Introduction to Philosophy of the Human Person

Lesson 1: THE MEANING OF PHILOSOPHY

The term Philosophy came from two Greek words philo and sophia which means “to love” and “wisdom”,
respectively. Simply put, Philosophy means the love of reasoning making wisdom as its primary goal.
Technically, Philosophy is defined as the science that by natural light of reason studies the highest
principles of things.
In order to understand further the meaning of Philosophy, the following salient features of it must be
taken into consideration:
A. Philosophy is a science. It is called as such because it is systematic and follows certain steps or
procedures. In short, it is an organized body of knowledge same as any other sciences.
B. It employs Natural Light of Reason. This means that philosophical investigation does not use any
laboratory instrument, investigative tools nor supernatural approach. Philosophers use their natural
thinking capacity or use the so-called unaided reason.
C. Philosophy has an inclination to Study All Things. Other sciences concern themselves with a
particular object of investigation such as: anthropology which deals with human beings in relation with
the society; sociology focuses on society, its forms, structures and functions; botany concentrates its
attention on plants; Philosophy may deal with human beings, society and plants among others. It is this
character that Philosophy is considered multidimensional or holistic.
D. Philosophy employs First Cause or Highest Principle. Note that principle means a reason (or an
explanation) from which something proceeds in any manner whatsoever.
The fourth characteristic (D) of Philosophy mentioned above is composed of the following:
1) Principle of Identity. In simple terms, this principle means “everything is what it is”. What is
not is not and what is is. For example, a seed is a seed and will no longer be seed when it appears
like not a seed.
2) Principle of Non-Contradiction. This principle states that it is an impossibility for a particular
thing to be and not to be at the same time at the same respect. For example, a seedling is
different from a seed. If we say that a seedling is a seed, then that seedling is a seed. They
can never be both.
3) Principle of Excluded Middle. This principle explains that everything must be“either be or not
be” or “either is or is not”. There is no middle ground thus the term “excluded middle”. For
example, anger is different from happiness. There is no such thing as mixture of anger and
happiness. And lastly,
4) the Principle of Sufficient Reason. This principle states that there is sufficient reason for the
being and existence of everything. Conversely, nothing exists without any reason at all. For
example, to say that something is unexplainable is already gives a reason for it being
unexplainable. By using the aforementioned philosophical concepts will enable one’s
argumentation more valid, reliable and strong. Thus, doing philosophy becomes more easy and
intelligible.

Lesson 2: BRANCHES OF PHILOSOPHY

Knowing only the meaning of Philosophy and some of its characteristics are not enough if we are in
search for true wisdom. For a narrow and partial mind is wholly incompatible with the real philosophical
attitude that manifests holistic point of view. The discussion below on branches of Philosophy is intended
to broaden one’s perspectives and skills in doing philosophical discourses.
There are 5 branches of Philosophy: Metaphysics, Ethics, Epistemology, Logic and Aesthetics.
1. Metaphysical philosophy accounts on investigating the unreal entities in terms of the real world that
we experience through our senses. The well-known Philosopher, Plato, enlightened the field of
metaphysics by contrasting reality and appearance. He stated that our experience with the real world
Introduction to Philosophy of the Human Person
is not real. Reality according to him is how we perceive the world. Therefore, what is real is just
products of our perception through the mind. For example, we see a yellow chair because we perceive
it as yellow chair. But others may perceive a different color when light affecting the appearance of
the chair is obstructed.
2. Ethics as another branch of Philosophy deals with the evaluation of human actions and the nature
of moral virtue. As such, ethical philosophy accounts for the nature of our moral judgement and it
also attempts to investigate our fundamental ethical ideas. From these contentions arise the idea of
right versus wrong and evil versus good. Discourses like feminism (equal opportunities among
genders) and law-making become areas where ethical philosophy is employed. Socrates pointed out
that knowledge is not merely theoretical nor speculative but also practical. It means that knowledge
on rules of right living is not sufficient when it is not actually being practiced.
 One historical example that exemplifies ethical philosophy is that issue laid down by William Du
Bois. He argued that there must be equal rights between black and white Americans.
3. Epistemology as philosophical perspective concerns itself with the nature, sources, limitations and
validity of knowledge. Some of the basic questions raised by Epistemology are: how do we know what
we know, how do we know what we want to know and do we distinguish true from what is not true.
Knowledge, according to this perspective, can be acquired through induction (empiricism) and
deduction. Induction is a process of knowledge-forming by investigating particulars (also known as
empirical evidences) in order to arrive at general idea. Conversely, deductive process employs
generally accepted ideas in order to arrive at specific ideas. Advocates of deductive method are
called rationalists. Rene Descartes is well-known rationalist. Another method used under
Epistemology is pragmatism.
 William James and John Dewey are famous pragmatists. They believe that value in use is the
real test of truth and meaning.
4. Logic is another branch of Philosophy. Unlike any other philosophical perspectives, logic does not
concern itself in what we know regarding certain subjects. Thus, logic does not provide us knowledge
of the world directly. It only serves as tool to guide one’s arguments or discourses so as to keep
them valid and true.
 Aristotle was the first philosopher who employed logical method. He place when mental ideas
correspond to the objective world. This is where logical reasoning comes in. Reasoning is very
important in our everyday lives. Decision making can make or unmake us. Thus the quality of our
logical capacity affects our well-being. A person equipped with logic can reason far better than
those who are not.
5. Aesthetics as philosophical perspective concerns itself with the notion of beauty. Whenever we
created a devise or equipment we consequently aim to improve (or beautify) it after some time. It
only goes to show that aesthetics accounts for the criteria of beauty. Aesthetics can be used to
explain matters regarding culture and arts. It is in these fields where beauty can best be explained
with the use of aesthetical philosophy. Embedded in our culture is our capacity to distinguish
beautiful from what is not. Arts as part of our cultural milieu manifests our ideas regarding beauty.

What benefits can students get from aesthetical knowledge? As students, the importance of
aesthetics are: it vitalizes our knowledge making the world more useful and alive, it helps us live more
deeply and richly for appreciation of work of arts arises, and it keeps us in touch with our culture.

 Holistic perspective enables us to understand better the world that we live in. Thus, having
equipped with the different philosophical perspectives discussed above contributes to one’s wellbeing.
Employing a particular perspective, though, requires the element of Natural Light of Reason as explained
in the previous module. Having the knowledge on branches of Philosophy gives us some edge compared to
those who didn’t have the opportunity to learn them no matter how difficult choosing which perspective
to use on a particular situation or subject matter.
Introduction to Philosophy of the Human Person

Lesson 3: Approaches in Doing Philosophy:

REDUCTIONIST AND HOLISTIC

Examine the picture above. Do you still remember about the analytical and speculative
approach? If yes, then you can relate it the image of this creatively depiction of our brain; analytical
to the left, and being speculative to the right. Philosophizing doesn’t end with just two approaches.
Let us continue our journey deeper into the realm of philosophy!
 Reductionism is the belief that human behaviour can be explained by breaking it down into simpler
component parts.
 Holism is a theory that parts of a whole are in intimate interconnection, such that they cannot
exist independently of the whole, or cannot be understood without reference to the whole, which
is thus regarded as greater than the sum of its parts.
Examine this simple example.

