LESSON 1: PARADIGM SHIFT, HUMAN ACTIVITIES AND PHILOSOPHY

There are things that will help us differentiate between the Holistic and Partial point of
view: First, there is the science and philosophy. Second, the two Marcelian reflection
Third, the difference between shadows and reality from Plato’s allegory of the cave.
 

1. SCIENCE AND PHILOSOPHY

Humans have sense experiences. Sense experiences refer to our sense of sight, hearing,
taste, touch and smell. But Sense perception is limited. And with this our senses can be
deceived and therefore not reliable. We have to go beyond our senses in order to see
the whole reality. Philosophy is the one that can see the holistic perspective of life.
The purpose of philosophy is to have a picture of the whole universe, that is, to have a
complete worldview. Philosophy is different from science since science emphasizes only
on a particular aspect of the reality.
Science is the empirical study of the world. Scientific knowledge covers a very small part
of the world. Science is investigative. It must investigate. This means it is able to describe
the facts. It gives us knowledge of the facts. It must observe or get new data. Science is
very important. But science cannot answer everything in this world. We cannot prove
the existence of God through the scientific method. The scientist cannot tell us what
happiness is and how it is to be attained, what we must do in order to be achieve
happiness. The scientist cannot tell us how to live a moral life. The scientist cannot tell
us what man’s duties are, what is right and what is wrong. In short, science cannot solve
an ethical problem.  Science looks at reality partially.

LET’S READ:
Excerpted from How to think about Great Ideas by Mortimer Adler
(1) “The scientist, I say to you, cannot tell us what happiness is and how happiness is to
be attained, what men must do in order to be happy. The scientist cannot tell us how to
constitute a society justly, how to make it a just political organization or a just economy.
The scientist cannot tell us what man’s duties are, what is right and what is wrong. The
scientist cannot tell us why all forms of labor should have dignity or why there should be
no slavery, why all men should be free. In short, science cannot solve a single basic moral
or political problem. And these basic moral and political problems are precisely the
problems which both the philosopher and the theologian, both philosophy and both
religion claim to be able to solve.” oratory, performing an experiment with test tubes and
retorts. That illustrates the kind of method of the chemist that he is investigating by an
experimental means. Then let’s turn to another kind of scientist who also investigates.
Let’s picture an astronomer, inside a great observatory with a giant telescope. Consider
the difference between the chemist and the astronomer. The astronomer is an
investigator by means of sheer observation in an observatory; whereas the chemist is an
investigator by means of experiment in a laboratory.
(2) Now let’s think about the method of religion. The method of religion involves the
receiving of revelation from God. Picture Moses receiving the Law, receiving the Ten
Commandments with fire on the top of Mount Sinai, one of the great episodes in the
religion of Judaism, the revelation of the Law by God to Moses. Then consider Jesus
delivering to His disciples and followers the Sermon on the Mount, again revealing the
Word of God to man. In these two episodes we see what is common to religion, the
element of revelation; and the reception by man of divine revelation.
(3) How do we picture the method of philosophy? The armchair is the principal piece of
apparatus of a philosopher; for the philosopher is strictly an armchair thinker. Any
philosopher worth his salt knows better than to ever get out of the armchair. Oh, he
needs one other piece of apparatus perhaps. He needs a pad and a pencil; and that is
about all the apparatus he needs. Of course, this does not quite distinguish the
philosopher from the mathematician. The mathematician can work also in an armchair
with a pad and pencil. But the mathematician is a solitary-armchair thinker. The
philosopher needs conversation. He needs to carry on disputes with his fellow
philosophers. He needs to discuss with them. And so the further apparatus the
philosopher may need is a collection of armchairs around a table; for he is a social-
armchair thinker.”
(4) Science we understand is investigative. It must investigate, it must observe, by
experiment or otherwise, new phenomena, get new data. And here reason serves the
senses by making rational constructions or formulations based upon the data of
observation. Philosophy is reflective. It is the kind of thing a person does in sitting down
and contemplating or thinking hard, analytically, reflectively about the common
experiences of mankind. Here the senses in ordinary experience serve reason. And
religion as compared to both of those is receptive. It is the attitude of receiving the
revelation of God, and here reason is in the service of revelation.
(5) As these three differ in method, so necessarily they differ in object, because the
methods a body of knowledge uses to acquire what it knows will largely limit it to the
kind of thing it is able to know. The objects of science, because science is investigative,
are all phenomena, the world of appearances. The object of philosophy,
because philosophy is reflective, is what lies behind the phenomena, what lies behind
the appearances, the reality of things and their ultimate causes. And the object of
religion, because religion is receptive of divine revelation, the object of religion is what is
called the ultimate mysteries, the divine mysteries.”
 
