A good rational man is difficult to find
Introduction
Man is a solucentive being that raises and solves problems. Man is a rational animal, he is the only one who has conscience and can say. In principle with man we want to define or distinguish a biological species. Plato conceives the man formed by a dual constitution of the body, which considers the material and immaterial or spiritual idea as opposites.
The body is like the soul prison. For aristotle soul and body are the substance that make up man. Both ancient and medieval philosophy include man among animals. Recall that one of the classic definitions that occur of men is: rational animal. But man is more than that. Man is the being who has conscience and what can I say. The essence of man is the self.
Developing
Man is a who as opposed to a what. It is a thinking and reflective being. Man is unique and irreducible even if he shares with others the same nature. This nature that makes him one and unique is what makes him a person, because he is the person who coexists in intimate coherence with his distinction. Man is the only being that reflects on himself;that is to say that he turns to himself.
self-reflection on your actions, it is corrected and improved, because it knows and knows. In reflection he leaves himself and returns to himself. Man is a moral being and his morality is lived or recognized in the ability he has to self-realize and in this way the language is possible to do what he is;that he can communicate and relate to others.
The person is an imperishable astonishment, which is very difficult to define by their different areas and their complexity in society. Being a person was the honor that the human being had, since it was the emblem of man, it was his title of nobility and distinction of the rest. At the beginning person was a role that man represented in a play. With the term person we designate the holder of qualities and attribute with this term a special dignity to whom we designate it, but also to make a numerical reference.
When we talk about people we cannot talk about classes of people for two reasons: men are conducted with respect to what they are different from what individuals of a class are normally conducted with respect to it, which are limited to being included insideher. 2- With the application of people we grant individuals a certain status of inviolability and by this status we contract the duty to accept their relevance. The person always belongs to a specific natural species, in a unique way as it does not exist in species.
Difference between man and person
For Spemann, the person adds everything to human essence and what he adds is someone unique. Being a person is to make the common human essence as a total novelty. The man has not become a person, he is on his way to being. The man is open to infinity, especially is open to himself, to his realization as a person.
Man is the being who has his own nature, Spaemann tells us;On the other hand, the person is not belonging, I am not a person, I am a man, all things are in the person, but they are not the person, man contains being and their essence, it is what he is and in the person he possesses the qualitiesthat distinguish him. The person is rich in content, because in it all the contents that man contain in itself fit.
Men have certain qualities that lead us to call them people, but what we call people is the bearer and not the qualities, for which we say they are people. The most important thing is the reception that the community gives, to be able to identify it and be accepted. It is in the community where this principle is delivered and develops in which man lives as a person.
Are all men people? If rationality and self-awareness are the qualities whose virtue we designate some beings as people, it is not reasonable to call people and welcome them as such, those men who do not have them. But if this is the measure to call men people, we are leaving out the rest of the human species, which still does not have them developed, or that for others does not develop them, nor can it do so, because they have stunted them and we leave forSo much outside the community, of people who form men in their families. And only part of it would be formed by self-awareness and rationality and not by birth, or for procreation.
The relationship of man is different from the relationship of objects or animal or plant species. The man keeps a kinship relationship and an identity of his being. According to the studies, as we know him today, he has his genetics of a woman who lived more than 200 ago. 000 years. We see then that being, fundamental biological relationships and functions in man are specifically personal. The personality of man is the means of his realization as a person, who leads him to be an ethical person. Ethics is based on the person’s being and not on man as a species.
For Kant Humanity is: The family of man and what makes man into person: humanity into your person and the person of any other. Because there are still waste from someone or who, as a person. The person is substance because it is the way man is. Man is in its fullness and is not done in parts, that is to say in all his stages and moments he is a person.
The personal being is not the result of a development, but the characteristic structure of a development. The man does not begin to make a person, when he acquires knowledge of his self, his being person, it is already before. Because of the condition of being personal, there can only be a criterion: biological belonging to the human race. The being of the person’s life is the life of a man and cannot be separated at any moment from his existence. The person is man and not a quality of man.
Man in society and human integration
Rafael Alvira says that every activity of man, and of human life as a whole, needs a seat. The life of man develops in the polis. For Carl Schmitt, man has a legal relationship with space. The right of man is originally linked to Earth. The legal order is an order of space: a law. Man is a terrestrial being;And this condition is the condition by virtue of which, and according to which, man organizes his living.
The spatial character of the political ethos can recognize it in Aristotle. In politics, it deals with the size of the polis, in the number of citizens, as in their physical dimensions. Divide the land into two parts: a common for the support of the cult of the gods and the expenses of common food and the other particular, for the use of each owner. Aristotle remembers that he was a mileet.
The man transforms the polis into his inhabits, is the place where he lives, which organizes and makes it to him, the polis is therefore the human habitat or ethos. For the Romans, being citizens was more a "personal" social status than a "earthly" spatial condition. There are therefore two forms of government: a- politic.
conclusion
The polis and the civic constituted a measure and an order of space. But that space was not just a physical reality, thanks to that order, it was also an ethical reality: it was a space ethos. The action of the space in which man develops is noticeable as Miquel Bastons says, in the construction of buildings, streets, squares, etc. That way of living. And for this he has the man to live in common and that acquires a certain degree of visibility, is the one that leads to a city to give a clear, vigorous and unitary image of herself: a city endowed with what Lynch calls readability or machinability.
Inhabiting is the integrative activity of all other activity of man in society. The polis as the headquarters of inhabiting, is the ethos, institution or community that integrates everyone else. And citizenship is the human identity that integrates all identity that man can acquire in each of the Ethoi, institutions or communities integrated into the polis.
Leave feedback