-2PART TWO: Philosophical Anthropology
1. Anthropology: (Gk.Anthropos[man]+logia[reasoning]) first used in the philosophical faculties of
German universities at the end of the 16th century to refer to the study of man as a physical and
moral being.
2. Philosophical Anthropology: the study of man by the “reflective methods of philosophy" or
simply from the perspective of philosophy.
The Concept of Human Nature: ideas are derived from everyday experiences of life and usually
based on commonality. Some common qualities are: people tend to be proud, sensitive, ambitious,
hopeful, selfish, seek recognition/admiration, but also capable of self-sacrifice. Some call these
“innate tendencies.”
3. Two Interpretations: a). FORM/ESSENCE (Plato/Aristotle) as explanatory concept thought to
be the principle present in being or responsible for human nature or present in nature that
determines the kind of being intended to be. Thus the teleological (purposive) view of the
development of organism, determined by reference to the ideal form it seeks to realize. This Greek
concept of form/essence is fixed and immutable form. They are, however, immaterial and hence not
observable in the way empiri- cally based notions usually are.
b). The modern biological explanation is derived from the DNA molecular structure of the cell
which is thought to be responsible for physical development. This gave rise to the concept of
GENETIC CODE. Through genetic engineering, DNA molecules can now be located, isolated,
analyzed, and manipulated by biologists. It is now possible to biologically characterize the human
person. The genetic view is MECHANISTIC (non-purposive). Development of the organism is
viewed to be dependent upon and determined on preexisting structures and conditions. Species are
not stable because of random genetic mutation which can cause changes in the genetic constitution
of the species as a whole. Hence species do not have the fixed, immutable forms or essences
characteristic of the biology before the advent of evolutionary theory.
In either interpretation, there remains the question of the role of the environment in the evelopment
of an organism.
One controversial question deals with the conceptual debate about human intelligence and
(rationality) the IQ tests that are supposed to be the measure of this, and hence may provide
evidence as to whether intelligence is determined by birth (nature) or by the environment
(nurture). The result may point to the question as to whether there is such a thing as human
nature common to all human beings.
[The debate about intelligence is important for the understanding of racist policies because
variation in intellectual capacity has been used as justification. Those (believed to be by nature)
with less mental capabilities (no reason/intellect) are not considered fully human [man is
distinguished from animals by his possession of reason/intellect] and hence not accorded fully
human rights. A concrete example of this racist attitude concerns women].
-3Western thought however tended to concentrate on human reason as the only distinguishing
characteristic that separates man from the animals forgetting the biological constitution that we
largely share with the animals. Man is also a tool-user or fabricator (homo faber), as essentially
social, language-user etc. These are strictly nonphysiological (mental, intellectual, psychological)
characteristics. There is a question of the relation between mind and body (philosophy/biology).
Until the 15th century, it has been assumed that man has a fixed nature that determines his destiny
and place in the universe. The Renaissance (1350 up to 17th) humanists thought otherwise. It is
man's freewill and responsibility that make his nature.
Two interpretations:1. human character is plastic. Humans are product of culture; 2. humans are
autonomous and must make himself/herself. Freedom is not bound by law, by nature.
4. Mottoes for the Philosophy of the human person:
A. Protagoras: Man is the measure of all things.
B. Delphic Oracle: Know thyself (echoed by Socrates/Heraclitus).
Both take man as the starting point on which all other disciplines depend.
5. Classical Philosophy: Plato and Aristotle
Plato's Metaphysics of Dualism
Physical World
Realms of Forms
: Not primary world of appearance
Primary, eternal reality
: Changeable
Unchangeable
: Knowable by the senses
knowable by the intellect
Body
Soul
: simply an appearance and
Real and gives identity
manifestation of the soul
to the body
: Material and physical
Immaterial and non-sexual
: Mortal and corruptible
capable of being reincarnated
: Temporal
Eternal
[like Pythagoras idea of the transmigration of the soul. Also in Hinduism. Plato agreed with
Pythagoras]
: Hence there is a separation between the rational/spiritual and the material aspects of human
existence, one in which the material is devalued.
-4Aristotle: rejected Plato's dualism. The physical world made up of concrete individual existence is
the primary reality. Though here is dualism in the sense of matter and form, they are not
separable, for the forms of changeable things have no independent existence apart from the matter
that instantiates (make) them. The soul is the form of the body giving life and structure to the
human existence.
: All human beings are the same in respect to form and only different in matter.
: Body and soul are one. One cannot exist without the other.
: Reincarnation is ruled out as a metaphysical impossibility.
Both Plato and Aristotle agreed that men are social and rational
beings. Plato, however, was more accommodating regarding the “women question," allowing them
participation in public life. But
like Aristotle, he generally thought that men are better than
women.