INTRODUCTION TO THE PHILOSOPHY OF THE HUMAN PERSON

I Title: Knowing the Truth

II. MELC: Distinguish opinion from truth (PPT11/12-1a-2.1)

IV. Learning Objective/s:

1. differentiate opinion from truth
2. illustrate through a semantic map the nature of truth as a property of beliefs and
statements
3. weigh the value of truth by distinguishing certain kinds of truth.

V. Reference/s
Mabaquiao,, Napoleon, Jr. 2016. Making Life Worth Living: An Introduction to the Philosophy of
the Human Person. Quezon City: Phoenix Publishing House, Inc. pp. 47-53
Miller, Aimee. The Three Great Theories of Truth from
https://www.slideshare.net/hoovermiller_aimee/theories-of-truth-powerpoint retrieved on July 9,
2020

VI. Concept notes with formative activities

The Nature of truth
o Truth is one of the central subjects in philosophy. It is also one of the largest. Truth has
been a topic of discussion in its own right for thousands of years. Moreover, a huge variety
of issues in philosophy relate to truth, either by relying on theses about truth, or implying
theses about truth.
o We give much importance to truth; some demand to know it, some fear it, and others
would even die for it. But what exactly is truth? What is its nature? Does it even have a
nature in the first place? When do we say that some truth-bearer1 is true? Philosophers
offer varying answers to these questions.
o One fundamental philosophical question about truth is whether it has a specific nature2;
a nature that could perhaps best explain why we give importance to it.
There are two conflicting philosophical views about this question: those who affirm that
truth indeed has a specific nature and those who deny it.
o Those who affirm that truth has a specific nature see truth as a substantial property. The
motivating idea behind this is that by ascribing “is true,” “it’s true,” or any of its cognates
to a given truth-bearer something theoretically significant is being added to it. Thus, there
is something significant that will be added to the sentence “It’s raining,” if we put “is true”
after it. Those who deny this claim that when we say that a given truth-bearer is true, the
predicate “is true” does not add anything significant to it at all. Furthermore, to assert that
‘“It‘s raining” is true’ is just to assert that “It’s raining.” As such, for them, truth has no
specific nature. The former view is known as inflationist theories of truth; the latter as
deflationist theories.
o A variety of truth bearers are considered – statements, beliefs, claims, assumptions,
hypotheses, propositions, sentences, and utterances. It is argued that statements,
beliefs, claims, assumptions, and hypotheses – in the sense of things stated, believed,
Page 1 of 13
 claimed, assumed, and hypothesized – can be identified with propositions, but that
these, in turn, cannot be identified with sentences or utterances. Propositions are
distinguished as the primary bearers of truth, while sentences and utterances are
properly characterized as true in virtue of expressing true propositions.
(https://www.oxfordscholarship.com/view/10.1093/0195123352.001.0001/acprof-9780195123357-chapter-2)

