Essay On The Nature of The Human Person

The essence or nature of the human person is a rather complicated topic in the sense that
no single field of study could give a definite answer or explanation on the matter; rather, it
is through the reconciliation of different disciplines’ perspectives one could define the
essence of the human person.
Philosophy, or the study of various aspects of human existence and reality, views the
human person as innately rational in the sense that they possess the capability to think in
an extensive and proper manner prior to producing a judgment or action. It should be
pointed out, however, that although the human individual is innately rational and strives
for rationality, there is no such thing as perfect rationality. This is because the human
person is incapable of making thoroughly calculated decisions in all instances as they
sometimes forego economic-utilitarian analysis and reasoning in favor of other personal
factors such as emotions and desires to make what they consider to be the most optimal
decision or action (Jones, 1999). This then suggests that human rationality is not perfect
but rather bounded, which then implies that there is no absolute standard for rationality;
instead, it is through the lens of society and its standards that one’s decisions and
rationality could be judged (Elster, 1989). Take, for instance, a person who purchases a
considerable amount of cryptocurrency; there will be a group of people who will brand
them as irrational for prioritizing a risky investment over current necessities, whereas
another group will consider them rational for making a significant investment in their
future. Additionally, an individual is automatically deemed to be irrational if they commit
an act that endangers people and property as a result of the influence of rage or prohibited
substances.
Sociology and anthropology, or the study of groups of people and their shared practices
and traditions respectively, on the other hand, view the human person as innately socio-
cultural. The two disciplines suggest that it is through one’s interaction and collaboration
with other individuals that one could create or discover meaning. Additionally, the
aforementioned fields argue that as soon as an individual is born, they are immediately
introduced and integrated into a group of people with their own distinct set of practices
and traditions. It should be pointed out that this is not always the case, as there are
reported instances of feral children – young human children who were isolated from
human contact and thus exhibited an absence or lack of human social behaviors
(Libretexts, 2021). It could then be implied that under normal circumstances, an individual
is incapable of disembodying themselves from society due to the concept of the social self
in that a considerable part of their identities are influenced or dictated by their past and
current societal interactions (APA Dictionary of Psychology, n.d.). Indeed, the human
individual is unable to completely detach themselves from society and culture; however,
they possess the liberty to defy the existing society and culture, especially in instances
where there is a clash of individual and societal philosophies.
Philosophy, or the study of individual human behaviors, on the other hand, views the
human person as innately unique as it assumes the notion that each human individual
possesses a distinct set of traits and behaviors. It should be noted, however, that there are
two opposing perspectives that seek to explain human personality formation and
development – nature and nurture. The stance of the nature ideology is that human
personality is inherently pre-programmed based on the biopsychological aspects of one’s
lineage, whereas the viewpoint of the nurture ideology is that the individual’s environment
ultimately dictates the formation and development of their personality. It should be
stressed that there is no right or wrong between the two ideologies, as many experts
suggest that personality formation and development is a compromise between nature and
nurture. They specifically support the notion that an individual is born with an innate set of
behaviors, but it is through maturation in an environment that they adopt new behaviors
and discard existing ones to arrive at their current and future personalities (Mcleod, 2018).
Political science, or the study of power relations, views the human person as innately
political based on the assumption that humans are social and hierarchical beings by nature;
thus, they have the natural tendency to influence others for the sake of personal and social
benefit. Additionally, since man is a social being and constantly involves themselves in
various social environments (i.e., household, workplace, public spaces, etc.), they cannot
completely avoid the bargaining and negotiating of influence and thus, are incapable of
disembodying themselves from politics (Fox & Prilleltensky, 1996; Maiden, 2012).
However, similar to the social perspective of man, the human individual is given the liberty
to either promote or deviate from the status quo as a result of their personal philosophies;
it should be pointed out, however, that an individual who seemingly exhibits no political
participation actually participates by promoting the status quo through their lack of
participation.
It could then be synthesized from the presented points of information that the human
individual is composed of a considerable number of distinct yet interconnected aspects.
Moreover, the human individual could then be characterized as a being with their own
distinct set of traits and behaviors, the ability to make optimal decisions and actions based
on the combination of personal logic, emotions, and preferences, and the ability to involve
themselves in a group composed of other people with their own distinct culture and
politics which the individual may accept or reject based on their personal philosophies.
Jose Gabriel A. Cruz
12-Makiling
References:
APA Dictionary of Psychology. (n.d.). Retrieved September 21, 2022, from

https://dictionary.apa.org/social-self
Elster, J. (1989). Rationality and Social Norms. Studies in Logic and the Foundations of
Mathematics, 531–552. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0049-237x(08)70064-8
Fox, D. R., & Prilleltensky, I. (1996, March). The inescapable nature of politics in
psychology: A response to O’Donohue and Dyslin. New Ideas in Psychology, 14(1),
21–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/0732-118x(95)00028-f
Jones, B. D. (1999, June). BOUNDED RATIONALITY. Annual Review of Political Science, 2(1),
297–321. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.polisci.2.1.297
Libretexts. (2021, February 20). 4.1F: Feral Children. Social Sci LibreTexts. Retrieved
September 21, 2022, from
https://socialsci.libretexts.org/Bookshelves/Sociology/Introduction_to_Sociology/
Book%3A_Sociology_(Boundless)/04%3A_The_Role_of_Socialization/4.01%3A_The
_Role_of_Socialization/4.1F%3A_Feral_Children
Maiden, N. (2012, September). Politics Are Inescapable. IEEE Software, 29(5), 88–90.
https://doi.org/10.1109/ms.2012.120
Mcleod, S. (2018, December 20). Nature vs. Nurture in Psychology. Retrieved September
22, 2022, from
https://www.simplypsychology.org/naturevsnurture.html#:%7E:text=Nature%20i
s%20what%20we%20think,and%20learning%20on%20an%20individual.

Essay On The Nature of The Human Person

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Essay On The Nature of The Human Person

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Essay On The Nature of The Human Person

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

The essence or nature of the human person is a rather complicated topic in the sense that

APA Dictionary of Psychology. (n.d.). Retrieved September 21, 2022, from

You might also like