the ideas concerning the possibility
concrete integrity, concrete acts and the resulting to know, to do and act, to present values, etc.
accomplishments. The phenomena and With the actualisation of these possibilities,
accomplishments of human integrity are the knowledge, philosophy, sciences, technique,
following: man as a being who knows, acts, feels moral, culture and other human accomplishments
values, adopts attitudes, foresees and predeter- emerge. In other words, these themselves are also
mines, wants, ideates, commits himself to some- possibilities. These accomplishments are the
thing, works, educates and can be educated, actualisation of man’s possibilities. These
founds states, believes, speaks and who is free, accomplishments produce their products in an
historical, the creator of art and techniques, and interdependent way and they are among the main
biopsychic. Mengusoglu calls these accomplish- elements of man’s world as supra-person values
(Ozcan 2006).
ments and phenomena the “conditions of exis-
Mengusoglu considers all his work in the
tence” of man, which is a term uttered by Nietzsche
scope of new ontology. This has been criticised
(Mengusoglu 1959). by philosophers in Turkey in terms of philosophy
Mengusoglu’s original anthropology has three education. It is possible to link this criticism with
main philosophical sources. It derives from Kant the fact that philosophy in Turkey still does not
the idea that man is an autonomous being and take shape as a part of the culture. In an
has opportunities that could further be improved. environment where institutionalisation of
He attaches importance to the idea that how philosophy remains incomplete, it seems rather
accomplishments specific to man and man-made risky to show, process, and evaluate the concepts
works emerge from his very existence should be and problems of philosophy through the eyes of
shown explicitly, which is an idea that Scheler put a certain type of philosophy. Making the other
forward as a principle when defining the task of types of philosophy the point of criticism over
philosophical anthropology. It does not adhere and over again by this certain type of philosophy
to any assumption or acceptance other than the has also been criticised since it may lead to the
ontological integrity of man. Its idea of ontic spread of a single-perspective philosophy culture.
integrity lies in the phenomenology and ontology Although this is quite understandable in terms of
views of Nicolai Harttmann. Harttman, in his “new philosophy education, it does not prevent us from
ontology” talks about four levels of existence. considering Mengusoglu as the first system
These are respectively: inorganic, organic, philosopher of Turkish philosophy. Mengusoglu
psychic and spiritual levels. These levels come dealt with almost all subjects and problems of
together in the concrete integrity of man. In other philosophy within its systemic integrity. He made
words, man is a being which brings together all important detections and evaluations considering
levels of existence in himself. Destroying human not only the general subjects of philosophy, but
integrity means locking his being in a single also the historical and up-to-date problems of
concept or a system. Rather, as long as man exists, Turkish society (Ozlem 1997). From this point
320 MEHMET ALI DOMBAYCI

onwards philosophical anthropology shall mean 7. Students develop an attitude of inquiry to


Mengusoglu’s philosophical anthropology. understand themselves and the universe,
8. Students develop an attitude to have a multi-
Teaching of Philosophy in Secondary perspective look into topics,
Education in Turkey 9. Students develop a discussion culture, and
the attitude to be able to use concepts
In the History of Turkish Education, accurately and neatly when expressing their
philosophy has been taught in high schools and ideas.
Universities for many years. Teaching of 10. Students develop the skill to judge basic
Philosophy which was introduced to our problems of knowledge and science
secondary education along with the II. Mesrutiyet 11. Students establish the relationship between
period has been one of the courses which were life and philosophy
subject to a lot of changes both in terms of curricu- When the above mentioned overall aims are
lum and practise during the Republic period. Seven analysed, the fifth, the sixth, and the seventh aims
different curricula have been implemented so far are noteworthy in terms of philosophical anthro-
in high schools in the Republican Era. These are pology; however, they are not reflected in the
the curricula of 1924, 1935, 1950, 1976, 1985, 1993 attainments of the curriculum.