o Focus is given to beliefs and statements as the bearers of truth. The reason is that not all
sentences can either true or false. When we say that that sentences can be true, what we
have in mind are the declarative sentences only. We cannot say that a question, an
exclamation, or an imperative that it is either true or false.
o What we call a statement, which philosophers also call a “proposition” refers to a linguistic
expression whose function is to advance a claim about the world. This claim can be true
or false, and hence the statement is either true or false.
o Beliefs are the mental expressions of our claims. Sometimes it is said that statements are
expressions of beliefs, which means beliefs as more basic than statements.
Example: The statement “the table is brown”, we just have to observe whether the
table is the statement is referring to is actually (and really) brown.
o The same is true with belief, we can determine the truth without associating it first with a
statement. Thus, we can say that the belief that humans are mortal is true.
o Fact versus Truth. A fact is something that occurs in the world, and it is what makes a
certain statement is true. For example, what makes the statement, “There is a cow in the
rice field” true is the fact that there is a cow in the rice field. When we say this, we are
using the word “true” to mean a “fact” such that what we actually mean here is that “It is
a fact that there is a cow in the field”.
Kinds of Truth
1. Empirical Truth. It is established by means of sense experience. Example: “It is raining”
Empirical truth is described as a posteriori which means that it can only be known after some
relevant experience.
2. Rational truth is established by means of reason. Example: “A triangle has three sides” or “Five
and five are ten”. This kind of truth is called a priori which means that it can be known before
some relevant experiences.
3. Contingent truth is a true proposition that could have been false; a contingent falsehood is a
false proposition that could have been true. This is sometimes expressed by saying that a
contingent proposition is one that is true in some possible worlds and not in others. An example
of a contingent proposition is the proposition that human beings have evolved from other forms
of life. Empirical truths are contingent truths. In the statement: “The table is brown” is only true
in a situation where there is table that happens to be brown in color, but in another situation
where there is no table or the table happens to be black in color, the statement is no longer true.
4. Necessary truth is a true statement whose negation must imply a contradiction in reality, such
that the negation would be impossible. So, if “One plus one equals two,” is a necessary truth, then
the statement “One plus one does not equal two” will imply a contradiction. Given the meanings of
“one” and “two,” we can immediately see that the addition of two “ones” (units) always does yield
Page 2 of 13
 “two,” yet the statement “One plus one does not equal two,” contradicts this. It’s incomprehensible
that one plus one should ever add to anything but two. So “One plus one equals two,” is commonly
held to be a necessary truth, with its negation being impossible.
In simple terms, a contingent truth is not always true, while a necessary truth is always
true.
5. Private truth can only be known by the person who has the belief or make the statement
considered to be true. The truth of psychological statements are its examples.
6. Public truth is a kind of truth known by everyone. Empirical and rational truths are examples of
public truths.
7. Subjective truth is dependent on the attitudes, preferences or interests of a person or a group
of persons. For instance, the truth of the statement or judgment that rock music is the best kind of
music.
8. Objective truth is an objective claim is a statement about a factual matter-one that can be proved
true or false. For factual matters there exist widely recognized criteria and methods to determine
whether a claim is true or false.
9. Universal truth when a belief or a statement is acknowledged to be true by everyone. For
example, “Thou shall not kill because life is precious” Objective truths are usually universal as
well.
10. Relative truth when a belief is acknowledge only by some people.

Some kinds of truth intersect with or are closely related to one another.

Theories of Truth
The principal problem is to offer a viable theory as to what truth it consists in, or, to put it
another way, “What is the nature of truth?” To illustrate with an example – the problem is not: Is
it true that there is extraterrestrial life? The problem is: What does it mean to say that it is true
that there is extraterrestrial life? Astrobiologists study the former problem; philosophers, the
latter.
Correspondence Theory
• The dominant theory, especially popular with empiricists
• Correspondence Theory proposes that a proposition is true if it corresponds to the facts.
Example: “The apple is sitting on the table” can be true only if the apple is in fact sitting
on the table.
• Often traced back to Thomas Aquinas’ version: “A judgment is said to be true when it
conforms to the external reality” (Summa Theologiae, Q. 16)
• Also leaves room for the idea that “true” may be applied to people (a “true friend”) as
well as to thoughts
• Two main versions of Correspondence Theory: object based, and fact-based
(currently prominent)

Page 3 of 13
 • In order to prove that “It is raining today” is true, according to the correspondence theory,
all one must do is look out the window and verify that it is in fact raining
• According to Descartes, “I have never had any doubts about truth, because it seems a
notion so transcendentally clear that nobody can be ignorant of it…the word ‘truth,’ in
the strict sense, denotes the conformity of thought with its object” (‘Letter to Mersenne: 16
October 1639,’ The Philosophical Writings of Descartes, vol. 3 )
Coherence Theory
• Preferred by many idealists. For idealists, reality is like a collection of beliefs, which
makes the coherence theory particularly attractive
• The coherence theory of truth states that if a proposition coheres with all the other
propositions taken to be true, then it is true.
• The truth of a belief can only consist in its coherence with other beliefs; truth comes in
degrees. Coherence theorists hold that truth consists in coherence with a set of beliefs
or with a set of propositions held to be true, not just an arbitrary collection of
propositions
Pragmatism
• William James is considered the father of pragmatism
• However, in order to understand James’ presentation of pragmatism we must draw a
distinction between meaning and truth. – A sentence is meaningful only if believing it
would make a practical difference in your life as opposed to believing some alternative
to it.
• Example: Proposition A: There is a gaping hole in the middle of the cafeteria. – Would
believing this proposition to be true make a practical difference in your life?
» It is safe to assume that one would take a path that avoids the middle of the
cafeteria if one believed that there was a gaping hole there.
The previous example is an illustration of a meaningful proposition – belief in it (or lack
thereof) makes a practical difference in one’s life.
• What about truth?
• Only meaningful sentences can be true or false
• James’ take on both the coherence and correspondence theories of truth is that they
are not competing theories, but rather different tools to be applied to beliefs to see if those
beliefs work. The key thing for James and pragmatism is that of an idea “working”. If
believing that there is a gaping hole in the middle of the cafeteria prevents you from falling
and breaking a leg, or making a fool of yourself in front of that cute boy from chapel, then
that belief works. It is “true.”
Critical Thinking and Truth
Critical thinking is the intellectually disciplined process of actively and skilfully
conceptualizing, applying, analyzing, synthesizing, and/or evaluating information gathered from,
or generated by, observation, experience, reflection, reasoning, or communication, as a guide
to belief and action. In its exemplary form, it is based on universal intellectual values that

