INTRODUCTION TO THE PHILOSOPHY OF THE HUMAN PERSON

3RD Quarter of Second Semester, SY 2023-2024

Lesson 6: INTERSUBJECTIVITY

I. MOST ESSENTIAL LEARNING COMPETENCIES

1. Realize that intersubjectivity requires accepting differences and not imposing on others.
2. Explain that authentic dialogue means accepting others even if they are different from themselves.
3. Performs activities that demonstrate an appreciation for the talents of persons with disabilities and those from the
underprivileged sectors of society

INTRODUCTION:
Important values related to intersubjectivity include acceptance of differences and embracing diversity. We
understand that each person is unique, therefore, differences will exist among groups of people. When we look at physical
traits and even behavior, we can see that no two persons look and think the same. We have to accept that people have
different views and beliefs. What unites us all is our shared HUMANITY and DIGNITY.
The recognition of our shared humanity and dignity is what drives us to extend assistance and act with concern
towards others, especially towards individuals or groups that experience hardships and discrimination. For instance, those
who are physically and mentally challenged often experience hardships because of their condition. Despite their
limitations, many of them have successfully transcended their disabilities to become productive and happy individuals.

LC 1: Realize that intersubjectivity requires accepting differences and not imposing

on others.

I. HUMAN EXISTENCE
“The purpose of life is to live it, to taste experience to the utmost, to reach out eagerly and without fear for newer and
richer experience.” ~ Eleanor Roosevelt
We may have several ideas to explain how we got here, yet the more important question to reflect upon is why are we
here? We understand that each person is unique; therefore, differences exist among people
By studying philosophy, 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.
Several philosophers have devoted their time answering questions about our existence.
Jean Paul Sartre: Existentialism

Being and Nothingness can be characterized as a phenomenological investigation into the nature of what it is to be
human. Sartre defines two types of reality which lie beyond our conscious experience: the being of the object of
consciousness and that of consciousness itself. The object of consciousness exists as "in-itself," that is, in an independent
and non-relational way. However, consciousness is always consciousness “of something,” so it is defined in relation to
something else, and it is not possible to grasp it within a conscious experience: it exists as "for-itself." An essential feature
of consciousness is its negative power, by which we can experience "nothingness." This power is also at work within the
self, where it creates an intrinsic lack of self-identity. So the unity of the self is understood as a task for the for-itself
rather than as a given.
In order to ground itself, the self needs projects, which can be viewed as aspects of an individual’s fundamental project
and motivated by a desire for "being" lying within the individual's consciousness. The source of this project is a
spontaneous original choice that depends on the individual's freedom. However, self’s choice may lead to a project of
self-deception such as bad faith, where one’s own real nature as for-itself is discarded to adopt that of the in-itself. Our
only way to escape self-deception is authenticity, that is, choosing in a way which reveals the existence of the for-itself as
both factual and transcendent. For Sartre, my proper exercise of freedom creates values that any other human being
placed in my situation could experience, therefore each authentic project expresses a universal dimension in the
singularity of a human life.

Soren Kierkegaard - Existentialism

"...the thing is to find a truth which is true for me, to find the idea for which I can live and die" Søren Aabye Kierkegaard
- Journals 1835.
He was primarily a philosopher who asked searching questions as to how best, that precious and rare thing, a Human
life, ought to be lived. He himself used the terms existential and existentialism in relation to his philosophising, his
heartfelt view was that life, existence, in all its aspects was subjective and ambiguous. Philosophy was seen as an
expression of an intensely and courageously examined individual existence - an expression that was, hopefully, free from
illusion. In his view individuals must be prepared to defy the accepted practices of society, if this was necessary to their
leading, what seemed to that person, to be a personally valid and meaningful life.
In his earliest major work Either / Or (1843) he suggests that people might effectively choose to live within either of two
"existence spheres". He called these "spheres" the aesthetic and the ethical.
Aesthetical lives were lives lived in search of such things pleasure, novelty, and romantic individualism. Kierkegaard
thought that such "pleasure", such "novelty", and such "romantic individualism" would eventually tend to decay or
become meaningless and this would inevitably lead to much boredom and dire frustration.
Ethical lives, meanwhile, as being lived very much in line with a sense of duty to observe societal and confessional
obligations. Such a life would be easy, in some ways, to live, yet would also involve much compromise of several
genuinely human faculties and potentials. Such compromise would inevitably mean that Human integrity would tend to
be eroded although lives seemed to be progressing in a bourgeois-satisfactory way.
What sort of person a person tended to become was very dependent on the life choices they made and the sort of lives
they subsequently led. Neither of the "existence spheres" that Kierkegaard believed that he had identified seemed to him
to offer fully satisfactory lives to Human beings.