PHILOSOPHY IS INDEPENDENT OF SCIENCE AND RELIGION
(1) Science is investigative. This means it is able to describe the facts. It gives us
knowledge of the facts.
(2) Philosophy is reflective and does more than describe. It goes to the underlying reality
and to the causes. It tries to do more than describe; it tries to explain the facts and
therefore beyond giving us a basic knowledge of the facts of nature and of life, it gives
us some understanding of them.
(3) Religion accepts and believes. And in accepting and believing, it often goes beyond
what is simply knowable and understandable by men. Perhaps the best illustration of this
is to give you three questions, one that the scientist can answer, one that the
philosopher can answer, one that the theologian or religionist can answer.
(4) Here is a typical scientific question: How is matter transformed into energy in atomic
explosions? This is the question that Einstein answered in his extraordinary formula for
the quantitative relation between matter and energy in atomic fission or explosion.
(5) A typical religious or theological question is the question whether God created the
universe in the beginning of time. This is the question which the divine revelation in the
first sentence of Genesis answers. God created heaven and earth, it says, in the
beginning.
(6) And what is the kind of question the philosopher answers? A question like, Why does
all the world of change involve some permanent thing? Why must change be based upon
permanence? Or this very question we’ve been discussing, the very question, How does
philosophy differ from science and religion, is itself a question for the philosopher, not
for the scientist or for the religionist or theologian.
(7) In science, you get more knowledge from generation to generation. And the motion
forward is a straight-line motion with uniform acceleration. More and more and more,
and the progress is more rapid in each generation. Whereas in philosophy it is not more
knowledge you get, but more understanding, and not from generation to generation but
from epoch to epoch, as you go from the ancient world to the medieval world, from the
medieval world to the modern world. Those great epochs see more understanding in
philosophy. And the motion forward is not a straight-line motion but a spiral motion, a
slow, forward motion with intermittent retardation, slipping back before it takes another
step forward.
(8) If one understands what one means by the methods of science, methods of
investigating, gaining knowledge by more and better observations of the world of
physical or psychological phenomena, that these methods cannot be used to penetrate
the ultimate realities or the ultimate causes of things. The scientific method not only
now, but probably never, will be able to discover the ultimate causes, nor will it be able
to answer ultimate questions of value.
(9) It tells the story of an argument that was going on in an officers’ club during the war.
And a major who said that he was raised on the scientific method turned to the chaplain
and said, “How can anyone scientifically prove the existence of God?” And the chaplain
turned back to the scientific major and said, “That is a difficult question. In fact, it is a
question I would like to put back to you in another way, ‘How can anyone theologically
prove the existence of an atom?’” And the major replied, “But whoever heard of trying to
prove an atom theologically?” The chaplain said, “That is exactly what I meant, whoever
heard of trying to prove God scientifically?” And that does indicate the sharpness and
the separation of methods and the kinds of questions they can answer.”

2. GABRIEL MARCEL’S PRIMARY REFLECTION AND SECONDARY

REFLECTION

(1) Philosophy is reflective. We reflect based on our own experiences. Our experiences
become rich when we reflect on them, and share them to others. How does science look
at man? Science looks at man, only on its material point of view.  This is what Marcel
calls as the Primary reflection which tends to compartmentalize, analyze and divides a
certain whole.
(2) Primary Reflection reaches its highest form in science and technology since it is the
foundation of scientific knowledge. Primary Reflection sees persons not according to
their being but as something associated with predicates. I am a son of… or I am daughter
of ….Man is defined according to one’s own name, student number or even address. It is
like filling up a bio data.  Primary Reflection sees people not as a person but someone
associated with predicates. Like for example, I see Naomi as a “beautiful History
teacher”, but the predicate is not her whole being but a part of who she is.
(3) Here, man is viewed as an object, the body of man as an object, a kind of body that is
studied by medicine, anatomy, physiology and other sciences. This is “a” body of “no -
body” because the Subject and the body are separated from each other. There is no
experiential self. In these sciences, man’s body becomes an object of observation and
experimentation.  Besides, these sciences treat the human body as an object of their
experimentation. Human life cannot be viewed only on its biological functioning of
organs. Human life is beyond breathing and beating of the heart.
(4) In the Marcelian concept of Secondary Reflection, we have to go beyond the usual
customary experience of the phenomenon, the body is which I have a conscious
concrete experience of. Secondary reflection escapes analysis. This is what we mean by
having a holistic perspective of man. Science analyzes man, just like doctors are
dissecting the frog through analysis. Philosophy synthesizes man. It unifies man, just like
joining all the puzzles to establish a complete picture of the reality. The Secondary
reflection looks not on man only through his predicates, but on his whole being, the
totality of his being a person.
(5) Let us take for example, love, I can look at love as an emotional response towards
someone, since this is what I feel right now. There are the sleepless nights, sweet
nothings, day dreaming, but this kind of thinking is too narrow and limited on looking at
love. What I have to do is to go beyond this thinking and focus more on the holistic
perspective of love- that love is not just a feeling or an emotion, because love covers all
forms of love- be it storge, agape, or platonic. Love is not only eros. This is what I mean by
holistic point of view, very different from a partial perspective in life.
(6) Now, in our daily lives, what we have to do is a kind of a paradigm-shift, from the
narrow partial perspective to a holistic view of life, and this is what philosophy is all
about.
 