Page 4 of 13
transcend subject matter divisions: clarity, accuracy, precision, consistency, relevance, sound
evidence, good reasons, depth, breadth, and fairness.
Critical thinking is self-guided, self-disciplined thinking which attempts to reason at the
highest level of quality in a fair-minded way. People who think critically consistently attempt to
live rationally, reasonably, empathically. They are keenly aware of the inherently flawed nature
of human thinking when left unchecked. They strive to diminish the power of their egocentric
and sociocentric tendencies. They use the intellectual tools that critical thinking offers –
concepts and principles that enable them to analyze, assess, and improve thinking. They work
diligently to develop the intellectual virtues of intellectual integrity, intellectual humility,
intellectual civility, intellectual empathy, intellectual sense of justice and confidence in
reason. They realize that no matter how skilled they are as thinkers, they can always improve
their reasoning abilities and they will at times fall prey to mistakes in reasoning, human
irrationality, prejudices, biases, distortions, uncritically accepted social rules and taboos, self-
interest, and vested interest. They strive to improve the world in whatever ways they can and
contribute to a more rational, civilized society. At the same time, they recognize the
complexities often inherent in doing so. They avoid thinking simplistically about complicated
issues and strive to appropriately consider the rights and needs of relevant others. They
recognize the complexities in developing as thinkers, and commit themselves to life-long practice
toward self-improvement. They embody the Socratic principle: The unexamined life is not
worth living, because they realize that many unexamined lives together result in an uncritical,
unjust, dangerous world.

To have a clearer grasp of truth, critical thinking involves a person who:

1. Looks for Evidence to support assumption and beliefs

2. Adjusts Opinion

3. Looks for Proof

4. Examines problem

5. Rejects irrelevant and incorrect information-

In this chapter, we have explored the question about the nature of truth. We also
discussed different theories which account for the nature of truth. We found that these theories
also have problems. The philosophical issue about truth remains open and I invite you to answer
the activities!

Page 5 of 13
 The Fact/Opinion Distinction
• In calling something an opinion, one presumably wants to contrast it with something that is not an
opinion, and the obvious candidate for the contrast class is “fact”. Philosophers might be tempted to
draw this contrast by identifying facts as states of affairs – occurrences that are there in the world
regardless of what anyone may think about them – and identifying opinions as beliefs (or some other
mental state) about states of affairs.
• Suppose, then, we narrow our inquiry to statements, so that when we ask, “What is the difference
between facts and opinions?” what we’re really asking is “What is the difference between statements
of fact and statements of opinion?”

• This seems like it should be an easy question, but it actually tends to stump most people on
the street. Mind you, they have no trouble in offering examples of either, or in categorising
others’ examples. So for instance, given:

(1a) There is beer in my (1b) Wine tastes better than beer.

refrigerator.
(2a) The earth revolves around (2b) The earth was created by an
the sun. omnipotent God.
(3a) Thousands were killed in (3b) Genocide is wrong.
Darfur.
(4a) The current US president is (4b) A Democrat will win the
a Democrat. presidency in 2016.
they’ll say that the A statements are facts and the B statements are opinions. When asked to
explain the principle of distinction between the two,

• “Fact: statement of actuality or occurrence. A fact is based on direct evidence, actual experience,
or observation.

• “Opinion: statement of belief or feeling. It shows one’s feelings about a subject. Solid
opinions, while based on facts, are someone’s views on a subject and not facts themselves.”

• “Facts are statements that can be shown to be true or can be proved, or something that
really happened. You can look up facts in an encyclopaedia or other reference, or see them
for yourself. For example, it is a fact that broccoli is good for you (you can look this up in
books about healthy diets).

• “Opinions express how a person feels about something – opinions do not have to be based
upon logical reasoning. For example, it is an opinion that broccoli tastes good (or bad).”

How can philosophy guide us in distinguishing truth from opinion?

