Docsity
Docsity

Prepare for your exams
Prepare for your exams

Study with the several resources on Docsity


Earn points to download
Earn points to download

Earn points by helping other students or get them with a premium plan


Guidelines and tips
Guidelines and tips

Philosophy reviewer containing topics about the FREEDOM OF THE HUMAN PERSON to DEATH., Study notes of Introduction to Philosophy

The topics that are enclosed in the reviewer are the following: - FREEDOM OF THE HUMAN PERSON - Circumstantial Freedom - Metaphysical Freedom - THE SELF AND THE OTHER - Intersubjectivity - THE HUMAN PERSON AND THE SOCIETY - DEATH

What you will learn

  • How does the self interact with others in the context of intersubjectivity?
  • What is the relationship between freedom and determinism, and how does the concept of God fit into this debate?

Typology: Study notes

2019/2020

Uploaded on 09/20/2023

yel-5
yel-5 🇵🇭

1 document

1 / 4

Toggle sidebar

This page cannot be seen from the preview

Don't miss anything!

bg1
PHILO 4TH QUARTER
LESSON 1: FREEDOM OF THE HUMAN PERSON
> Freedom – requires a degree of control from the
person who exercises it
If there is a need to control, then are we really
free?
“I can do whatever I want. This is a free country.”
– I feel that I am free; I think that I am free
–$when we try to rationalize the thought, we begin
to wonder how irrational it is
– what evidences can you provide that you are
free?
– are we really free or are we just imagining that
we are?
– not a ticket to do everything we wish
–$if freedom is power, then it comes with great
responsibility
– includes the concept of love and devotion
– freedom now is equated to choosing alone (may
choices ka so malaya ka): ganito kalayaan natin
–$we forget that the original value of freedom is
rooted from love and devotion; we dismiss the
concept of love and devotion (has evolved because
of constant usage)
– freedom is understood as a kind of independence
to the will of others
–$a free person can do whatever he chooses as long
as he doesn’t break the law or infringe the freedom
or right????? of others
–$our concept of freedom has been devaluated
–$freedom is embedded in human nature
–$for us to operate freely, we have to know how the
concept operates?????
–$are our action free and anchored in love and
devotion?
–$some believe na nakatadhana mga bagay bagay
– you cannot believe in both perspectives: na you
are free and that fate yung gumawa ng mga bagay
bagay
> Circumstantial Freedom – “I am free, if and only if,
my circumstance allows me to be free.”
> Metaphysical Freedom – “I have the power to decide
what will happen to me in the future.”
Originating cause of a decision
Leads us to free actions????? In which we can be
held responsible
> Fatalism – philosophical doctrine emphasizing the
subjugation of all events/actions to fate/destiny
> Libertarianism –$view that defines a free act as one
that is exclusively controlled by the person’s will as long
as he/she respects the equal rights of others
> Determinism –$our actions are controlled by factors
such as biology, genes, the way we are brought up by
our families and society
Determinists believe that we are passive to our
existence and we have no free will
Does not give room for choices, everything is
predetermined
Can you blame me kung nakatadhana?
Hard-Determinism –$all things are determined by
purely external factors of which we have no
control
– “Whatever happened, happened and couldn’t
have happened in any other way.” – Morpheus
Soft-Determinism – actions and choices are
determined by our inclinations, attitudes, and
character
–$also called compatibilism
–$may fixed loss yung universe
– soft-determinists believe that free will influences
greatly our actions
–$actions become free if they come from
ourselves?????
–$if it’s a free choice, it results to a consequence
which is responsibility
– we have moral responsibility for the actions we
choose
> Freedom vs. Determinism
Are we really free?
John Locke: you do not know that the room is
locked from the outside, then are you really not to
go outside? He thinks he is free pero illusion lang?
his illusion to leave is not really a choice or an
option
When we try to reconcile freedom and
determinism, we encounter the idea of God and
how God affects our freedom
If everything is predetermined, is there someone
who determines?
> Divine Foreknowledge –$“God knows about every
little thing about you.”
God is all-knowing
God knows all your desires
God knows why and the effect of your choice
Knows every little thing about you
> Divine Providence –$nothing happens outside of the
Divine Will
God provides?????
God orders and controls all that occurs
> If God can see into the future, can see someone’s
action before they have been done, then are we really
free? Does God’s omniscience eliminate free will?
> How do we reconcile divine foreknowledge,
determinism, and the human freedom?
Pwede bang naniniwala ako sa Diyos pero
naniniwala akong malaya ako?
If you believe in God, then do you have the power
to be free?????
He just knows about our choices
We can still choose????? Binigyan niya tayo ng
choice
> Absolute Freedom and Responsibility
pf3
pf4

Partial preview of the text

Download Philosophy reviewer containing topics about the FREEDOM OF THE HUMAN PERSON to DEATH. and more Study notes Introduction to Philosophy in PDF only on Docsity!

PHILO 4TH^ QUARTER

LESSON 1: FREEDOM OF THE HUMAN PERSON

Freedom – requires a degree of control from the person who exercises it  If there is a need to control, then are we really free?  “I can do whatever I want. This is a free country.”