The figure above is called gunpla, a short term for Gundam plastic model. Figure 1 shows a part
by part disassembled gunpla while figure 2 is a whole fix toy model. In simple words, these can
be used as model on how reductionist and holistic approach work.
 Reductionist in a sense that the parts are important to create a full assembled toy model; it is so
important that you need to know every single detail of each parts to understand the whole.
 Holistic in a sense that what matters most is the significance of the wholeness of this gunpla,
yet it can only be understood as a whole if we look closer to its parts.
 Let’s analyze your “face”
But not Aristotle‟s face, we are just going to have a figure to look at so we
can explain visually your activity (we will mention Aristotle later).
A face is compose of two eyes, one nose, a pair of ears, a mouth with a
set of teeth and one tongue, cheeks, forehead, hair and facial hair.
Each part has its own unique function. Each part is used every single day.
Introduction to Philosophy of the Human Person
 Are there any connections among these parts?
Your answers may vary with someone else ‟s thoughts, simply because your face is different
from others. You are unique. You may say that your eyes are the most used every day because
your eyes start its duty as you wake up in the morning . You may say that your mouth has the most
important function because without a mouth, it would be difficult for you to eat or be nourished.
You may say that each part is connected with others; example, you cannot enjoy the movie with
hearing the sound; you cannot enjoy your food with being mesmerized by just looking at it; you
cannot enjoy a song if you cannot sing it.
 How about your hair?
Well, it matters. Aristotle is Aristotle with that kind of hair.Kidding aside, the ultimate
question for this module is this…“What would be the relevance of the wholeness of being?
According to Willy Ostreng in his artitle entitled Reductionism versus Holism,
Difference between these two ideologies:
 Their focus – the truth of the matter. The former focuses on the properties of each part while
the latter‟s emphasis is on the relationship between them. The truth of the matter in using a
reductionist approach is all about the function of the parts of the whole – we lean towards the
details of a whole - while the truth of the matter in using the holistic approach is the wholeness
of „being‟; understanding a certain subject as a whole, reconnecting each part to convey the
ultimate truth.
 Reductionism was first introduced by René Descartes,
the father of modern philosophy. According to
Vinzons, “he likened the world to a machine with
pieces workinglike a clockwork mechanism.” Descartes
would like us to understand that the machine can only
be understood if we take its pieces apart and
examine each before putting it back together to
comprehend the bigger picture. From the word itself,
“reduce‟ – breaking down the pieces, reducing all that is
in it, to fully realize the truth of the matter. After all,
the machine will not work without the pieces within it
– it will not function as a whole, part by part is
essential.
 Holism is the “idea that something can be more than the sum
of its parts.” Meaning to say, we shall understand everything,all
in reality,all that is comprehensible, as a WHOLE.
This approach in philosophy was summed up by Aristotle in his
Metaphysics. He had been using this holistic approach and it
wasn't popularized not until 1926 that the term “holism” was
presented by Jan Smuts. This approach is indeed contrasted
from reductionism. Just likeits origin – holos a Greek word which
means all‟,„total‟, or „whole‟.
 According to Vinzons, “the fundamental assumption underpinning the holistic perspective is that
the properties of the parts contribute to the understanding of the whole.” The relevance of the
wholeness of being is defined by the parts of it – meaning, there is indeed interconnectedness among
the parts of the subject matter to convey the wholeness of reality. But take note, this is the
counterpart of reductionism, therefore the totality of being is important and it refuses to divide
the parts apart from the wholeness of being.
 Let us be reminded that we are in preparation to understand the philosophy of the human person. One
thing that we need to consider is that a human person cannot be understood in one factor or one
Introduction to Philosophy of the Human Person
side of the story. We will create prejudices if we do so. Therefore, just like what ‟s mandated by
the curriculum guide, we are going to use the holistic approach in doing philosophy.
 But it doesn‟t mean that we are going to neglect or set aside the other approaches that we learned.
Just like what reductionism is telling us; each approach in philosophy is relevant and can be used to
philosophize – we can always be analytic in every manner as we seek knowledge; we can also be
speculative at thoughts being perceived; and we are capable now to reduce a certain topic into
its parts for us to comprehend. Finally, we look at the bigger picture of all things intelligible –
the wholeness as one, interconnected with all around.
 Let us be reminded by a Latin Maxim – “Minima Maxima Sunt” which literally means the smallest
things are most important. We have to look into the smallest details of our lives.
Example:
 Best example to understand reductionist approach is when we faithfully stick with our
favourite chicken-pork adobo. There are various recipes that can be used to prepare our
favourite dish. And when we come across an unusual adobo, we tend to reduce it with the
prejudices we already have; like saying, “oh parang kulang sa paminta”, “aww bakit parang sobra
sa suka?”, “uy masarap kung may laurel ‘to” etc. Before saying that it is the best adobo, we tend
to look first into its parts as an adobo. Of course this example is too shallow, let ‟s try to be
philosophical!
 At school, we tend to take for granted the importance of daily attendance. We thought that
one single absence from school would not take any effect in our lives. One‟s presence is
always important most especially when you belong to a particular class section. Your class would
be incomplete without your presence –this principle could be applicable to all aspects; at home, in
our community, in social media, etc.
How about the holistic approach?
 We look into the wholeness of the person, not just in one piece of his/her being.
 Holism helps us to take away our prejudices – in such a way that we focus on the wholeness, not by
part. Example, we will not discuss EDSA revolution as our sole jumping board towards the concept
of freedom. It will definitely create biases if we do.
 When we practice a holistic perspective, we can deliberate ideas philosophically because being
holistic is congruent with being open-minded to all possible realities