3. PLATO’S ALLEGORY OF THE CAVE.    

Plato will truly help us in his allegory of the cave. The prisoners see only a limited and a
narrow reality. They think that the shadows are the reality, but it is not… it is only a
mistaken reality. That is what we mean by a partial perspective. The partial perspective
exists inside the cave. The partial perspective are the shadows of the objects that exist
outside the cave. The holistic perspective is found outside the cave- real objects found
outside the cave. Freedom occurs when we are able to see the truth, and not the mere
appearances of objects. That is why, it has been said, that truth is freedom, and that is,
truth will set us free. It is when we are able to see the holistic perspective of life that we
will be able to find freedom, that we will be able to be free. The free man is able to see
the reality outside the cave. The free man is the one who is able to experience happiness
because that is what truth and freedom bring to man- happiness, joy and pleasure. But
that happiness is overflowing, in which the free man returns to the cave to convince the
prisoners to look at life holistically, and not partially. But the other prisoners refuse for
they are much immersed with a mistaken reality.

The sun is analogically seen

as the source of wisdom and
knowledge.
The cave is the imprisonment
of man in ignorance and
deception.
 
The “WHAT” of PHILOSOPHY
(1) Etymological Definition of Philosophy. Philosophy comes from the Greek
word Philo and Sophia. Philo means Love. Sophia means Wisdom. Combining the two
words, we have love for wisdom. Philosophers are said to be lovers of wisdom. It was
invented by Pythagoras.
(2) Historical Definition of Philosophy. While Pythagoras was watching the Olympic
Games inside an amphitheater, he noticed three groups of people. The first group went
to the Olympic Games to make money and gain profit by selling their goods inside. They
were the “lovers of gain or pleasure.” These are the businessmen. The second group of
people was there to play games, to win, to compete, to fight in order to win honor,
prestige and fame. Pythagoras called them the “lovers of fame.” These are athletes as
well as the politicians. The third group went there to watch the games and be thrilled by
the events unfolding. Pythagoras called them the “lovers of Spectacle.” These are the
audience, the viewers, the observers as well as the game analysts.
(3) Pythagoras performed the activity of philosophizing: According to him, there
were also three types of people in real life. There were those who live life with one aim,
to become rich and wealthy. There were those whose lives were lived only for the
purpose of becoming famous.  But there were also those people which are just a
minority, who live life not to become rich or famous, but who live life with one purpose
in mind: to understand and reflect what life is really all about, that is, to love wisdom.
(4) This love for wisdom is very evident in Socrates’ life. He chose to die for the sake of
that love. He was accused of poisoning the minds of young people in Athens simply
because of that infinite love and desire for truth, for knowledge.
(5) To love wisdom is not to say that I own wisdom. To love wisdom is to have that
insatiable desire for truth. Again, what makes a philosopher is not the knowledge that
they have or possess, but rather, is that within the person, this desire for truth that
bothers them. I remember a story of Socrates being asked whether he really knows
everything. He answered that, “I know that I do not know”… the key is not the arrogance
of thinking that we  know everything, but the humility that every time we know
something is the moment that will remind us that there are things that we still do not
know. As the Socratic motto states: “AN unexamined life is not worth living.” No one can
become a true philosopher without first examining one’s life.
(6) Lexical Definition of Philosophy. Lexical definition is a definition coming from the
dictionary. Using a standard dictionary, Philosophy is to be defined as something like
this: “Philosophy is the study of the ultimate reality, causes and principles underlying
being acquired through the use of human reason alone”.
 