  • I feel that I am free; I think that I am free
  • when we try to rationalize the thought, we begin to wonder how irrational it is
  • what evidences can you provide that you are free?
  • are we really free or are we just imagining that we are?
  • not a ticket to do everything we wish
  • if freedom is power, then it comes with great responsibility
  • includes the concept of love and devotion
  • freedom now is equated to choosing alone (may choices ka so malaya ka): ganito kalayaan natin
  • we forget that the original value of freedom is rooted from love and devotion; we dismiss the concept of love and devotion (has evolved because of constant usage)
  • freedom is understood as a kind of independence to the will of others
  • a free person can do whatever he chooses as long as he doesn’t break the law or infringe the freedom or right????? of others
  • our concept of freedom has been devaluated
  • freedom is embedded in human nature
  • for us to operate freely, we have to know how the concept operates?????
  • are our action free and anchored in love and devotion?
  • some believe na nakatadhana mga bagay bagay
  • you cannot believe in both perspectives: na you are free and that fate yung gumawa ng mga bagay bagay

Circumstantial Freedom – “I am free, if and only if, my circumstance allows me to be free.” Metaphysical Freedom – “I have the power to decide what will happen to me in the future.”  Originating cause of a decision  Leads us to free actions????? In which we can be held responsible Fatalism – philosophical doctrine emphasizing the subjugation of all events/actions to fate/destiny Libertarianism – view that defines a free act as one that is exclusively controlled by the person’s will as long as he/she respects the equal rights of others Determinism – our actions are controlled by factors such as biology, genes, the way we are brought up by our families and society  Determinists believe that we are passive to our existence and we have no free will  Does not give room for choices, everything is predetermined  Can you blame me kung nakatadhana?  Hard-Determinism – all things are determined by purely external factors of which we have no control

  • “Whatever happened, happened and couldn’t have happened in any other way.” – Morpheus  Soft-Determinism – actions and choices are determined by our inclinations, attitudes, and character
  • also called compatibilism
  • may fixed loss yung universe
  • soft-determinists believe that free will influences greatly our actions
  • actions become free if they come from ourselves?????
  • if it’s a free choice, it results to a consequence which is responsibility
  • we have moral responsibility for the actions we choose

Freedom vs. Determinism  Are we really free?  John Locke: you do not know that the room is locked from the outside, then are you really not to go outside? He thinks he is free pero illusion lang? his illusion to leave is not really a choice or an option  When we try to reconcile freedom and determinism, we encounter the idea of God and how God affects our freedom  If everything is predetermined, is there someone who determines? Divine Foreknowledge – “God knows about every little thing about you.”  God is all-knowing  God knows all your desires  God knows why and the effect of your choice  Knows every little thing about you Divine Providence – nothing happens outside of the Divine Will  God provides?????  God orders and controls all that occurs If God can see into the future, can see someone’s action before they have been done, then are we really free? Does God’s omniscience eliminate free will? How do we reconcile divine foreknowledge, determinism, and the human freedom?  Pwede bang naniniwala ako sa Diyos pero naniniwala akong malaya ako?  If you believe in God, then do you have the power to be free?????  He just knows about our choices  We can still choose????? Binigyan niya tayo ng choice Absolute Freedom and Responsibility

  • “Man is condemned to be free." – Jean Paul Sartre  Opposes that man has a fixed nature  Operated on the idea that there is no God?????  Human nature cannot be determined in advance  Existence precedes essence?????  Atheistic view prompts us to create meaning for ourselves  Emphasizes the dignity of a human person  We are dignified creatures because of our ability to create meaning for ourselves, to choose our purpose in life  We cannot immediately mention what their purpose is (we are given the freedom to create meaning after our creation or existence, not before, according to an atheistic perspective)  As much as we are condemned to be free and perpetually disappointed in this world, the possibility that we have control over some things  We are free to live, to live freely with others and the society LESSON 2: THE SELF AND THE OTHER

Intersubjectivity – the interaction between the self and the other  The shared awareness and understanding among persons  The ability of humans to agree and cooperate  The existence of shared or common knowledge and consensus, as well as emotions like grief, joy, and love  We are aware that there are persons unique from us  Self-consciousness: characteristic that sets apart an interaction between people?????  There are people who act intentionally to deceive others “No man is an island.” “Walang sino man ang nabubuhay para sa sarili lamang.”  The self always exists with the other  We have an undeniable connection????? With others When both truly acknowledge each other’s presence A much deeper level of interaction through dialogue  We fall into a dialogue  Much deeper connection through dialogue  A dialogue is made possible when we realize that the other is a genuine and unique individual and we take interest in that  When two individuals begin to view each other as selves when both truly acknowledge each other’s presence, that’s the beginning of authentic relationship and dialogue Martin Buber’s I and Thou (Two Kinds of Relationships) (I is the self or the subject and Thou is you or the other)