Lesson 4: PLATO’S CONCEPT OF A HUMAN BEING

(Human Body as an Embodied Spirit)
Questions are always answered but answers may vary when we
speak about the truth. Truth may be coherent – if there is a fact as
evidence. Truth may be correspondent to the experience of the matter.
Truth may also be pragmatic especially whenever it serves its purpose.
Now, for this next lesson, let us search for the truth about the concept of
the Human Body as an Embodied Spirit.
To begin with Plato’s concept of the human body, we must always look back to the story of the
allegory of the cave:
 The story reveals that there are
two worlds Plato wants us to
remember: the world of ideas and
the world of senses. Inside the
cave portrays the world of senses
which tells us that the world we
live in are just mere copies of
Introduction to Philosophy of the Human Person
what is in the real world. Outside the cave conveys the world of ideas – the place where all copies
from the cave originates.
According to Plato, our body is composed of two different realities –the one mentioned in the first
paragraph. In particular, a human body is not just a mere body, but a composition of a body and soul –
where the tangible body lives in the world of senses while the soul comes from the world of ideas.
So what’s the point of Plato?
Plato’s body and soul is separable in a sense that when the body dies the soul comes back to the world
of ideas, while the body remains in the world of senses where it decays. The soul is perfect as it
existed from the world of ideas where the soul is capable of knowing all things. But then again, the
reality of the body kicks in which slams us with the idea that the soul is being limited (like the prisoners
in the cave) by the body, or needless to say, imprisoned inside a body. Therefore, man’s body, in reality, is
always limited – full of imperfections and flaws.
 Human limitations do exist. It is essentially normal to a lot of people.
Doing things that you can do practically liberates you from being
imprisoned to human limitations.
 But then again, it doesn’t immediately guarantees us that we can do a
lot things.
 We cannot be like super heroes .
 We cannot be like the ones you envy most.
 We cannot be the person that we ideally want to be.
 Frantically, we are just who we are today. There are things that our body cannot do. There are
times that our mind just cannot comprehend some lessons in every school day we attend. It is
definitely normal.
 There’s a lot of activity helps us to realize that in spite our
limitations, there is still a desire that lingers in our personhood – a
desire to be better, to do better. At the end, we all realize that life
is worth it if we desire to develop more ourselves.
 Let us go out of the cave! But the question is,
 ‘how are we going to develop ourselves?’
 What do you think Plato wants us to realize in his concept of the
body and soul?
The body may limit us from doing things, but definitely the soul has the capability to rule over us.
Apparently, Plato’s concept of the body and soul directs us to his ideal
man – the man that is rational and governed by his own intellect and will.
This is evidently seen in his work. The Republic wherein Plato compared
the human person into a state.
Here is a table that sums up the comparison of a person to a state:

State State State State

Individual Individual Individual Individual
Function Function Function Function
Virtue Virtue Virtue Virtue
For Plato, the state is composed of a ruler, soldiers, and workers. Each position in a particular state
corresponds to man’s body parts – the head, chest, and stomach consequently. Each part corresponds
Introduction to Philosophy of the Human Person
witha particular function – being rational, spirited, and the appetitive function. Each function of the body
corresponds with soul’s virtue – wisdom, courage, and temperance.
Plato wants us to realize that a human person’s body must not be ruled over the desire of the chest
and the stomach. He wants us to have a firm conviction that the head or the ruler is supreme over all.

 Therefore, the human person must be ruled by his head. For him, there must be an ideal
relationship between these parts of the body, and only reasoning can make this possible. Our
limitations can be transcended when rationality takes over. There are a lot of human possibilities
only if a person uses his head and not their hearts.
Plato’s idea of a good life is a life ruled by reason, as rational part controls. It is logical indeed to have
our life controlled intellectually by our own reasoning.
 Reality check! We cannot deny the fact that a lot of people today do not understand this concept –
and all they care about is how they are going to survive another day. People nowadays only care
about their heart’s desire, emotionally speaking. Worse comes to worst if people’s desires are
reduce into the desires of the flesh.
That’s why there are few things we must always remember:
Accept our flaws
 Knowing imperfections, we are tend to perfect it
 There is always a room for improvement, because after all, we are all perfect beings and we just
need to transcend our lives back to its originally state.
There are three possible things a person is inclined to:
 Bodily desire
 Emotional stability
 Rational think
 And you must acknowledge the one who controls the two other possibilities
Never let yourself be boxed in your own limitations
 Let your limitations be your way towards perfection – GO OUT OF THE CAVE!
The soul is perfect, yet it is imprisoned to a body that limits the real perfection. The body limits man
to know everything. That’s why, acquiring knowledge is just a mere REMEMBERING of all the things in
reality – we remember knowledge, we acquire wisdom!

Lesson 5: FREEDOM OF THE HUMAN PERSON: Choices and

Consequences
“We are our choices.” This is a famous quote from the well-known Philosopher Jean-Paul
Sartre. Indeed, we always make choices every moment of our lives. From the time we wake in the
morning until we go to bed again, we consciously and sometimes unconsciously, make choices.
 We choose whether we wake late or wake up early.
 We choose what clothes to wear.
 We choose whether we go outside or stay home.
 We choose which food to it.
 We choose our friends.
 We also choose what personality we show to other people.
 We always make choices. We cannot avoid it. Even abstaining to choose is an act of choosing
--- to abstain. So, whatever we become is a result of how we make our choosing.
 Jean-Paul Sartre is telling the truth.
But how can we be so sure that what we choose is the best one?
Let us recall the ideas of Aristotle to give light to the question raised above. According to
Aristotle,thinking is volitional (Ramos, 2016). Volition or will is the cognitive process by which an
individual decides on and commits to a particular course of action. This means that our will is at
work whenever we make a choice.
Introduction to Philosophy of the Human Person
How is this will connected to thinking or reasoning?
Aristotle further elaborates the relationship between will and the intellect (reasoning) by saying
that the will is meaningless if it is apart from the intellect (Ramos, 2016).