• Opinions are comprised of statements which not only give facts but also provide conclusions or
perspectives regarding certain situations. They may advance a belief about certain things or
provide explanations. Opinions are also the bases for making arguments and convincing people
that a certain claim is a fact. They are often influenced by bias. They comprised statements
which not only give facts but also provide conclusions or perspectives regarding certain
situations. Hence, opinions may advance a belief about certain things or provide explanation.

Page 6 of 13
• Beliefs are statements that express convictions that are not easily and clearly explained by
facts. To judge the truthfulness of a belief, we must also consider things such as the person’s
experiences and views.

Example: I believe that God put me on earth to spread hus message of love.

• Explanations are statements that assume the claim to be true and provide reasons why the
statement is true

• Arguments are a series of statements that provide reasons to convince the reader or listener
that a claim or opinion is truthful. They often take the form of statements that are either claims
of facts and are phrased in such a way that they seem reasonable. Logic is a branch of
philosophy that focuses on the analysis of arguments. However, a number of arguments maybe
based on faulty reasoning.

• Fallacies are arguments based on faulty reasoning. Some of them are intentional, as the person
making the claim is desperate to convince you to accept his or her argument. They are ideas
that a lot of people thinks it is true but is in fact false.

Page 7 of 13
• Biases are the personal views of the person presenting it. They are not necessarily errors in
reasoning, but refer to tendencies or influences which affect the views of people.

How can an understanding of the difference between truth and opinion lead to wisdom?

• Understanding of opinions and facts and the means to distinguish one from the other can further
improve our understanding and appreciation of varied views and ideas.
• The ability to determine truth goes hand in hand with the holistic perspective and enables us to
make wiser decisions, especially in choosing the ideas and views which we find acceptable.
• An individual cannot live his or her life just agreeing with everybody he or she meets. A critical
mind aided by philosophy can help us form our own personal point of view that will eventually
guide us in making decisions and actions when faced with a problem.
• Philosophy can help us ideas that are truthful and acceptable which can then use to form our
views regarding certain matters in life. Philosophy can help us examine various views on relevant
issues in our lives.. An objective evaluation of opinions and an awareness of our own personal
biases can help us make wise choices regarding the most acceptable views to adopt and the
right actions to undertake

Page 8 of 13
SUPPLEMENTARY LESSON

Philosophy Reviewed and Philosophy of Man Introduced

• Philosophy is not really a subject, it is an activity (Articulo, 2004). One does not simply study it,
one does it. The study of philosophy is unlike the study of other subjects. No dates, formulas, or
rules are needed to be memorized. No field work is necessary, no technical equipment required.
• The only prerequisite in philosophizing is an inquiring mind.
• To have a philosophy is to have a view of man. Since philosophy is given the task of discovering
man in his totality and essence, man himself, according to

Gladstone (as cited in Fetizanan & Gajete, 2003) , is the crowning wonder of creation, and the
study of his nature is the noblest study the world affords. Thus, knowledge of man should be the
highest priority.
• The study of philosophy facilitates the understanding of man. Since man is the basis of existence
in the world, everything on earth can only achieve its meaning and its perfection in man.

Philosophy of Man Introduced and Its Method of Philosophizing

• The British philosopher sir Karl Raymund Popper (as cited in Demetrio, 2001) theorized that
man concurrently exists in three distinct worlds: namely, (1) the physical world of nature, (2) the
internal world of ideas, thoughts, and emotions, and (3) the social world of inter-subjectivity. The
physical world of nature more properly belongs to natural sciences, but the internal world of
ideas, thoughts, and emotions as well as the social world of inter-subjectivity belong to the
jurisdiction of philosophy. Hence, the primary interest of philosophy of man is to find out not how
man develops but what, who and why he is.
• Philosophy of Human Person can be defined as the science of human beings which interprets
the data of experience in the light of metaphysical principles. It has two sources, namely, the
data of experience supplied mainly by everyday experience, which is confirmed by experimental
sciences and the metaphysical principles supplied by ontology or by metaphysics. Thus,
Philosophy of Human Person is a combination of science and metaphysics.
• Philosophy of Human Person is that branch of philosophy which concerns itself with trying to
respond to those deepest and perennial questions about human beings - questions that have
plagued humans ever since history began. Here, our attempt is to respond to these issues, and
not answer them. For, the word ‘answer’ seems to imply more or less complete and thorough
rejoinder to the matter, an exhaustive conclusion ‘once-and-for-all.’ But we must remember that
we are dealing with human being who is a mystery to be understood more and more than a
problem to be solved once and for all. We cannot demand a conclusive, authoritative answer but
only a response.

