Skip to main content

The Second Aporia: What is Man? (The Abyss)



You could not in your going find the ends of the soul,
though you traveled the whole way:
so deep is its
logos.


I searched into myself.


Heraclitus, Fragments 45 and 101





Man has known that above all the beings in this world man is the being which is most worthy of man's knowledge. Malebranche says, "Of all human knowledge the knowledge of man is the most deserving of his study." Gifted with all the splendors of the world and of all the varieties of life or otherwise, man's unique and burdensome ability to know finds itself challenged not by the grandeur of the knowable world but by the task of knowing man himself.

Yet this challenge to know man himself presents the most difficult task and heaviest cross. To know man is to know not merely a part or an aspect of man; episteme seeks to know as a whole, that is, to know man as man or man's wholeness. And this is the difficulty as such. As Rabi von Prysucha once said, "I decided to write a book called Adam, which would be about the whole man. But I decided not to write it." And that decision not to pursue a knowledge of man betrays the difficulty of the task: difficult because it requires comprehensibility. For where does one begin in knowing man in his wholeness?

In "What is Man?" (Between Man and Man), Buber remarks that in front of this perplexity, man sidesteps the challenge put to him by himself and goes to other directions. He instead seeks knowledge of first, everything else except man -- this or that being, the world, the extra-worldly, etc., or second, knowledge of man as divided into his rationality, body, spirituality, etc. The sciences accomplish their knowledge of beings through their specialization. To specialize a science is to find for that science its own locus, that is, its own object and method. Each being, turned in to an object under the gaze of science, is thus grasped as this or that, that is, known as . . . . The object: thrown before man's gaze and to which man counter-throws his questions and categories in order to know. This is why we know this to be. . . , we know that to be . . . . Even man is known to be as this object or that object (a biological work of art, the cousin of the ape, advanced intelligent life, etc.) In other words, in the world of knowledge everything has to be an object. Even man.

"All men," says Aristotle, "desire to know." And this desire is never quenched. See and listen to all the knowledge of this world. To a certain extent, it is true that "nothing is new under the sun" (Ecclesiastes). However, this desire finds its first aporia or dead-end when it tries to quench its thirst by the drink that comes from its own river. It aspires to but cannot
completely know itself, that is, know man in itself and as such. This knowledge consigns itself to every knowable other-than-itself: this or that being or this or that part of man's being. It aims man, to be sure, but he always misses the mark where to hit the mark is to find the bull's eye at the center of man, i.e., his heart, his spirit: the not-object. Hitting the periphery is easy; finding the invisible center is close to impossible, or at least, as Husserl says of philosophy, is an 'infinite task.'

Man: the not-object. Hence, man: the
subject, that is, that being who takes the initiative to know and has the ability to know at all. The problematic: can the knower know the knower as knower?


To be continued.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Fields of Amorsolo

The first National Artist in Philippine history, referred to warmly as the “Grand Old Man of Philippine Art,” Fernando Amorsolo (1892–1972) still stands today as a looming figure in Philippine art responsible for being one of the artists who helped define what we up to now visually imagine as essentially Filipino. The images of rural life, of golden fields below clear blue, blue skies; the smiles of farmers which diminish their weariness as they plant, harvest, and winnow rice;most especially the iconic figure of the Filipina maiden working in the fields—the beloved dalagang bukid--; these, I believe, even after generations of Filipino painters since Amorsolo, have remained in our hearts and memory. Amorsolo did what great masters do for their country: bestow upon it its own icons, represent its native beauty, that is, to give its people and lands an identity and a face. There are, however, as many intentions for art as there are works of art. And these intentions will always remain in…

[Payapang Daigdig]

Written by Pat Nogoy, S.J.

Payapang Daigdig Felipe de Leon, Sr. 
Ang gabi'y payapa Lahat ay tahimik  Pati mga tala      Sa bughaw na langit 

Kay hinhin ng hangin Waring umiibig          Sa kapayapaan          Ng buong daigdig     
Payapang panahon    Ay diwa ng buhay Biyaya ng Diyos       Sa sangkatauhan
Ang gabi'y payapa Lahat ay tahimik Pati mga tala Sa bughaw na langit  
Pati mga tala           Sa bughaw na langit


The gift delivers Being/being Jean Luc Marion

There is something about the night.
The blanket of darkness hovering the other half of the day sparks ambivalence. Everything is the same in darkness—fear, joy, pain, triumph, doubt, glory, sorrow. Identities recede unto the vast anonymity. There is a pervading anxiety where existence slips into nothingness. One is never certain what to make out of darkness; maybe that is why the night shakes us because we never know. One cannot avoid imagining a something that is greater, higher, mightier, (even sinister) that lurks (hence the power of ghos…

Without Why (The Rose) II

Lifetime is a child at play; moving pieces in a game.
Kingship belongs to the child.

Heraclitus, Fragment 52


The child at play never asks itself why it plays. The child just plays; and if it could, it will play as long as possible, it will play throughout its life. See its delight and witness its smile.

If it would never go hungry or if the sun would never set it too will never leave its playmates and playthings. Time flies at play because it stops or suspends time. Time -- as we grownups only know too well -- is the culprit for order, schedules and priorities; yet for the child, there is no time, there is only bottomless play. It is we who impose that this or that should be done at this or that time. We stop the absurd and supposedly endless play ("He does nothing but play") because we insist that discipline, order and priorities be instilled in the child at an early age ("He needs to learn other things beside playing"). So that the child will become like us one da…