For how could ideas be translated into action when a person does not will it?
The intellect guides the will in making choices. It goes to show that the absence of the intellect
or reasoning means absence of the will, too.
For example: your intellect or thought has an idea of not going to class. That idea will remain an
idea unless the will converts it into action. If your will finally decide not to go to class, then your
action will be that you are absent in class. However, if your will finally decide to go to class, then
your action will be that you are present in class. An action is done because of human reason
(intellect) through his will.
Can you now see clearly the interconnection among reason, will and action?
Reasoning an important element in determining the nature and quality of one’s actions.
 Since choices are products of one’s action, we can say that choices are result of one’s
reasoning. The nature and quality of our choices is the end product of how we reason out.
How then is reasoning being evaluated in making judgements with regards to our behavior when
making a choice?
Another great philosopher St. Thomas Aquinas talks about the (4) fourfold classification of law:
natural law, human law, eternal law and divine law (Ramos, 2016).
 These laws guide the way we think. The knowledge or ignorance of these laws determine our
actions thus our choices.
1. Natural law states that good should be sought after and evil should be avoided (Ramos, 2016).
 Following this principle, it can be meant that human beings have inherent inclination for
preservation of life. Any actions that violates this principle is a choice that is not good and
is evil. Hurting anybody physically is tantamount to an attempt to violation of natural law.
2. Human law is based upon the concept of natural law stating that it is directed towards the common
good and it serves as instrument in the promotion of virtue. As you can recall in the lesson about
ethical philosophy, virtues refer to morally good behavior or character (Ramos, 2016). Human
laws are therefore created to uphold common good through maintenance of desirable virtues.
For example, the implementation of anti-bullying law is designed to curtail behavior that is not
morally good. The same is true for laws like: anti-harassment law and ban of smoking in public
places. Obedience to such laws promotes common good, benefits everybody and consequently
prevents chaos.
3. Eternal law can be understood as “ the mind of God”. God stands as ruler to the universe which he
created. And when God’s wisdom is understood as God Himself which is unchanging and eternal,
eternal law exists Accordingly, Saint Thomas says that “eternal law is nothing else than the type
of Divine Wisdom, as directing all actions and movements” through Him whom we can find wise
answers as the Principle of Sufficient Reason suggests. Recall that the Principle of Sufficient
Reason states that nothing exists without any reason at all (Ramos, 2016). Therefore, the wisdom in
everything is drawn out from the wisdom of God since all things were created by Him. Seeking for
the truth behind everything then is seeking for God’s wisdom thus recognizing and understanding
eternal law. Laziness to know (ignorance) is tantamount to violation of eternal law.
4. Furthermore, for Aquinas human and natural laws are both dealing with purposes limited by humanity’s
nature (Ramos, 2016). But since human beings are destined to go beyond his nature, they need a law
to guide them towards that destiny (Ramos, 2016). This law which guides this act of going beyond
(transcendence) is called divine law.
Introduction to Philosophy of the Human Person
 The above discussion gives us an awareness that the nature and quality of one’s action can be
evaluated through one’s knowledge on fourfold classification of law set forth by St. Thomas
Aquinas.
 We can therefore say that the choices we make is also evaluated or gauged by the same laws by
Aquinas since choices are product of action.
 Rational Choice Theory can also give us an idea how one makes choices. The theory states that “ a
person relies on rational calculations to achieve outcomes…which provide him/her with the
greatest benefit or satisfaction…given available choices ” reasoning or understanding Or simply
put, rational means reasonable or plausible. Choosing rationally therefore means the act of
choosing among choices with the aid of good reasoning given several options. Furthermore, the
theory explains that the doer of a chosen action believes that such action has more benefits than
costs. Thus considers such action as rational.
 Rational Choice gives us an idea that one’s action passes through and is a result of choosing
process between several options. Note that since one’s action is a result of a choosing process
among options, it could mean that there are options that are not chosen. There are options which
are given up.
 For example, if you are thinking of whether you are attending class or not, the two options are:
1. you will attend class
2. you will not attend class.
 Choosing a choice always has consequences, consequence means a result of an action.Usually, the
choices or options we are choosing from are interrelated in some way or another. For whether the
option is chosen or forgone (given up), it has a consequence that might affect us.
 Consequences could be good, bad or neutral. The possible consequences of not attending class
are:
 you will miss the lessons
 additional work and time of catching up missed lessons
 possible apprehension from your teacher
 and not seeing your crush could be another consequence.
 The opposite is true if you attend class:
 no missed lessons
 no catching up
 no apprehension
 and you could see the apple of your eye!
 But one thing is for sure: the action of choosing always has consequences.

Lesson 6: René Descartes’ the Thinking Thing

(Human person as an embodied spirit)
Aristotle and Plato’s
discourse about the human
person tackled the two basic
principles of the body and
soul – the matter and the
form. They both argued that
there is a certain relationship
between these two important
points.
Their concepts helped the succeeding philosophers of all time to give more insights about the
human person as an embodied spirit. From ancient times up until today, there are a large number of
philosophers who spent time largely with this concept. And from all philosophies rendered throughout
Introduction to Philosophy of the Human Person
time, here is a philosopher whose work affects the way human thinks especially during the modern
times. The father of modern philosophy - René Descartes
According to Vinzons, this famous philosopher “widens the gap between body and the soul
even more” as he separates the body from the soul which has the faculty to think and therefore cannot
be doubted unlike the body.
For Descartes, our knowledge that is based from our senses could definitely be deceiving.
Knowledge claimed by mere senses are not reliable, thus it is inferior from the brain. Actually, t he brain
itself, according to Descartes, could also be doubted!
 So, what is it that cannot be doubted?
The way you doubt cannot be doubted. Descartes wants us to realize that the process of doubting is
indubitable. This process of doubting is a way of thinking. Therefore, what makes man a human person
is his faculty of thinking – the only real and certain in this world is the Thinking Thing, the way man
thinks! This constitutes man’s existence!
 - COGITO ERGO SUM -
This is Descartes’ famous line literally translated as I think, therefore I am. This line sums up
his idea of Dualism – or the MindBody Dualism principle.
 Mind–body dualism is a view in the philosophy of mind that mental phenomena are non-
physical. The mind is apart from the body, since the mind can process on itself without the
body. It unveils that the mind and body are distinct and separable. Therefore, it encompasses
a set of views about the relationship between mind and matter, and between subject and
object.
 René Descartes believed that all things around us can be reducible. As per reductionism,
before we look into a larger picture of beings, we must take a look on its parts and negate
each one until we are set to finalize the thought of the being – reducing them until we get
the very essence. Same is done by Descartes: realizing that even his own body can be taken
apart from his very being. But one thing only prevails, and that is his process of thinking – the
being that thinks.As a result, in dualism, the mind or the thinking thing is nonphysical and non-
spatial-substance. This indubitable reality is our consciousness, self-awareness, and the seat
of intelligence within the human person. This claimed truth makes man superior to all other
beings. We claimed that we are the only living being that thinks. Still, it is always
acknowledged as dualism because without the body, the thinking thing will never process.
Here comes a sweet interaction that is firm between the mind and the body. Hence, man may
be limited by the body, but never forget the power of the mind to make your existence
worthwhile.
Lesson 7: IMAGO DEI: The Origin of Freedom
(Human person‟s freedom)
Do you remember deep ecology? The concept
of self-realization speaks about the dignity of
a human person that is coequal with the dignity
of nature. There is a “deep” understanding of a
human person being one with nature and not
being the apex of all species. If so, then it is
not just a duty but a moral and natural duty
for us to care for the environment and later
realize that this order contributes to health, wellbeing and sustainable development. We have this
vocation to notice things that are not in their proper place and organize them in an aesthetic way. And
most of all, as a human person, we shall be a stewards of nature who demonstrate the virtues of
prudence and frugality towards mother earth. But the journey does not end here. This is just the
Introduction to Philosophy of the Human Person
beginning of a deeper discourse on a human person. And as we engage with the essentials of being human,
we must first talk about FREEDOM.
It seems that freedom is an easy topic to discuss. When we see the word “freedom”, our mind stimulates a
lot of ideas and memories at the same time. Just like the famous image of these two nuns present during
the EDSA revolution. When we speak about freedom, we always incorporate it with the notion of freedom
that we got from a significant event in EDSA. These people tried to get back the freedom that is ours,
and so they did.But as philosophers, we ask, “Is this the real meaning of freedom?”Or even darker,
“Are we even truly free?”
To begin our discourse on freedom with these kinds of questions, we might be deceived because of the
presence of prejudices we have towards this concept. This is the immediate reason why it is logical for us
to begin our discussion on freedom with its foundation. That ‟s why we ultimately ask:
“What is the origin of freedom?”
We start with a Latin phrase: philosophia ancilla theologiae. This phrase literally means
"philosophy is the servant of theology." This phrase is famous during the medieval period in
philosophy and it was espoused by St. Thomas Aquinas. There is a misconception here - everybody
thought that theology is above philosophy and vice versa because of the term „servant‟. But then
again, we shall be clear that we use philosophy to understand theology – “the idea was to improve
theology, not to enslave philosophy.
”But why are we talking about this?
We are going to enter the realm of theology in order for us to understand the origin of freedom.
By the help of philosophy, we shall be able to comprehend the deep origin of freedom in a
theological perspective. We can understand where freedom begins when we discuss the doctrine of
IMAGO DEI – the image of God. The doctrine speaks about the human person being created in the
image and likeness of God. So, where do we tackle freedom in this doctrine?
 “So God created mankind in his own image,in the image of God he created them; male and
female he created them.”