THE “HOW” OF PHILOSOPHY OR HOW TO PHILOSOPHIZE
(1) Ostensive Definition of Philosophy. Ostensive comes from the Latin
word ostendere, which means to show or to point out. One defines a term by pointing it
or by showing it out.  One example of this is Moore. G.E. Moore was once asked what
Philosophy is. He invited the inquirer to his home, and pointing to his collection of
philosophy books, he answered, “This is what Philosophy is all about”
(2) Philosophy is not just a textbook knowledge. Rather, Philosophy is basically an
attitude, an activity of the human mind and heart. What is important is not the WHAT of
philosophy but rather the HOW of philosophy. Like in swimming, one cannot learn
swimming simply by studying a book on swimming. One becomes a swimmer by jumping
in the water and starting to swim. So, no one can learn philosophy by memorizing the
names and works of different philosophers. But one learns to philosophize by performing
the activity of philosophizing.
(3) From the WHAT of Philosophy, we have now the HOW of philosophy. In a way, it is
easier to define the WHAT of philosophy, one just goes to internet, and type “what is
philosophy” or “philosophy” in Google search engine, but the question arises? Does it
really make one person a philosopher? The answer is no. there is a big difference
between a student of philosophy and a philosopher, a lover of wisdom. To become a
student of philosophy is just to memorize and retain the knowledge we receive inside
the classroom. The failure of education is the inability of the students to apply
knowledge in their daily life experience. As Alfred North Whitehead said, “Thought
knowledge is one chief aim of intellectual education, there is another ingredient, vaguer
but greater, and more dominating in its importance. The ancients called it “wisdom.” You
cannot be wise without some basis of knowledge; but you may easily acquire knowledge
and remain bare of wisdom… The importance of knowledge lies in its use, in our active
mastery of it, that is to say, it lies in wisdom.”  A lover of wisdom is one who applies what
he has learned inside and outside the classroom. Wisdom is the active utilization of
knowledge. Therefore, a lover of wisdom is one who has a desire for knowledge and
truth, and using and applying that knowledge for his human development and for the
development of mankind.
 
 WHAT IS THE STARTING POINT OF PHILOSOPHIZING?
(1) For the Greeks, it is wonder or awe. This Cosmo-centric point of view highlights the
four elements- earth, wind, fire, and water that made up the world, or the universe, as
matter of fact, all their answers were all wrong. But the most important thing in
philosophy is that they are able to reflect from their human activities. And this what has
made them as philosophers. Observe a child, and you will find that they have so many
questions about themselves, because they are full of wonder and awe. Unfortunately,
this sense of wonder or awe dies out when we grow old.
THE FOUR DIFFERENT PERIODS IN PHILOSOPHY:

1. Ancient Classical Philosophy - Cosmo-centric (Thales)

2. Medieval Philosophy - Theocentric (Thomas Aquinas)
3. Modern Philosophy - Scientific and Rationalistic (Descartes)
4. Contemporary Philosophy - Anthropocentric (Jean Paul Sartre)

(2) Another starting point of philosophizing is the act of questioning - asking relevant

questions. Questions like, why the sky is blue? is there an alien? are there other planets
like earth- these are all scientific questions, but philosophers ask themselves these
questions- what is the meaning of life? is there a god? and what is a human person?
(3) Asking questions by recognizing and being aware of our own activities will lead us to
deliberate reflection. And this is what doing philosophy is all about. A wise man is one
who asks questions. A critical mind is also one who asks questions. Basically, Philosophy
is a discourse. To philosophize is to converse and start a dialogue with a person/s.
Philosophy begins with the act of questioning.
(4) Philosophy is reflective, and reflections arise from our experiences. Human activities
are very different from animal activities. Animals are not capable of doing reflections.
They do not have awareness of themselves. They are not considered as “subjects”. They
do not have an “I”. “I” means being self-conscious and self- aware. As humans, we have
the capacity to become aware and conscious of our human daily activities.  This is what
Philosophy is all about. And this is what makes us humans. Unfortunately, many people
nowadays have no time to think and reflect on their experiences. They were busy on
their work. Reflection is simply giving time to think, by stopping what one is doing like
work, and reflection is personal, because nobody can do it for you.
GENERAL QUESTIONS IN PHILOSOPHY:

Philosophy raises some of the deepest and widest questions there are:

1. Philosophy of Religion:
1. Is there a God?
2. What reasons are there to believe in God?
3. Can we prove or disprove God’s existence?
2. Epistemology or Theory of Knowledge:
1. What is knowledge?
2. Can we know?
3. What is it to know?
4. How can we know?
3. Ethics or Moral Philosophy:
1. Are we free?
2. Are our actions already determined? Do we have free will?
3. What is right? What is wrong?
4. Philosophy of Art or Aesthetics:
1. What is beauty?
5. Rational Psychology or Philosophy of Man or Philosophical Anthropology:
1. What is man? Who is man?
2. Is man only his body or is man his soul?
3. What is a good life? What is happiness?
4. Does life make sense?
5. What is the meaning of life?