[betty boop]

What Is Man?

The original idea for this thread was the question: What Is Reality?  Then interested parties settled on Alamo-Girl's specification of the different criteria by which such a problem could be profitably engaged. In no particular order of importance, eight different possible approaches to the problem were identified:
 

To a metaphysical naturalist, "reality" is all that exists in nature

To an autonomist "reality" is all that is, the way it is

To an objectivist "reality" is that which exists

To a mystic "reality" may include thought as substantive force and hence, a part of "reality"

To Plato "reality" includes constructs such as redness, chairness, numbers, geometry and pi

To Aristotle these constructs are not part of "reality" but merely language

To some physicists, "reality" is the illusion of quantum mechanics

To Christians "reality" is God's will and unknowable in its fullness

This list is probably not exhaustive of legitimate frameworks by which to consider the main question. But it will have to serve as a point of departure. [Meanwhile, other points of view can expect all due consideration on this thread. (Just speak up.)]

Subsequently, it was observed that "what is reality" is an impossibly broad question. How does one even begin to "get purchase on"  a problem of that order, complicated as it necessarily is by its sheer intractible, amorphous intangibility?

It was then suggested that perhaps a more modest question might be asked: "What is Man?" This is a much less abstract question, because we humans all have experience as and with other humans. So, although this question is a problem virtually as complex as "what is reality?", on this view at least we have the benefit of human experience to help us answer it.

Just maybe the answer to the human question answers the question "what is reality?" also. But that remains to be seen.

Of the eight categories to be described, it was my (blessed!) lot to draw Plato.

The above is my meditation on theme. Hopefully, other writers will explore some or all of the other worldviews on Alamo-Girl's list.

Your thoughts, insights, questions, and comments are most welcome!
 
 
 

[MissAmericanPie]

Not to quibble but it was King David, not Plato, that first posed the question, "what is man".

[djf]

Bump. Lemmee think about this one.

[betty boop]

Bump to y'all! Hope to hear from you, if you have the time and interest.

[spodefly]

Platonic BTTT

[djf]

Allright, I'll throw out a few things, but they may not necessarily jive with your essay.

In asking any question, rather I should say trying to find an answer, it always hels that both the question and the answer are somewhat well defined. There may somewhere be a mathematical approach to it, which we don't know, but think about this. If you ask a priest what a man is, then ask a doctor, then ask a politician, you will probably get pretty different answers.

So that in a way indicates we haven't phrased the question in a precise way. We can flip a coin, and look at it as it lies on the floor, and answer the question about which side came up. But if somebody asked me "what is man" today, and I gave them an answer, they might well return tomorrow, ask me again, and get a somewhat different answer!

I am not invalidating the question. It is a very good question, for precisely that reason. To answer the question, we have to come up with enough bits and pieces to satisfy the priest, and the doctor, and the politician. So the answer has to be a very global type answer.
Physical
Spiritual
Emotional
Intellectual
Spiritual

Physically, man is not tremendously different from a large number of animals. Observations of species, not only mammalian, show many to be omnivores. Our tendency to build structures to inhabit is not unlike many activities in the animal kingdom, it is a difference of complexity, not purpose. Yet is physicallness enough to define man? Definitely not, as studies of feral humans have shown them to never really reach any semblence of what might be called human.

To be continued...

[Drammach]

bflr

[ChemistCat]

Bump

....to read after my physical chemistry exam.

[bigcat00]

Great post. It's been a while since I delved into philosophy with any degree of serioiusness, so take this with the appropriate grain of salt.

Not to quibble, but for Aristotle,isn't reality what we see, feel and tastes? What is observable through our senses (which, as opposed to Plato) we can pretty much trust? Or am I wrong? My (admittedly limited) reading of Aristotle seemed to indicate that he was pretty content to make judgments on what we can observe, and pretty much rejected, at least in practice,the kind of speculation in which Plato engaged.

Not to say that either one was less valid. Both are great teachers for conservatives (and anyone else). Plato's Republic is the ultimate primer on the futility of trying to build a utopia (the eternal liberal project). I think Plato appeals to Christians because he seems to be longing (the term he uses, as I recall, is "eros," meaning not sexual desire - or as it now seems to be used, kinky sex - but desiring) for God. Socrates, in the Republic, is referred to as the "erotic man" in that sense. This longing or desiring, expressed in the Republic as a longing for truth, Christians would say, is a longing for God.
For Christians, Plato (or Socrates as portrayed by him)seems to be the ultimate virtuous pagan.