In his later works he suggested that there was a third, religious, "sphere" where people accepted that they could "live in
the truth" that they were "individual before the Eternal" to which they belonged. By living in this truth people could
achieve a full unity of purpose with all other people who were also, individually, living in the same truth. This is the
choice that he made for himself in his own efforts to live a life which he considered to be valid

Human existence is very complex. We might see it in our own perspective or look at it in the perspective of others that
will determine our understanding on the nature of our essence and existence.

II. What is Intersubjectivity and how does it define human relations?

Intersubjectivity - a fundamental aspect of human relations, emphasizing the social and relational nature of
human experience. It highlights the importance of mutual understanding, shared meaning, empathy, and
interdependence in shaping our interactions and relationships with others. Intersubjectivity highlights the idea that
our subjective experiences and interpretations are influenced by social interactions and shared cultural frameworks. Here's
how it defines human relations:

Mutual Understanding: Intersubjectivity underscores the importance of mutual understanding and agreement in human
relations. It suggests that our understanding of the world is not solely determined by individual experiences but is also
shaped by our interactions with others. Through communication and dialogue, individuals negotiate meanings and
establish shared interpretations of reality.

Shared Meaning: Human relations are defined by the creation and sharing of meaning. Intersubjectivity highlights the
role of shared cultural norms, values, and symbols in shaping our understanding of the world. These shared meanings
provide a common ground for communication and interaction, facilitating social cohesion and cooperation.

Social Construction: Intersubjectivity emphasizes that reality is socially constructed through interpersonal interactions
and collective processes. Our perceptions, beliefs, and identities are not fixed or predetermined but are continually shaped
and negotiated within social contexts. Human relations are thus characterized by ongoing processes of negotiation and
interpretation.

Empathy and Perspective-Taking: Intersubjectivity involves the ability to empathize with others and take their
perspectives into account. By understanding the subjective experiences and perspectives of others, individuals can
establish meaningful connections and foster empathy, compassion, and solidarity.
Interdependence: Human relations are characterized by interdependence and interconnectedness. Intersubjectivity
highlights the ways in which individuals are influenced by and dependent on each other for the construction of meaning
and the fulfillment of social needs. It underscores the importance of cooperation, collaboration, and reciprocity in
maintaining healthy relationships and societies.

How does Intersubjectivity enables human person to establish meaningful interactions?

We are social animals. We crave contact with others for support, wellbeing and entertainment. But as our lifestyles
become ever more transient and reliant on digital tools, these simple interactions are under threat. Nothing compares to
living in real communities and spending actual physical time with the people we love.
Relationships are one of the most important aspects of our lives. Nevertheless, building positive and
meaningful relationships can be very challenging for many people. Technology is changing relationships as we know
them. Fake news is dominating minds and headlines.
In this atmosphere and culture, building sustainable human relationships is very important. Human person naturally seeks
meaningful relationships. It means that his or her identity and destiny are shaped by relating with others; he is being with
others.
Edith Stein looked at this in the perspective of empathy as an intersubjective process.
For Stein, empathy is an intentional act in this phenomenological sense. It is generally a core assumption that empathy is
about our experience of another. For Stein, empathy deals with the givenness, to oneself, of this foreign experience; and it
is through empathy that “foreign experience is comprehended”.
Stein’s conception of empathy always involves at two perspectives, self and other. Thus, psychologically speaking,
empathy can be said to be an interpersonal process (and intersubjective in the phenomenological sense outlined above).
There is always the empathizer, relating to the empathized (even given the case of empathizing with oneself).
For Stein, “empathy is not the feeling of oneness”. It is an interpersonal process lived as a ‘direct’ coming to know
another’s experience. Or, better, more in line with a contemporary phenomenological view, empathy is the intersubjective
process of directly
knowing the foreign experience.
Three Levels of Empathy
Each of the levels she describes has particular defining characteristics, but each is also a way of knowing another’s
experience. That is, the three levels share one of empathy’s essential qualities: all are experiences which bring another’s
experience to our awareness. This means that, in a way, we can look at these levels as different kinds of empathic
phenomena, or different ways into empathy. 1. Directly perceiving (the immediate perception of another’s present,
minded, embodied, embedded, experience); 2. Experientially projecting (the non-intellectual experience of another’s
unfolding experience); and 3. Interpretatively mentalizing (the higher-level recognition and interpretation of our
knowledge of the other’s experience).