 Accordingto CCC, 1701 says “Christ, in the very revelation of the mystery of the Father and of
His love, makes man fully manifest to himself and brings to light his exalted vocation.” It is in
Christ, “the image of the invisible God, that man has been created “in the image and likeness” of
the creator. It is in Christ, Redeemer and Savior, that the divine image, disfigured in man by the first
sin, has been restored to its original beauty and ennobled by the grace of God. This supports the idea
of man‟s dignity – being created in God‟s image, a being that is GOOD and not evil.
 Thus, as 1702 says “the divine image is present in every man.”
 Moreover, 1703 wants us to contemplate on the truth about God ‟s will to create humankind - Endowed
with a spiritual and immortal soul, the human person is “the only creature on earth that God has
willed for its own sake.”
 In 1704, it reveals the gift of God towards man – the gift of REASON and FREE WILL – as it says,
“the human person participates in the light and power of the divine Spirit. By his REASON, he is
capable of understanding the order of things established by the Creator. By FREE WILL, he is
capable of directing himself toward his true good. He finds perfection in seeking and loving what is
true and good.”
The origin of freedom – a gift from God!

REASON FREE WILL

Faculty of intellect Faculty of the mind
that is capable of which selects a desire
understanding the at the moment of
Introduction to Philosophy of the Human Person

Being created in God’s image and likeness!

 1705 states the most important part of the doctrine: “ by virtue of his soul and his spiritual
powers of intellect and will, man is endowed with FREEDOM, an outstanding manifestation of the
divine image.”
Freedom originates from God as a gift to mankind. The very essence of man’s freedom is to
do what is good and avoid what is evil. Free will is given to us to incline ourselves to the
Supreme Being, and on that note is a manifestation of true and logical thinking.
 IMAGO DEI does not guarantee us a perfection of life. We, humans, are still bound to error
and sin – there is an existence of struggle every single day since good and evil still co-exist in
man. But because of God‟s grace in which we shared with Him, we are being restored every time
we desire to follow His WILL. Our freedom must be towards doing the good so that Christ’s
passion and death shall not be in vain. Our freedom was given to us in order for us to choose
Christ‟s in our life, because whoever believes in Christ becomes a son of God – radiating the very
essence of IMAGO DEI.
Our freedom comes from the Supreme and Highest Being.
The essence of freedom in a human person is to do good and avoid evil. Free will must always come
with a rational and logical intellect. We do good because we are naturally born as good. We may do
bad things, but it does not take away the gift of freedom within us – there is just a corresponding
consequence that we must be accountable of. So to bring back the grace of goodness within our
personhood, we follow the highest good of all – doing the right thing always.
Let us apply this concept in our everyday living:
 All actions have consequences
 It is indeed true because of the ORDER of THINGS
 With the faculty of reason, we are capable of understanding the order of things
 Therefore, in all beings alive, only the human person can evaluate his/her own actions and the
corresponding consequences that may occur
 Example, we know that cheating is bad. But we want to pass the quiz and we don ‟t want to
fail it, so we attempt to cheat and we‟re able to pass it. At the end of the day there is a
guilty feeling, and that feeling is because we have done something wrong. We are free to
cheat, but be ready to face the consequences of cheating.
 Now, what are the consequences? First, you may be able to pass the quiz but never learned
anything in life. Second, your credentials might be questionable in the future. Third, there is
an order of things – one mistake might affect all others, like a domino effect.
Let us not forget the concept of St. Thomas Aquinas:
Aquinas views the image of God in three senses.
1. The general sense of the image of God is seen in all people because of their rational faculty.
2. The richer or higher sense of the image of God is seen only in believers who are being
conformed to the grace of God (Christ), though they are imperfect.
3. The highest sense of the image of God is seen in believers who have been glorified.

Lesson 8:Jean Paul Sartre’s Absolute Freedom

Introduction to Philosophy of the Human Person
Jean Paul Sartre: a Philosopher, Atheist, Teacher, an Existentialist.
 Sartre’s absolute freedom can be best explained from his atheistic view
 if god does not exist, then everything is permissible. Simply, no god, no rules – no rules,
you can do anything. Moreover, according to him, “if there are no guidelines for our
actions, then each of us is forced to design our own moral code, to invent a morality
to live by.” That’s what makes Sartre an atheist after all. As an existentialist, all of
them have this same maxim
 Existence precedes essence. Basically, existentialism is a philosophical theory or approach
that emphasizes the existence of the individual person as a free and responsible agent
determining their own development through acts of the will. Meaning to say, all humans
exist first without having their essence. This is a counterpart to determinism,
(essentialism) where that ideology speaks about pre-determined life for each individual.
 Jean Paul Sartre would definitely not agree with determinism, simply because for him,
all individuals should make their own path to life.
 Now, Sartre’s absolute freedom consists of these two realities – that we can do
anything (good or evil), and at the same time, we choose to live our own way of life.
In a nutshell, WE ARE CONDEMNED TO BE FREE!
 For Jean Paul Sartre, each agent is endowed with unlimited freedom.
 to making choices
 not being able to avoid making choices.
 Example, you choose to be a religious. A religious person is morally upright because there are
certain standards of living especially when we correlate it with ethics. These choices are
personal choices.
The human person shall unveil his/her person hood through his/her own choices. This is not a
project which the individual has proper knowledge of, but rather one which man may
interpret.Specific choices are therefore always components in time of this time-spanning
original choice of project. We are truly free because we have the ability to decide on our own.
Freedom is indeed absolute because it is a freedom of spontaneous choices!
Lesson 9: Maurice Merleau-Ponty’s
Situated Freedom
We have seen two extreme realities of FREEDOM.
1. Freedom from theological perspective – determinism
2. Freedom from atheistic view – existentialism
Either we are free or not, we have it both. It is God-given
gift, it is a one-life oath
 How to live life to the fullest, if life itself is absurd?
 Shall we call it freedom? Shall we be forever cursed?
 What shall we do to make existence true?
 What‟s clear for us is a certain power
The power to CHOOSE, rise up! My dear fellow!
Our choice matters most, it makes our life authentic
We make our own original project,
Let’s live our life real, efficient, well-played and effective.