At least that's what I thought after reading Bloom's translation of the Republic with a bunch of friends.

As to Aristotle, try reading Politics and Ethics. They are not difficult. You'll find some shocking things - Man has a nature, he is rational (I'm sure losts of college humanaities and social science professors out there don't like that) and political by nature (the latter, I think, undercuts the social contract idea), the fundamental societal unit is the family, reality is as reality appears to be, virtue is necessary for good government, etc.

[Phaedrus]

Bumping one of the most relevant questions of our time.

[LiteKeeper]

Man is a creature created in the image of the Creator God.

[RightWhale]

What or who is asking the question?

Of whom is the question being asked?

What is the nature of the question?

Got to establish a few basics. What is 'what'?

What region of being is man?

What is 'is'? [In the world? Let's discuss the worldness of the world, too.]

[general_re]

It is fitting to give Plato the first word on the question, “What Is Man?”

So long as we give Diogenes the second word ;)

[martin gibson]

Western Civilization (Dead White Male) Bump...!!!

[PatrickHenry]

Not much to do with Plato, but this seems like it somehow fits into this thread:

What a piece of work is a man! how noble in reason! how infinite in faculty! in form and moving how express and admirable! in action how like an angel! in apprehension how like a god! the beauty of the world! the paragon of animals!

Hamlet, Act 2, Scene 2

[unspun]

"It is possible to imagine that there are certain seed ideas in Plato that could not come into full bloom until Jesus Christ irrupted into human history four centuries after Plato's death."

Giving Plato credit is a good thing. There, did you ever think I'd say that, Jean? It's interesting that the Lord paused in expressing Himself canonically during this time --this time of letting the "world" catch up a bit to His hesed, to be ready for His agape, if you will.

(Not to confuse, though. I think hesed and agape are one in the same, seen from the perspective of proximity to the Lord and not necessarily the concurrent people, nor the variations in His Mediation of them as He brings willing humanity through His developmental process for them. It must be a wonderful wedding gown that takes so long to arrange!)

Anyone: pardon the jargon and for seeing this Scripturally, but through the eyes of Love may truth be seen.

[gore3000]

From your nice exposition, I can see why Christian writers thought so highly of Plato as an 'almost' Christian before the coming of Christ.

[stuartcr]

I think it is safe to say that no one is correct, and/or will never be proven right or wrong. Why then, don't we all just say.."I don't know, and I never will know", and leave it at that? We are really not much different, in this aspect, than any other animal.

[Fester Chugabrew]

An article recently published in Concordia Theological Quarterly has a wonderful way of addressing the question, "What is Man." I hope to see the article posted at FR with a link once I get permission. For now, here is an excerpt (with a few extra paragraph breaks to make the reading a little easier):

An ancient and a modern heresy that the church again must combat is the view that death is natural. Such a view regards death as the last act of life, and as such, death is something over which we dispose. Such a view could not be further from the biblical understanding.

The Bible begins, not with a living man as though man lived self-evidently, but the Bible begins with the Creator, who speaks into existence man, who is made to exist by being made to live. Life is, therefore, a gift. Life, therefore, is not, so to speak, 'natural' to us. It comes to us from the outside, from God, so that even that which most "belongs" to us, namely our life, is itself not out own proper possession.

Precisely in our being made alive, our relationship with God is both begun and revealed: He is our creator and we are His creatures. To live is to be created. For this reason, Irenaeus could write that "the glory of God is a living man," for in the life of man the living God who makes by making alive is manifested. This "making alive," however, also reveals a will to make alive. It is God's will that man live.

While this is implicit in the creation story itself, it is made explicit in the Wisdom of Solomon: "God created man for incorruption . . . and made him in the image of His own eternity" (2:23). When, therefore, the early church spoke of God's creating, it spoke of God creating ex nihilo, "from nothing," and by that phrase the church meant that God creates purely by His will and command. A living man is the direct expression of the will and command of God.

From "Death and Martyrdom: An Important Aspect of Early Christian Eschatology" by Dr. William C. Weinrich

[Belial]

What Is Man?

A hairless ape that really likes the sound of hot air and his tongue slapping on his palate.

[Old Professer]

Whatever he is, you can bet that he won't know it until he is told by a woman.