and the currently implemented 2009 curriculum
respectively. The most comprehensive and most OBSERVATIONS AND DISCUSSION
appropriate one in terms of curriculum develop-
ment technique is the 2009 curriculum which is In Turkey philosophy has been taught in
being taught at the moment. secondary education since the establishment of
As this study deals with the 2009 Philosophy the Republic, and this makes Turkey one of the
Curriculum, which is still officially taught, it would countries which teach philosophy at secondary
be useful to mention the overall aims: it is a level. It is possible to say that this brings about
curriculum in which the units and content of the both advantages and disadvantages in different
1993 Curriculum were partly maintained, but which ways. The fact that education is a science and
was developed in line with the constructivist
philosophy is a supra-science field sometimes
approach. It comprises eight units. These are, in a
given order: introduction to philosophy, makes it difficult to carry them out together. The
philosophy of knowledge, philosophy of difficulty here is that a supra-science field is dealt
existence, philosophy of morality, philosophy of with in the scope of teaching activities and an
art, philosophy of religion, philosophy of politics, education system that function in accordance with
and philosophy of science. Unlike other curricula, scientific principles and procedures. Still, it is a
activities are included. The curriculum, in which great advantage that students come across with
some units are shifted, show signs of the 2005 philosophy and its content in secondary
reform. The overall aims of the curriculum could education.
be listed as follows (MEB 2010); Teaching of philosophy should make man
1. Students acquire information about the field both the subject and object of education. Integrity
and fundamental problems of philosophy, of man can take place in two ways; one is by being
2. Students understand what philosophy is and a being with self-consciousness, the second is
develop the skills to carry out philosophical by being a being who can find himself and others
inquiry, in others (Akdeniz 1996). What is important here
3. Students adopt a philosophical perspective is to deal with this structure of integrity without
and develop the habit of using this destroying it. As an indicator of this structure of
perspective in their daily lives, integrity, a philosophical anthropology point of
4. Students develop systematically thinking view to philosophy teaching requires going
skills, beyond the philosophy course and the school in
5. Students develop the skill to inquire which this subject is taught (Kaynardag 1997).
existence as a whole, In this section, philosophy course will be
6. Students realise the meaning of values for evaluated in the light of the latest curriculum
man, and develop an attitude to judge both (MEB 2010) which has been taught since 2009,
ethical and aesthetic values from a national and in the context of the conditions of existence
and universal point of view, of philosophical anthropology (Mengusoglu
A STUDY INTO PHILOSOPHICAL ANTHROPOLOGY 321

1988). This intervention is considered not clarity as to which topic this aim is linked with and
concerning its relation to the phenomena to what extent it will be actualised (MEB 2010).
themselves, but in terms of its influence on the Man as a Being who Adopts an Attitude;
success of these phenomena regarding education. There is a correlation between man’s adopting an
Man as a Being Who Knows: The knowledge attitude towards the conditions of life and the
about man who has a tendency to know and who phenomena of knowledge, acting, and value. The
knows should be evaluated in the context of its bond activeness of man is due to the fact that he
with life. Hence, rather than how knowledge is formed possesses knowledge. Values define the direction
and what elements it comprises, the question of what of this activeness. These values display man’s
is the accomplishment of knowledge for human life attitude towards life. There are situations in which
is important. There is a parallelism between man can remain indifferent towards the conditions
Mengusoglu’s association of the knowledge in life. The reason might be his lack of knowledge,
phenomenon with the sphere of values and histo- value blindness, the fact that these situations do
ricism, and Cotuksoken’s utterances about the link not fall in the life sphere of man, or they may be
between knowledge and the outer world, thinking, due to a pathological reason. Except for the last
and language (Ozer 2011). There nine attainments one, we cannot talk about indifference or not taking
in total about the philosophy of knowledge in the an attitude. Philosophy education should
philosophy curriculum. The last one establishes establish links with these, apart from this last one.