Level 1: Direct Immediate Perceiving

This level has a status analogous to direct perception; that is, it is not a product of other deliberated, intellectual, or
cognitive processes. Rather, it is the result of a perceptual act, which directly brings another’s experience into one’s own
awareness.

What it is that We Perceive [Another’s Experience]

Direct perception is a special case of perception (“a kind of an act of perceiving ‘sui generis’ ”,), because what is
immediately perceived is the foreign experience. A key feature of empathic perception is that it involves our immediate
knowledge of another’s present experience. It has the foreign experience for its intentional object. Empathy is an act of
perception, and the object of that act is the embodied, embedded experience of another, as it is given in consciousness.

Imagine that you perceive a chair. When you perceive it, you see the presenting sides of the chair (those which face you),
and you see the surrounding area (the context). You would not literally see the back of the chair (averted sides) or its
underlying structure (interior sides), of course, but the chair is still perceptively given to you in its wholeness (i.e. as a
composite of its seen and averted sides and its structure). Under normal conditions we do not perceive a fragmentary
chair, composed only of that which is literally accessible to our gaze. In empathy, this analogy means that one
simultaneously perceives at the same time (‘co-perceives’) the other’s outward, expressive, visible (seen sides) and non-
visible behavior (averted sides), as well as the other’s experience (structure). This is what we mean when we say that for
Stein the given-ness of empathic perception is direct. In empathy, we directly co-perceive body-and-mind, together, at
once, in its context. We directly perceive another’s minded, embodied, embedded, expressive experience. We have access
to this gestalt ‘other’ through empathic perceptive acts.

Level 2: Experientially Projecting

Why Empathy is a Form of ‘Projecting’? Stein herself describes this level as “the fulfilling explication”. For her,
empathic projections: 1) are experienced (not reasoned, or imagined, or simulated, such as in perspective-taking; 2) are a
means of accessing genuinely foreign experiences (not hypothetical, “probable”, nor conjured, or projected, experiences,
and 3) this access is direct (not based in any kind of past knowledge, such as the empathizer’s past experiences) and
immediate.

Stein’s projection is a very particular kind of projection. It is an experiential, nonintellectual, and intuitive kind of
projection. Imagine that we are watching a novice acrobat balancing on a wire. At first, we directly see his/her fear of
heights (direct perception level). We may also experience this fear to some degree, but for that experience to be an
empathic one, the fright could not be our own personal fear (e.g. contagion), or an imagined probable fright (a simulated
or remembered one), or a fear for the safety of the acrobat (Scheler’s fellow-feeling, or sympathy). Instead, it would have
to be the acrobat’s fright, given to us via experiential projection. As we observe the acrobat, we may project into the
object’s experience, turning ‘with’ it towards the wire and the depths below. At such a point we are empathically given an
‘experience’ of the acrobat’s own fear. Critically, we experience it, not in the fullest sense (the sense with which we
might experience our own fear, for our own safety), but only partially— as the acrobat’s fear.

Level 3: Interpretatively Mentalizing

Stein describes the point at which the interpersonal process of empathic knowing reaches its inevitable conclusion—this
is where we actively interpret our directly perceived ‘feeling-in’ of the other’s experience, and it becomes more explicitly
and linguistically accessible to us as ‘knowledge.’ Simultaneously, then, this is the point at which the process more
clearly resembles a non-direct ways of knowing the foreign experience, though still distinguishable because its intentional
object is a directly given foreign experience (not a deduced, inferred one).