Page 9 of 13
• Some typical questions that Philosophy of Human Person raises are: What do humans have in
common with the rest of the material world? What are the implications of this common bond
between humans and the rest of the material world? Which are those aspects of human that set
him/her apart from the rest of the animal world? How significant are these differences? Is there
some explanation that gets to the root of human’s uniqueness? Is this explanation defensible in
the forum of reason? What is the origin of human life? What is its goal? The bulk of Philosophy
Human Person is basically an exploration into the above mentioned questions and into the
ramification of the answers generated by them.
A. THE NATURE OF PHILOSOPHY OF MAN. Philosophy of Man is as broad as life and as
deep as human understanding, since it looks into the wholeness and fullness of human
existence. Hence, to set the framework for this subject matter, this broad and inclusive
definition shall be used: Philosophy of Man is an inquiry into the what-who-and-why of man,
i.e, of human nature which pertains to the characteristics that distinguish human from non-
human nature, of human person which refers to the characteristics that entitle an entity to be
considered a person, and of human life which consists of the philosophical purpose or goal
of being human and of an ideal human existence. The nature is that which is given to man,
that which is “at hand” for him. The person is he to whom this nature is given and who has to
use it for his purposes. Accordingly, philosophy of man is one’s intense desire to know the
what-who-and-why of man as philosophy is an intense desire for wisdom.

B. THE APPROACHES TO THE STUDY OF MAN. Understanding man

as a nature (what), man as a person (who), man as existing (why) is a no trouble-free
project, it means breaking through the mystery of our being. In attempting to explore this
mystery, thus, the following approaches are used: the descriptive (or scientific) approach
and the normative (or prescriptive) approach.
1. Descriptive (or scientific) approach asks about what is man as person, as a nature,
and as existing. It is merely interested in describing man’s personhood, nature, and
condition. It uses empirical method and explains that there is no knowable reality beyond
what one can see, hear, measure, etc.. It is concerned with and interested to distinguish
man from animals, from plants, and from properties.
2. Normative (or prescriptive) approach asks what man as a person, as a nature, as
existing is suppose to be. It sets up a standard of what man ought to be. It uses the
reflective method and views that there lies beyond what one can see, hear, and measure.
It deals with the philosophical aspects of man like the transcendental realities, (i.e.,
goodness, love, justice, freedom among others) realities that only philosophy can unveil.
The normative approach is concerned with what man must possess to be man.

• For our study of Philosophy of Human Person we need a method. A method is a way of doing
something, especially in a systematic way. In science, method is a series of steps taken to
acquire knowledge. Philosophy of Human Person, being a rational investigation into the nature

Page 10 of 13
 of human being, needs a method so that it can bring out its subject matter in a lucid and logical
manner.

• We use these two methods – phenomenological and transcendental - because human beings
have two aspects, namely, the physical and the psychic. We need both objective observation
and introspection. Thus, our method is inductive in character – we move from phenomena and
study them profoundly with the aim of discussing their origins and their ultimate causes.
• A Phenomenological survey of human existence and the subsequent transcendental
reflections upon them brings some pieces of important information concerning human person,
which are elaborated during the course of study of Philosophy of Human Person. Human being
is a living organism who, by virtue of his/her anatomical structure, is indubitably a part of the
animal kingdom. On the other hand, there are certain characteristics unique to humans, that set
them apart from the rest of creation.
• Transcendental Method. While animals do possess consciousness, human being alone
possesses self-consciousness, or the capacity for reflection. While animals possess a high
degree of instinct and some even possess a high degree of intelligence, humans alone possess
abstract intelligence or rationality. While animals do communicate with one another, their
communication is very limited. They cannot communicate ideas or information pertaining to the
past or future. Humans alone seem capable of this because of their capacity for abstraction.
Animals are thoroughly dominated by needs, drives and instincts, and are therefore attentive to
those features in their environment which appeal to these forces. But animals are unable to rise
above them and look at them in a disinterested way. Human being alone seems capable of
contemplating nature. He/she is the only aesthetic animal. Animals cannot objectify. To know an
object as an object is to know it somehow as not-I, and this would call for self-consciousness.
Humans, instead, because of self-consciousness, is also capable of objectifying his world.
Human’s ability to objectify enables him/her to name things, to speak about them and to engage
in cultural pursuits. Consequently, he/she is the only creature such that one generation can carry
on from where the previous generation left off. Instead, animals continue to live today as their
forbears lived centuries ago.
• Critical Thinking as Method that Leads to Wisdom and truth
For Double (1999) the subject matter of philosophy is questions, which have three major
characteristics:
➢ Philosophical questions have answers, but the answers remain in dispute.
➢ Philosophical questions cannot be settled by science, common sense or faith.
➢ Philosophical questions are of perennial intellectual interests to human beings.
Critical thinking is the careful, reflective, rational and systematic approach to questions of very
general interest. Critical thinking means understanding of philosophy and refraining from merely
giving claims but through careful thought, one reasons through arguments.