a relationship between knowledge and life, while However, no such relationships have been
the others analyse how knowledge is formed and established. This kind of relationship can only be
what elements it comprises. No linkage is men- possible when affective aims are also included in
tioned between the world, thinking, and language. the curriculum (MEB 2010), but this curriculum is
On the other hand, as the curriculum deals with mainly composed of cognitive ones.
the acts of knowledge it establishes the relation- Man as a Being who Foresees, and Prede-
ship between knowledge and existence as a whole termines: Foresight is about the intentions, aims,
(Mengusoglu 1955). plans and related activeness of man. Sense of
Man as a Being Who Acts: The bond between value, which gives direction to the acts of man
the phenomenon of acting emerges as the practical also determines his attitudes. This determination
sphere of man but it is not limited to this only. makes it possible to accomplish the phenomena
This phenomenon can only turn into an of foresight and predetermination. Since values
accomplishment by being active, and being action and acts are not sufficiently dealt with as human
oriented. When the philosophy curriculum is acts in the curriculum, it is not possible to consider
analysed, it is clear that not all actions of man, as man as a being who foresees and predetermines.
a whole being, are deals with. These is an inquiry Though there is an attainment which says that
about the purpose of moral action and answers students question existence and their own
are sought from the perspective of the history of existence, it is not enough.
philosophy. Man as a Being who Wants: Human acts are
Man as a Being Who Senses Values: What actualised when the sense of value and the
regulates the acts of man is the sense of value in phenomena of taking an attitude and foreseeing-
man. The sense of value should be considered as predetermining are combined with want. Unlimited
a criterion in decision making. The relationship form of want, on the other hand, is desire and it
between the acts and values is uninterrupted. cannot stand being able to do, or being actualised,
Mengusoglu categorizes values as high values so it is indeed being a dreamer. In the curriculum,
such as love, knowledge, honesty, justice, etc., there is no perspective which would make it
material values such as benefit, interest, doubt, possible to consider man who wants in a way to
etc. as means values, and behavioural values that establish the links mentioned above.
are derived from the social structure of the society, Man as a Free Being: Man needs to take
traditions, and customs. Although there is a initiative to organize and sequence his own acts.
statement in the curriculum which says that the The opportunity needed to take this initiative is
aim is to ensure that students realise the meaning freedom. When the acts of man are governed by
of values for man, and develop an attitude to means values, freedom either disappears or is left
evaluate both ethical and aesthetic values from a with little space. In such cases, interests become
national and universal perspective, there is no influential. Hence, man’s acts should be governed
322 MEHMET ALI DOMBAYCI

by high values so that freedom is possible. The accomplishment of a task in the centre. The
curriculum limits the concept of freedom to moral curriculum does not have sufficient content to
acts; however, it does not make a link with values make an assesment of man’s committing himself
(MEB 2010). to meaningful work or thing.
Man as a Historical Being: History includes Man as a Being Who Can Educate and be
information about human acts, the resulting Educated: The bio-psychic cores that are found
accomplishments, and events that take place in man constitute the basis for phenomena.
between communities of man (Ang 2006). Man’s Phenomena such as knowing, acting, sensing
acts, as well as his accomplishments constitute values, being active, foreseeing-predetermining,
the sphere of historical existence. In this way, being free, etc. are not granted to man readily by
man sees what is historical as a whole and can be nature. In order for these to actualise, the pheno-
based on an anthropological ground deriving from mena of education and being able to be educated
the integrity of historical sphere. The curriculum are needed. Education of man needs him to be
is not sufficient in dealing with man and his from considered as a whole. His “plasticity” which
a spatial and temporal perspective. Information distinguishes him from other living things is the
about accomplishments and events are presented possi-bility for him to bend and to gain a new
in a disconnected way. form. Even though the curriculum accepts that it
Man as a Being Who Ideates: Giving meaning could only aim to educate the student in terms of
and ideating are related to the sphere of human philosophical inquiry at this level, it lacks the
life and sphere of human action. Each act is structure to make it possible.