 SITUATED FREEDOM
 Our freedom depends on a given situation. There is neither pure determinism
characteristic of the thing nor the absolute choice of pure consciousness. Situated
Introduction to Philosophy of the Human Person
freedom falls at the center of things – that freedom is relatively true only with a given
situation.
This philosophical concept came from Maurice Merleau-Ponty, a contemporary of Jean Paul
Sartre, not to mention being his school buddy and a friend. Merleau-Ponty, a french
philosopher, asks “What then is freedom?” For him, to be born is both to be born of the
world and to be born into the world. Simply, we exist for a purpose and that purpose is relative
to every being.
 Existence does not end with existence alone, but it is a gateway towards coexisting with
other beings – sharing each essences of well-being. Moreover, he added that “the world
therefore is already constituted but notmcompletely. It is already constituted because
before us are possibilities for us to choose our being in the world.”
 Our world is a given world: pre-determined, created even before us. All that is in this world
are constituted for a purpose. When we exist, we coexist with all the possibilities that this
world may offer. Thus, Merleau-Ponty says, “There is always an exchange between
situation and the person who takes it up.” Our choices depend on every situation: the same
situation million years ago that existed and constituted all throughout time.
In all situations possible, how can we exercise our authentic freedom?
 Let us deepen the concept of situated
freedom!
 Let’s start with this quotable quote by our
philosopher for today.
Being known as one of the great thinkers in the
area of phenomenology, for Merleau-Ponty,
experience is way better than our intellect in
terms of acquiring knowledge. In every choice
we make, we try to be analytic but still
experience can be the best key. Through
experiences, from childhood up to now, we are
able to collect values – not just a simple family
value, but a high moral standard of value.
 When we’re kids, our parents taught us to say “po” and “opo” as a sign of respect to our
elders. That simple gesture connotes a high moral value, and unconsciously that value is
confined within us as we grow older. And I strongly believe that as long as we live with a
high moral value, we live more authentically – practicing our freedom to choose good over
evil.
To deepen more the concept of situated freedom, here is an excerpt
from Rommel Gersava’s article entitled Freedom, and I quote – “He (MerleauPonty) states
that „freedom is interwoven with the field of existences. Our choices are not made from
absolute zero but from this field of meaning‟. It means that we choose something not
simply because we need to choose but we choose something because it has meaning to us.
Man’s freedom is always affected by situation. We are free to choose based on what situation
we belong in which we find meaning for ourselves.”This is definitely true in all levels! Now, to
supplement more information about situated freedom of
Merleau-Ponty, let us talk about the two kinds of freedom.

;VERTICAL FREEDOM
High Standard
Moral Value Your choice everyday

HORIZONTAL FREEDOM
Introduction to Philosophy of the Human Person

Low Standard
Your choice everyday
Moral Value

There are two kinds of freedom:

1. freedom of choice (horizontal freedom) The freedom of choice is our basic and
particular choices we made every day in our lives.
2. fundamental option (vertical freedom). The fundamental option is our general direction
or orientation in life that reflects our values in life. It is vertical freedom because it
is a hierarchy that some values are higher than the others.
Our decisions every single day depends on these two.
 GENEROSITY. There are lots of ways to be generous. We have a freedom of choice to
exercise generosity each day: making lunch for the family, contributing funds for the
school, etc. Now, that horizontal choice can be leveled up with the idea of the
fundamental option.
 Yes, you can be generous, but how generous are you? Your level of generosity may
vary because of your MORAL STANDARDS.
 There are many politicians who are doing their job in good and moral way. But
when a politician tries to be generous to his/her community and wants to take
bigger than what he/she has given, then the moral value of these politicians are
low

“it is Love which makes me a Person,

which makes me truly Free.”
 To sum things up, let us ponder on the words of Max Scheler,
Indeed, Love is the highest moral value of all. When our choices are rooted from love and
compassion, then all the decisions we make are good and nothing but pure goodness. There is
total freedom if there is love as the saying goes, “ if you Love someone set it Free .”
Freedom makes us truly human.
Our freedom comes from the IMAGO DEI. Our freedom is an everyday spontaneous choice
which is absolute. But most of all, our freedom is manifested from the choices we make
every single day.
 Reflect and look at yourself – set a high standard of moral value, and you shall be free,
living an authentic way of life.

But still, there are few things you need to remember:

1. Your choice defines your worth.
 If you choose to be good, then your life is worth living
2. Do not ignore small details in your life
There are times that you tend to ignore instances that may develop your moral standards.

 Example, exercising your freedom towards religion, exercising your social responsibilities,
etc.
3. Do not suppress your freedom.
Introduction to Philosophy of the Human Person
You always have a choice. Sometimes you neglect your existence through non-existent

act, that’s why you tend to not decide about things on your own.
4. Lastly, you are RESPONSIBLE to your actions and ACCOUNTABLE to your CHOICES
 You create your own life story. Your choices, your actions, and your decisions are
yours!, alone. It is up to you if you want to live an authentic life.

Lesson 10: Friedrich Nietzsche‟s The Otherworld

(Human beings as Oriented towards their impending death)
 What is death?
We have differentiated the phenomenology of death
from the perspective of SCIENCE and RELIGION.
 SCIENCE says death is the ending of life.
 When man stops breathing, he is dead.
 When the heart stops beating, man is dead.
 In hospitals, man is dead when flat line occurs. Man
is dead if man has no life.
 RELIGION says death is a gateway to new life.
 When man is good,
 he goes up to heaven;
 he receives a good karma;
 he is exulted from all other creatures.
 When man is bad,
 he goes down to hell;
 receive bad karma;
 neglected by all,
 ignored by whoever they call god.
 But what does Philosophy says about death?
 Is it really a question of what death is?
 Or is it a question of -WHAT IS DEATH BEFORE AND AFTER LIFE?