Page 11 of 13
 For Maboloc and Pascua (2008), critical thinking is a lifelong process or self-assessment
that further consists of:
▪ defining, analysing and devising solutions;
▪ arriving at reasonable and informed conclusions;
▪ applying understanding and knowledge to new and different problems;
▪ willingness to change one point of view;
▪ continually examining and re-examining ideas; and
▪ willingness to say “I don’t know”.
If one accepts one’s limits or has the courage to say “I don’t know,” then it becomes as
honest appraisal of say, solving a problem. Only if one is able to be willing to change one’s point
of view based on arising evidence and continually re-examining ideas, can a more holistic
perspective of truth be arrived at. Let’s practice: Which box comes next in the sequence?

To solve this question, there are three rules you need to

identify. Firstly, the circle is moving clockwise around the
box, meaning it will be in the top-right-hand corner in the
correct answer.
Secondly, the circle is always white. Thirdly, and this is
trickier, there is a relationship between the circle and the
square: when the circle is on the right-hand side of the
box the square is black, and when the circle is on the
left-hand side of the box, the square is white.
The correct answer is therefore A.

C. IMPORTANCE OF PHILOSOPHY OF MAN. Philosophy of man is especially important

for the following reasons:

1. It provides guidance in better understanding man’s nature and personhood.

2. It enables man to appreciate the diverse views on the ideals of full humanness.

3. It tells man the similarities and differences among man, plants, and animals.

4. It enables man to appreciate the nature of life and the meaning of his existence.
5. It opens the way for better relationships among men, others, and God.

• Philosophy of Human Person forms an important treatise in the study of Philosophy. After all,
human existence is an inescapable part of philosophic thought. Almost everyone has been
puzzled from time to time by such essentially philosophic questions as “What does life mean?”
“Did I have any existence before I was born?” and “Is there life after death?” Most people also
have some kind of philosophy in the sense of a personal outlook on life. Even a person who
claims that considering philosophic questions is a waste of time is expressing what is

important, worthwhile, or valuable. A rejection of all philosophy is in itself philosophy.

• By studying Philosophy of Human Person, people can clarify what they believe, and they can be
stimulated to think about ultimate questions. A person can study philosophers of the past to
discover why they thought as they did and what value their thoughts may have in one's own life.
Philosophy has had enormous influence on our everyday lives. The very language we speak

Page 12 of 13
 uses classifications derived from philosophy. For example, the classifications of noun and verb
involve the philosophic idea that there is a difference between things and actions. If we ask what
the difference is, we are starting a philosophic inquiry.
• It was Socrates, the great Greek philosopher, who turned philosophy from the study of great
philosophical questions to the study of human being. He preferred to postulate on ethics rather
than the meaning of the world. He used to go to the ancient Greek market (agora), talk to people
and help them realize that they already knew the “truth,” by examining their selves. The “know
thyself” motto is attributed to Socrates. He used to say that “The only thing I know is that I don't
know nothing.” He also believed that the limits of human knowledge were such that prevented
us from searching the ultimate truth for metaphysical problems. That is why he thought that
postulating on human matters is what a true philosopher should do.
• Humans seem to be the only creature that lives in the hope of immortality. Immortality appears to be the
one great factor that restores meaning to life in the face of death. Humans possess a natural openness
to transcendence. He/she is the only creature who has a spontaneous urge to ask ultimate questions, to
speak of the invisible, to believe in a ‘beyond’. Moreover, whenever human being addresses
himself/herself to these issues, it is always with a sense of reverence, awe and fascination. Thus, human
being seems to have an innate sense of religiosity.

• Successful study about philosophy of man entails personal and open sharing of experiences
(phenomenological) by the learners, and looking beyond its meaning and significance in life
(transcendental).

• In this very brief lesson we have given the primary interest of philosophy of man by clarifying the
jurisdiction of philosophy and natural sciences. We have noted various approaches to the study
of man. We have identified the aspects where philosophy of man is predominantly relevant.
Finally, we have presented our treatise plan.

Page 13 of 13