  • The person becomes the object of the dialogue or you  I-It – I objectifies the other in an egoistic and selfish manner kaya walang you or thou
  • may kailangan ka sa kanya
  • ginamit mo lang
  • you see the other as a thing
  • not seen as an equal  I-Thou – characterized by a fully engaged relationship or interaction between two selves
  • an I and I relationship
  • there are two Is who see themselves as authentic selves
  • may dignidad at respeto
  • made manifest by two selves
  • mas malalim mas makabuluhan mas maganda mas totoo

Philosophers  Edmund Husserl – … where people are able to put themselves into someone else’s shoes and thereby assume what the other person thinks and feels  Karol Wojtyla – … one has to treat the other person not as a faceless entity, but as a person

  • pag tinanggal mo lahat, pareho kayong tao
  • “who are you and what are you behind all those gold cloaks and jewelry?”
  • the human person, the I that is similar to the other I, pareho lang yon
  • pareho lang tayo
  • if you can realize that parehas lang tayo?????, you cannot anymore reduce the other or yourself into anything, you cannot objectify the other, you cannot make the other as an instrument
  • you are equals
  • one has to treat the other person not as a faceless entity, but as a person  Edit Stein – … by the fact that human person are at a distance with others, solidarity flourishes
  • phenomenology of empathy: starts by recognizing the person in front of you, then with or without words you attentively listen to what the other feels then you project the same feeling to make visible connection
  • the I concurs with the other, agrees with the other with or without words
  • you can always make manifest what she is feeling
  • this person is listening because she displays the same feeling that I feel
  • I feel you, naiintindihan kita
  • if you know, treat, appreciate, respect, and see your real self, you respect yourself as a person kaya you treat, appreciate, see, and understand others with respect?????
  • if you see the other as a self, you can always assume what the other thinks and feels
  • The Social Contract (1762): “Man was born free, and everywhere he is in chains.”; hindi dapat i- surrender ng kahit sinong individual yung rights niya; enter a social contract and when people would give up all of their rights not to the king but to the whole community, he calls the people the sovereign; the real power is held not by king or queen but by the people
  • Direct Democracy: all subjects submit their will to will of the Sovereign; it will be best if direct democracy; by protecting ourselves, we are also protecting the society; for the common good of all; we are promoting the common good
  • State of Nature: a wonderful, rich environment for early humans living solitary peaceful lives
  • Life will be fair to all if we employ a general will and set aside our personal interest LESSON 4: DEATH

Death – medical and biological perspective: the end of a biological organism  Medical: brain dead  Aging, disease, fatal injury (causes of death)  Death is not merely confined to a physical death  Social sciences: consider it as an experience which involves other people in the society (affect the society)  Are we afraid of death or are we afraid of the things associated with death?  Cultures: have varied ideas, values regarding death and these are reflected in our traditions, in funerary practices  Inevitable phenomenon  Philosophers: people often treat it with dread Death in the Philippine Context – religious observances, death anniversaries????? Para ma-feel ng deceased person that he or she is remembered  Religiously influenced Religious Definition of Death – immortal soul  Transition/cycle  Faith  Heaven, hell, purgatory  Afterlife  Core of the human person  There is something in us which is immortal: soul spirit life  Not every religion subscribe in the belief of the soul and its immortality  Usually defined as a transition or cycle  The soul will be placed directly to a place that is proportionate to its status in the earthly life  Others believe that after death, the soul undergoes reincarnation: rebirth of the soul: a bad moral standing, leads to a lower form of birth and vice versa

 All of these operates in the realm of faith

Existentialist Definition – to be or not to be  Possibilities  Dealing with anxiety  Face it or run away from it?  Anxiety from defining who we really are  Be redirected to being  Run away from the present  Our existence is always a question of to be or not to be in the future  Either you are a being or a non-being  Determination of all the possibilities we have as humans will simply cease to exist  These possibilities may pertain to the simplest of things  The afterlife is not a concern for existentialist because the existence of the afterlife is not concrete and is based on faith  We cannot validate the existence of heaven and hell?????  Anxiety comes from our non-existence or non-

being????? Na baka hindi tayo umiral?????  Death is a possibility as well, walang pinagkaiba sa ibang posibilidad  The real source of anxiety that we get from death does not come from dying, but other things  The fear concerning the manner on how we die  The fear of leaving responsibilities  Facing the possibility of our death, non-existence should redirect us to being  If we accept death as a possibility, we should inevitably be led back to what is actual, concrete, present  Kung takot ka sa kamatayan, it should boost you to live a more perfect life, a moral life  Address the anxiety that concerns the human person in the light of death  We only face anxiety in two levels: (1) we become anxious over the idea of our non-existence (kabaligtaran sa religious definition) and (2) anxiety may come from the realization that we are free to define who we are (given the responsibility to define who we are–to bear this responsibility because of freedom)  How do we now face these anxieties given to us by the concept of death? Either we face it or we run away from it (most existentialists agree that people????? hide or run away from it) (makes us prone to living unauthentic life)  Death is a part of our life  How do you make sense of people running away from something that is part of them?  Madaling tanggapin yung pananaw ng mga existentialist kung ang pinag-uusapan pa natin yung kalayaan