governed by the values that need to be actualised. Man as a Founder of State: Man’s acts are
The existence of the phenomenon of ideating in categorised according to their purposes, and they
man is the precondition of historicity, and hence, are given meaning and ideated in the historical
of attaching meaning to experience. The process. The uninterruptedness of the human
curriculum (MEB 2010) is incomplete in terms of actions which ideate actions by the sense of values
giving meaning to philosophical topics and
is actualised by the phenomenon of work. Man
problems and in terms of conceptualising them.
owes these to his ability to form a social unity and
This incompleteness lead to a limited act of thinking
with regard to questioning the content. found a state. State, on one hand depends on the
Man as a Being Who Commits Himself to conditions of existence of the society, and on the
Something: In the act of man, in addition to the other hand it is the developing, governing, and
sense of value and desiring something, having a protecting factor of other conditions of existence.
purpose and committing oneself to this purpose State is a precondition of sustaining man’s con-
is also influential. Man’s committing himself to a ditions of existence. Although there is an attain-
certain thing shows that his actions are meaningful ment such as “the student recognizes how and
to him and he values his them. The relationship why states emerged” in the unit dealing with
between values and the phenomenon of comm- political philosophy in the curriculum (MEB 2010),
itting oneself to something affects man’s freedom this attainment is considered in the scope of ideas
as well. As the content of the curriculum mostly concerning the source of power, which requires
focuses on introducing –isms and philosophers, philosophical knowledge.
it does not leave any room to the student to Man as a Faithful Being: The phenomenon
question with an aim to commit himself to a certain of believing is closely related to the realm of values,
something. but it is also a tool to design the future. Hence it is
Man as a Working Being: This could be closely linked to the phenomenon of foreseeing-
considered in the scope of explaining the link predetermining so that men and communities can
between governing the phenomenon of work in exist and survive. Man’s ability to exist in life
terms of its aims and the sphere of values. depends on his actions, his sense of values that
Meaningful work is governed by high values. gives direction to his actions, his love of work
Meaningful work makes the actualiser of the work and his belief. The act of believing gives direction
happy and becomes his style of existence. When to his actions. In the curriculum, the concept of
man gets out of this style of existence he feels belief is listed among the basic concepts of religion
deficient. Meaningless work is a way of work philosophy; however, it is not dealt with in the
governed by means values and place the context of philosophical anthropology.
A STUDY INTO PHILOSOPHICAL ANTHROPOLOGY 323

Man as the Creator of Art: Art is an accom- the secondary level in Turkey should be
plishment as a product of human actions. Art is considered as chance. Two centuries ago Kant
the field in which man explicitly shows his desires, said “A man can only become a man through
ideas, belief, values and his relationship with the education”, which may sound reductive, but it
nature. Its pursuit is the sphere of man’s existence should not be a problem to rephrase it as “A man
and everything related to it. Art is one of the can only become a man through philosophy
phenomena that ensures the continuity of human education.” because the only field which can deal
existence. Art shows the meaningful side of the with man and his conditions of existence without
invisible things in daily life. The curriculum leaves destroying its integrity to answer the question
some room to philosophy of art, but he content “What is human?” is philosophy.
focuses on art, artist, common aesthetic judge- In this context, when we look at the philo-
ments, problem of beauty, qualities of a work of sophy course being taught in Turkey, we cannot
art, etc. There is no mentioning of the fact that art say that it is a type of philosophy education
is an act of man and a form of existence, neither is foreseen by philosophical anthropology starting
there a sign of a link between art and other fields. from the sequencing of units to the content and
Man as a Talking Being: Language pheno- the methods used. The course starts with intro-
menon is at the centre of human phenomena. duction to philosophy, followed by philosophy
Though these phenomena are not in a hierarchical of knowledge and finally philosophy of existence.