What is Mentalized (The Foreign Experience)

Through mentalization—the making of an experience into a mental object—empathy becomes comprehension. The novel
quality that we have emphasized in the naming of this level is that this act partly transforms the empathic experience into
an intellectually intelligible one. More precisely, during this level, the empathizer is finally given the foreign experience
in an intelligible, partly interpreted, manner. Consequently, the foreign experience becomes once more, as it was during
direct perception, the intentional object of the empathic act—with the difference here that now the other’s experience is
not the target of an intuitive act, but of a mentalizing one.

Example
To extend the example of the acrobat, recall that, initially, the acrobat’s fear was directly perceived (first level). Then, the
perceiver projected into it, to explore some of it’s non-perceptively given sides (second level), say, and the escalating
intensity of the acrobat’s fear. Then, finally, the perceiver gives to the intuition an intellectual form—which might
hypothetically mean the empathizer saying to him/herself that the acrobat is experiencing something that could be called
‘fear of falling’ (third level). In this intellectual manner, the acrobat’s experience becomes an intelligibly interpreted—
thus partly, or fully, comprehended; the empathic experience completed. Hence, it is only through this level that empathy
is, as previously noted, a more intellectual act through which the “foreign experience is comprehended”.

These three aspects (i.e. occurring after experiential projection; requiring the making of the experience into a mental
object; and being an interpretative activity) explain the name given by Stein to this level: “comprehensive objectification
of the experience’.

Accepting differences and not imposing on others may require the following:

1. Show respect.
If we treat others with the same degree of respect we would like to be treated ourselves, then it would not be
hard to accept them for what they are.

2. Practice tolerance.
Tolerance is a key to move towards accepting other people’s opinions and respecting our differences. By
definition, tolerance is the ability or willingness to tolerate the presence of opinions or attitude that we dislike
or disagree with.
3. Avoid being judgmental.
Having or displaying an overly critical point of view will not help in accepting our differences. We should
embrace our differences, not be disapproving about them.

4. Do not “judge a book by its cover.”

We ought not to judge anyone on our first impression which is usually about how he or she looks. Instead of
pre-judging someone on appearances alone, it is far better to take the time to get to know him within.

5. Be willing to listen.
To listen to other’s opinions does not necessarily mean to deviate from our own conviction. For our own good,
entertaining a different opinion may even make us think deeper and improve our perspective on things.

Intersubjectivity would lead to a far more peaceful and understanding world with mature and developed
inhabitants.

LC 2: Explain that authentic dialogue means accepting others even if they are
different from themselves.

Accepting our Differences, Accepting Ourselves

We are all different. This seems like an obvious statement, but it is often the obvious statements which require the most
scrutiny and investigation, exactly because they are the ones we take least time to consider.

Even though we all share the essential experience of a human being, each of us filters this experience through our own
personal characteristics and background, and above all through our consciousness, the mysterious element that gives us
our sense of individuality and makes us unique and different from any other person on the planet.

In the age of social media we have a world wide forum for dialogue and communication and yet it seems that while there
are many speakers, we have less dialogues and more bi-sided monologues, where no one listens to or learns from the
other, but just shouts their own view louder. Perhaps it’s not enough to have a place in which to communicate, but we
need to learn to communicate as well.

We all share the experience of a human being, and therefore we all have something in common. By putting this common
experience first we can realize that the different shades of reality that we hold are not a problem, but a solution. They
allow us to complement each other and to build harmony in our society. A major ethical principle in harmonious co-
existence is to live and let live. Not in the sense of ignoring each other, but in the sense of not enforcing our view on
others, yet without being afraid of expressing it, or of listening to others. It is to make the effort to understand others, and
not to think that just because we don’t agree with them, it necessarily makes their ideas unethical.

We need to remember that our world views may be as strange to the other person as theirs are to us. Our world is facing
many problems. If we won’t be able to listen and harmonize the different approaches we have, we will not be able to find
the creative solutions necessary to confront these real and immediate challenges. There is a true need for a dialogue that is
born in the flexibility of the mind. In this context some questions come to mind: Are we quick to judge? Do we accept
the other person’s right to a different world-view? Do we really understand the other person’s world-view or we just have
a caricature of it in our mind? How prejudiced are we by the media and other influential factors?