GOD IS DEAD!

This is a famous line from our
philosopher of today:
 Friedrich Nietzsche
 God is dead! As an atheist, for
Nietzsche, the society particularly us
human beings are the ones who killed
our own god – people killed the true
essence of their own religion .
 OTHERWORLD
 For Nietzsche, the Otherworld is nothing but a fiction created by Christians themselves.
Knowing that death is certain, people tend to focus more on the belief system rather
than living an authentic way of life.
 According to Vinzons, “Nietzsche cannot accept that people are willing to trade this world
for a world which is a product of human imagination and suffering. As a notorious critic of
Introduction to Philosophy of the Human Person
Christianity, he claims that the concept of an afterlife in the otherworld serves to comfort
those who are weak and suffering in this world.
 ” In short, people sticks to what the religion says about their lives – there is an incorrect
interpretation or exercise of the true essence of Christianity. Thus, for Nietzsche, one has
to take away the concept of the other world and focus on living life to the fullest.
 But the question is… How?

 LIVE LIFE TO THE FULLEST!

 This line is indeed cliché if we speak about the meaning of
life. But cliche as it may seem, this is certainly the essence
of what Friedrich Nietzsche wants us to realize in his
philosophy about death.
 According to him, the otherworld is just an illusion that
makes people “accept their lowly condition here on earth ”
and somehow gives them hope that this otherworld would
grant them a life that is better from the life they live in
the present.
 Meaning to say, they tried to put their lives on the hands of religion – giving all what they
have for a belief that is ambiguous, and neglects what is essential in the present. Live the
moment. Those people during Nietzsche‟s time haven‟t realized yet the point of his
philosophy.
 What matters most is you live in the present, not investing for something you are unsure of.
 According to Vinzons, “Nietzsche is against the otherworld because this leads those who
experience difficulties in this life to give up and hope for better life in another world
instead.
 ” Let us not forget that during his time, they experience famine, war, and different levels of
social injustices.We cannot blame those people who are suffering from injustices especially when
you are in the midst of war. People during that time experienced despair – they thought that
only religion can make their lives better. But the problem is that they ignored their
potentialities andpossibilities and inclined to something that is uncertain.
 Friedrich Nietzsche, indeed, disagreed on this kind of mentality. He preferably suggests that
YOU CAN DO MORE and WE CAN DO BETTER in this present life. Now we understand what he
meant when he said „God is dead’ – since the people during that time killed the essence of a
Christian life. God is indeed dead for those who despair.
 Here are some important points for reflection:
 Set your goals and keep looking at it
 You need to have a plan for your life
 a planned life is better than a „come-what-may‟ philosophy
 When you have goals to settle, you are capable to stretch your possibilities
 which eventually leads you to living your life at the present
 To live life is to embrace one’s essence and existence
 There are many people who are in despair
 they thought that life is meaningless, but that‟s not true
 live your life is to showcase your essence to the world
 to let all beings see your worth as a human being.
 Living a life to the fullest is to become OPTIMISTIC in any way
 Be positive in all things
 There are times when you experience a lowly kind of situation
Introduction to Philosophy of the Human Person
negative thoughts would drown you for sure

 That‟s why practice a mantra of positivity
 smile away the problems that you may encounter
 Do your best in all things
 Make a 100% extra effort on all things you do, it may either be big or small
 the outcome doesn’t matter, what counts most is the attitude towards work
 Just like a saying of a saint, „Be extraordinary in ordinary things‟ all circumstance may
seem ordinary for us, but to make it extraordinary is a one step closer to living life to
the fullest.

Lesson 11: Søren Kierkegaard's Taking the Risk

(Human Beings as Oriented towards their Impending Death)
God is dead
For Friedrich Nietzsche, religion should not be the
focal point of existence towards death. As an
existentialist, what matters most is the act of genuine
existence through developing one‟s essence . A human
person‟s life should not be defined by what religion
he/she belongs to.
That‟s why Nietzsche‟s quotation above says it all.
People create illusions to feel better. They suffer in
the present, but do not want to deal with it. Instead,
they resorted to create the other world – a place
where after death there is peace in all aspects.
 Nietzsche negates this idea and said „God is dead‟ – the people themselves killed their own God
by following a belief system that is far different from its (religion) essence. God is dead for
those who despair, for those who are hopeless about their present life. But Nietzsche
teaches us to fight and live the moment – live life to the fullest!
 The experience of death is unknown.
 No human beings, even philosophers, ever tried to write a phenomenology about death because
no one has ever risen from the dead to tell the experience of death. Thus, death can only be
understood when we philosophize on life BEFORE death. So let‟s discuss death in the light of
life.
 Søren Kierkegaard
He was named the father of existentialism because he focused on subjective human experience
rather than the objective truths of mathematics and science, which he believed were too
detached or observational to truly get at the human experience. His death philosophy is
understood in his idea of:
 LEAP OF FAITH
In other words, Taking Risks is Kierkegaard‟s concept of life before death – that death can be
best understood with the present life of a human
person. Why taking risks?
 Let us be reminded that as a father of existentialism, he disapproved the reduction of the
matters of faith into matters of reason.
 For Kierkegaard, not all things are measurable by the faculty of reason.
 Not all things can be understood, some things are mysterious and it is up to us to unveil its
mysteries through our faith.
Introduction to Philosophy of the Human Person
 In short, according to Vinzons, “whether there is a God who will reward or punish us or
whether we shall be reincarnated, or whether we will be resurrected – is not something
which reason can ascertain, but only faith.”
 So what is a leap of faith? Is it negative or positive?
 It may be negative if…
 Our moral standards are low – taking a risk in line with unethical practices
 The results may affect the lives of people around you
 It is for self-interest, not for the common good
 It may be positive if…
 We believe that the outcome is for the good of all
 We are confident with the result because of our high moral standards – doing the right thing!
 Our convictions are prudent and true without hesitations
But it is not a matter of neither positive nor negative results…
It is all about the attitude towards something or towards the subject of faith, not of reason,
because reason itself is predictable unlike the results of faith.
 TAKING THE RISK
 According to Kierkegaard, risks are being reduced
when we put certainty on matters of faith. In
simplest terms, there are no risks present when
we try to put reason first before faith. This idea
came from efforts of the medieval philosophers
who tried to grasp the existence of God through
rational explanation.
 It is a battle between what I BELIEVE and what I KNOW – matters of faith and reason.So
what’s the point?
“If the things we believe in turn into something that we know, then we eliminate risks. When
we eliminate risks, we eliminate faith. When we eliminate faith, we eliminate the true passion
of Christian living. Christianity in Kierkegaard’s time prioritized knowledge over faith.”
 When we speak about death, there is no certainty about it. We cannot fully rationalize the idea of
death – because if we do and if we can, then people will try to escape death, and will no longer live
taking risks.
 Taking a risk about death connotes a true Christian living. True Christian living is all about living
a high moral standard of life – doing good and avoiding evil. It is not always good to know all
things; perhaps as a human being, we cannot fully grasp the idea of all things (o nly God can do
that). In the end, faith matters more than reason according to Kierkegaard –
but let us not be confused, because faith and reason always come together!
“When reason ends, faith begins!”