order, language positions itself by being historical This sequencing is one of the main reasons why
and with the accomplishments of man, it is indeed philosophical anthropology based on ontological
the carrier of these accomplishments. Language, grounds cannot flourish. In addition, the fact that
itself, is a realm of existence with its specific parts concerning existence, knowledge and
questions and problems. At the same time, axiology are dealt with separately and in a dis-
language is the way in which philosophy comes connected way, which is another problem.
to exist. It is the means of making sense and Man is on one hand a cognitive and on the
ideation. Transition of language from the realm of other hand an affective being. Similarly he is
condition of existence to the realm of reality is convergent and at the same time he has a divergent
only possible through philosophy teaching. In side. This also indicates his disharmonic nature.
that respect, its relation to thinking is very strong. However, the existing course only considers the
In the curriculum, the importance of language in cognitive and convergent side of man. This
terms of philosophy is analysed. In this context, cognitive side the course takes into consideration
the importance of language and its role in building puts philosopher, movement and concept in the
a network of concepts are emphasised and the centre of the course and foresees a knowledge-
relationship between language, meaning and based philosophy teaching, keeping it distant from
understanding is analysed. being human-centred. In a similar way it overlooks
Man as a Bio-psychic Being: Man’s bio- the values related to the affective side and
psychic existence means that he has an ontic and prevents phenomena such as believing, idealising,
concrete integrity together with all the adopting attitudes, foreseeing, acting, committing
phenomena. The curriculum destroys this integrity oneself to something, etc. from happening.
rather than supporting it. Although they are not topic of question in
Man as a Disharmonic Being: Disharmony is this study, “Value Dimensioning Approach” and
the bipolar state of man which hosts opposites in “Quadruple Thinking” developed by Dombayci
one place. Man, due to the nature of his existence, and Bacanli present points of view that are open
is equipped with qualities such as good and bad, for development to provide solutions to the
right and wrong, just and unjust. He is freed from obstacles listed here.
this bipolarity with his sense of values.
RECOMMENDATIONS
CONCLUSION
Philosophy lessons should not be delivered as
Although not enough links are established introduction to the history of philosophy or certain
between the conditions of existence of philosophical disciplines, they should seek
philosophical anthropology and philosophy achievements in questioning, independent thinking,
curriculum, the fact that philosophy is taught on establishing a personality, eliminating fanatism,
324 MEHMET ALI DOMBAYCI

adopting an attitude, etc. The basic condition to Cilingir O 2014. Insan Nedir? From <http://www. histo-
achieving such accomplishments is to take into ricalsense.com/Archive/Fener67.htm> (Retrived on
28 April 2014).
consideration the conditions of human existence. Cotuksoken B 1997. Ennst Cassier’de Insan. In: I Kucuradi
Throughout philosophy teaching, it is expected that (Ed.):YuzyilimizdaInsan Felsefesi - Takiyettin
the students know themselves with the help of con- Mengusoglu’nun Anisina. Ankara: Turkiye Felsefe
Kurumu Yayinlari, pp. 169-178
ditions of existence, can answer the question “What Harper D 2014. Online Etymology Dictionary- Flection
is man?” at least to some extent, and to actualise the From: <http://www.etymonline.com/index.php? term=
principle “Know thyself!.” reflection> (Retrived on 29 April 2014).
Heiddeger M 2009. Dusunmek Ne Demektir? (R. Senturk,
When philosophy turns to human existence, Trans.) Istanbul: Paradigma Yayincilik.
it should be able to see his education through its Iyi S 2006. Cumhuriyet Doneminde Aydinlanma ve Insan
own perspective. Philosophy which is home to Felsefesi Calismalari. Istanbul: Toroslu Kitapligi.
