Analyzation of “AKO kag IKAW: A Reflection on Martin Buber’s I-Thou Relationship”
Submitted by: Rochelle Anne Leis of 11 STEM-6
The article mainly talked about Villanueva’s understanding on the I-Thou relationship, and why having a
Thou is necessary for an I. He started by using the story of the creation as an example.
Buber stated, “Without It, man cannot live, but he who lives with It alone is not a man.” The example of
Adam without Eve signified this. There were many beings around him, but for Adam, none of them is a
Thou, which he was looking for. Although this is debatable, since he has Nature all around him, and man
is capable of having a dialogue and relation with Nature. Therefore, implied in here is that Adam has a
Thou, but treats Nature as an It.
Villanueva then imagined Buber being present in that scenario with Adam. Personally, it is beautiful that
Villanueva stated that Adam, an I or Ako, will be happy to be with Buber, a possible Thou or Ikaw,
regardless of the fact that Adam would need a female to reproduce. In an I-Thou relationship, gender
and other characteristics of a person do not matter and if one looks into another’s qualities, the latter
ceases to be a Thou and is treated as an It instead.
Villanueva dwelled on the reflection of his classmate, saying “Life is a dialogue.” Just like Buber said,
dialogue signifies the life of relation. This line implies that having dialogue means having a relation to
another being, and that supports Buber’s argument that it is innate in man to be relational. Villanueva
then shared his imagination of being alone, and that he cannot live like that. It is commendable that his
examples were not all speech-related since dialogue is not limited to words only.
The next paragraph discusses about how a subject becomes a Thou for an I. Acceptance was highlighted
and mentioned that the Thou should be considered as a Thou despite one’s weaknesses and
imperfections. Again, according to Buber, an I-Thou relation includes mutual and direct acceptance,
sincerity, dialogue, and care. As mentioned before, a Thou becomes an It when the I looks into the
other’s qualities. Therefore Villanueva’s statement supported Buber’s definition of an I-Thou relation,
since it was implied that the qualities of the other subject must be disregarded, otherwise, the subject
will be vulnerable to exploitation, which was explained in the succeeding sentences. This also supports
Gabriel Marcel’s idea of intersubjectivity, wherein one recognizes the other as a somebody and not a
something, and therefore makes the self a being-among-beings.
The conclusion started with the idea of mutualism between the Ako, or the I, and Ikaw, or the Thou. I’ve
already mentioned this in the previous paragraph, and I agree with this statement. Personally, this is the
most essential quality of an I-Thou relation, since the I is also a Thou to the other subject, and the Thou
is also an I in their own perspective. In order to have a real I-Thou relation, they should reciprocate what
is given to them. The finishing statement of Villanueva opened up a new topic: society. He implied that
the I-Thou relationship is aimed to make themselves a better person for other I’s and Thou’s or the
society.
The whole article gave some points about the I-Thou relationship of Martin Buber and most of them
were agreeable. The use of some examples is also appropriate and shows clear connection on the topic.
It is clear that Villanueva has a good understanding of Martin Buber’s I-Thou relations.