 Before death comes to us, have we come to ask ourselves:Am I ready?

We can say that we are ready towards death when believe that
there is life after death – that is a true Christian way of living.
 Am I ready to do good and avoid evil?
 There is a Filipino maxim: “Gusto kong bumait pero di ko magawa”
– to be good is a human effort, you cannot be good without doing good things.
 Goodness is innate to human beings; all we have to do is to act upon it
 Am I ready to co-exist with other human beings?
 When we say co-exist, we pertain to social responsibility
 Even if these people around us are strangers for us, still we have social responsibility
towards them especially when they are in need
 Am I ready to embrace my faith?
Introduction to Philosophy of the Human Person
 Knowing things is good but can be dangerous
 If things are immeasurable by reason, then let our faith grasp the reality
– take the risk!
 We embrace our faith in the mysteries of life
 We unfold our life‟s meaning when we totally upholds our faith together
 If your answers are all YES, then you are ready to face death. We should not be afraid towards
death because death will bring closure to the meaning of our lives. If we want to make our life
so meaningful and profound, then let‟s start TAKING RISK every single day.
Lesson 12: Martin Heidegger's Dasein
(Human Beings as Oriented towards their Impending Death)
 Uncertainty of Death VS Leap of Faith
 Death is the only way towards the otherworld – a place created by
man where suffering will end and life will be better. This is not true
according to Nietzsche. This is just an illusion created by man. We
shall know the true meaning of Christian way of life – our lives
should not be doomed forever looking towards the other world.
 Life must be lived before death comes – so live it according to your desires not with belief systems

Death is not measurable by reason alone. We do not know what’s inside

the realm of death. But what we can do is to prepare for something
greater than death – living a true Christian way of life.
Death is the fulfillment of life, and for Kierkegaard, we have to take a
risk.
Let us not settle on the things we know; but let this knowledge
strengthen our conviction and take a leap of faith: that there is a
reward after death, new life!
 We have seen both sides of the coin:
1. a philosophy of death from an atheist and
2. a devout Christian
 two extreme realities that render the meaning of death and life.

What have you realized about death and life?

What is death, for you?
What is the meaning of your own personal life?

 BEING-TOWARDS-DEATH
 This is the literal translation of the word DASEIN – a philosophical term coined by
our philosopher for this module, MARTIN HEIDEGGER.
 Martin Heidegger stands in between the philosophy of Nietzsche and Kierkegaard
though all of them point out one conclusion: living life to the fullest!
 He stands in between in such a way that he focuses on the subject matter itself
which is the human person rather than focusing on death alone.
 He is known for his term dasein which speaks about us, human beings, who exist to
die soon.
 This dasein is a human being that exists – part and parcel of our existence is our
death, simply because we are not socalled human beings if we do not experience
Introduction to Philosophy of the Human Person
death. Therefore, his major work is to put the human person at the center of all and
innate with this attribute is the reality of death.
 We are born to die. Our death is certain once we are born – this is the
existential anxiety that Heidegger philosophizes towards the concept of death.
 For Heidegger, death is just a fulfillment of our being and part of this process is
the existential anxiety that he talks about.
 Death is not a thing, not an object, but rather an instance of being non-being.
 Realizing to be a non-being is unimaginable.
 To think of dying is always connected with the feeling of fear.
 We are afraid to die.
 But Martin Heidegger is asking us, “What are you afraid of?
 It is not a matter of differentiating what to fear but let’s focus on how to feel
about death – what are we afraid of?
 According to a Christian existentialist Paul Tillich, “Anxiety is the existential
awareness of non-being.”
 Now, for Martin Heidegger, the dasein itself is our existential awareness that non-
being is part of our very being as a human person. With this idea, we can come up with an
appropriate differentiation: the difference between ANXIETY and FEAR. What is the
difference between anxiety and fear when it comes to the concept of death?
DEATH
FEAR ANXIETY
“Has an object towards death” “Has no particular object”
Perhaps fear on the manner of death It is just a feeling of non-beingness.
like getting gunshots, falling off from We cannot identify an object of
a building, or having vehicular anxiety when it comes to the
accident realization of death.

conclusions
It is always constant that there is an
object of fear towards death – we fear
death because there is a physical
pain that may occur.
Anxiety is far different from fear – it
is just a feeling of what if’s: “What if I
die? What would happen? What
about my family? Etc, etc.

HOW DO YOU
FACE YOUR FEAR/
ANXIETY?

 For Martin Heidegger, (2) two-ways on how we face death.

1. First is an escape from the anxiety of death which is a result of Heidegger’s notion of Idle Talk.
This idle talk is simply a kind of talk “which the herd or masses conduct and it has a character
of triviality.”
 Death is present in all aspects – we see death every day in TV news, we see death in
common movies, we see and hear death which seems to be very common already with other
Introduction to Philosophy of the Human Person
people. Death seems to be a normal thing in peoples’ lives and we never bother to talk deeply
about: rather, does an idle talk about death.
 In simplest terms, we escape death by not talking about it seriously. A lot of people
refuse to talk about what death is all about and that’s the first thing how we face death –
which is somehow contrary to what the dasein tells us.
2. Second way to face death is to ACCEPT death.
 Yes, death is common to us and we see every single day. Thousands of people die in each hour
of the day and the truth is we cannot escape it.
 Therefore, as the dasein dictates, we shall accept death even if it pours out the bitterness in life.
Death is painful indeed, but in order for us to live an authentic life; we shall accept death knowing
that this may occur anytime soon. Anxiety about death must be cherished every single day, and
realize that we live only once.
 A simple reflection for us as students of philosophy who tries to fathom the gaze of death in all of
us: death is a reality of man – we cannot escape it, we just need to accept it.
 The challenge for us is how to accept the reality of death.
 Here’s how:
 We shall be ready before death comes – we shall never have regrets when the time comes for
us – don’t be afraid to die!
 We shall do our best every single day, knowing that one day all the things that we do shall
perish and somehow we shall leave a mark in this world about the goodness of our personhood
 We shall always bear in mind that life is lived once – the meaning of life is useless without
doing something remarkable before death