Kaynardag A 1997. Takiyettin Mengusoglu’nun Dusunce
cognitive actions should take man as the centre Dunyasinda Egitim Kavrami veEgitimSorunlari. In: I
in order to understand what education means for Kucuradi (Ed.): Yuzyilimizda Insan Felsefesi -
man. Human-oriented education and the need for Takiyettin Mengusoglu Anisina. Ankara: Turkiye
man to question himself as a being can only be Felsefe Kurumu Yayinlari, pp. 49-66
Kucuradi I. 1997. 20. Yuzyil Felsefi Antropolojisinde
accomplished this way. Through this questioning, Takiyettin Mengusoglu’nunYeri. In: I Kucuradi (Ed.):
man will discover the relationship among his own Yuzyilimizda Insan Felsefesi. Ankara: Turkiye Felsefe
conditions of existence. Conditions of human Kurumu Yayinlari, pp. 75-85
MEB. 2010. Felsefe Dersi Ogretim Programi. Tebligler
existence should be the determining factor for all Dergisi, 73(2629): 124-138.
actions that lead to or result from it. Hence the Mengusoglu T 1949. Kant ve Scheler’de Insan Problemi
philosophical anthropological view in philosophy -Felsefi Antropoloji Icin Tenkidi Bir Hazirlik. Istanbul:
Istanbul Universitesi Edebiyat Fakultesi Yayinlari.
teaching is quite significant in contributing to the Mengusoglu T 1955. Bilgi Fenomeninin Felsefi
accomplishments of man. Antropoloji Bakimindan Tahlili. Felsefe Arkivi, 3(2):
Philosophical anthropology cannot provide 53-75.
content, but form to philosophy. Philosophical Mengusoglu T 1959.Ontolojik Esaslara Dayanan Felsefi
Antropoloji Hakkinda Dusunceler. Felsefe Arkivi, 4(2):
anthropology is tool to bring together the con- 1-8.
cepts, topics and issues and human integrity, as a Mengusoglu T1988. Insan Felsefesi. Istanbul: Remzi
perspective for philosophy teaching. Unfor- Kitapevi.
OrnekY 1997.Felsefede Antropoloji Gelenegive Takiy-
tunately, in the existing philosophy curriculum in yettin Mengusoglu. In: I Kucuradi (Ed.): Yuzyilim-
Turkey, this integrity is not so apparent. In a izdaInsan Felsefesi-Takiyettin Mengusoglu’ nun
historical sense, although it could be said that we Anisina. Ankara: Turkiye Felsefe Kurumu Yayinlari,
pp. 67-73.
are approaching this integrity, the progress is so Ozcan M 2006. Insan Felsefesi: Insanin Neligi Ustune
slow. Bir Sorusturma. Ankara: Bilim ve Sanat Yayinlari.
Ozer G 2011. Takiyyettin Mengusoglu’nun Egitim
Anlayisi. Ma. Thesis, Unpublished. Istanbul: Maltepe
REFERENCES Uni-versitesi.
Ozlem D 1997. Takiyettin Mengusoglu’nda Insan
Akdemir E 2010. Insan Felsefesi - Epiktetos ve Marcus Kavrami. In: I Kucuradi (Ed.): Yuzyilimizda Insan
Aurelius Ornegi. Istanbul: Birey Yayincilik. Felsefesi-Takiyettin Mengusoglu Anisina. Ankara:
Akdeniz H 1996. Felsefi Antropoloji Acisindan Egitim Turkiye Felsefe Kurumu Yayinlari, pp. 11-22
Problemi. Ma. Thesis (Unpublished). Bursa: Uludag Scheler M 1988. Insanin Kosmostaki Yeri. (T. Mengusoglu,
Universitesi. Trans.) Istanbul: Yaprak Kitap Yay. Paz.
Ang T 2006. Felsefe, Egitim, Tarihve Insan Uzerine Yildirim A, SimsekH 2006. Sosyal Bilimler deNitel
Dusunceler. Istanbul: Toroslu Kitapligi. Arastirma Yontemleri. Ankara: Seckin Yayinlari.

You might also like