Accepting our differences also emphasizes the importance of being authentic. We cannot accept others if we don’t accept
ourselves. At times we are afraid of being who we are, because we fear that we will not be accepted. But if we are busy
trying to be somebody else, if we are busy trying to be what we think is expected of us, we cannot contribute our piece of
the puzzle. To be authentic does not necessarily mean to be original, extravagant or rebellious. It just means to be
ourselves, and there is nothing more original than that. But in order to be ourselves, we must take the first step of every
philosophical journey: know yourself. Who am I and what is really me? and what parts of myself are based on social
conventions, fears and habits, among others?
The harmony our society begins with us accepting ourselves and accepting others. This is not an easy task, but it is worth
it.

HOW DOES AUTHENTIC DIALOGUE WORKS?

Authentic dialogue is a form of communication that goes beyond just exchanging words; it involves a genuine exchange
of ideas, feelings, and perspectives between individuals or groups. At its core, authentic dialogue is about fostering
mutual understanding, respect, and empathy, even when encountering differences.

Acceptance in authentic dialogue means acknowledging and respecting the inherent value of every individual, regardless
of their background, beliefs, or identity. It involves recognizing the validity of others' experiences and perspectives, even
if they differ from our own. This doesn't necessarily mean agreeing with everything someone else believes or does, but
rather, it involves approaching conversations with an open mind and a willingness to listen and learn.

Here are some key aspects of how authentic dialogue fosters acceptance:

Active Listening: In authentic dialogue, individuals listen attentively to each other without judgment or interruption. This
allows for a deeper understanding of the other person's thoughts, feelings, and experiences.

Empathy: Genuine dialogue requires empathy — the ability to understand and share the feelings of others. By
empathizing with others, we can better appreciate their perspectives and experiences, even if they differ from our own.

Respect: Acceptance in dialogue is grounded in respect for others as autonomous individuals with their own unique
identities and experiences. This means treating others with dignity and honoring their perspectives, even if we disagree
with them.

Open-Mindedness: Authentic dialogue involves being open to new ideas, perspectives, and ways of thinking. It requires
a willingness to challenge our own assumptions and beliefs and to consider alternative viewpoints.

Conflict Resolution: Accepting others in dialogue doesn't mean avoiding conflict; rather, it involves addressing conflicts
constructively and respectfully. By engaging in honest and respectful dialogue, individuals can work through differences
and find common ground.

Celebrating Diversity: Authentic dialogue celebrates diversity and recognizes the richness that comes from engaging
with people of different backgrounds, cultures, and beliefs. It involves embracing the complexity of human experience
and valuing the contributions of all individuals.
Overall, authentic dialogue is essential for building inclusive communities, fostering positive relationships, and promoting
social cohesion. By accepting others, even when they are different from ourselves, we create spaces where everyone feels
valued, respected, and heard.

KEY FIGURES:

1. Jurgen Habermas’s Theory of Communicative Action

Mutual understanding is an important telos of any conversation be it a simple dialogue or an argumentation. Thoughts are
refined, relationship is deepened, trust in others and confidence in oneself are built through communication. When people
converse bridges are constructed, strangers become friends, and individuals turn into a society of people. Life-
experiences, however, proves that this is not always the case. In fact, it is common to see individuals with different
backgrounds such as way of thinking, believing, and behaving could easily come into conflict when they communicate.
To avoid arriving at that point, Jurgen Habermas introduce a path leading to mutual understanding through his theory of
communication.

He, first, introduces various forms of action that human beings use like conflict, competition, strategic action that
facilitate understanding but he singled out “speech actions” for he believes that speech acts (dialogue) were predominant
means by which understanding is achieved.
Comprehensibility, truth, truthfulness, and rightness, for Habermas, are significant factors for authentic dialogue to
occur leading to better relationship. Habermas believes that when actors do not violate any of the validity claims in their
speech acts, it would result in intersubjective “reciprocal understanding, shared knowledge, mutual trust, and accord with
one another”
2. Martin Buber’s I - Thou Relationship

Martin Buber (1878–1965), a Jewish philosopher, became famous through his 1923 philosophical writings entitled I and
Thou (Ich und Du). Man exist and he exist to learn. Buber calls this mode of existence as “experience” (the mode of ‘I–
it’. Through experience, man collects data of the world, analyses, classifies, and theorizes about them. This means that, in
terms of experiencing, no real relationship occurs for the “I” is acting more as an observer while its object, the “it” is
more of a receiver of the I’s interpretation. The “it” is viewed as a thing to be utilized, a thing to be known, or put for
some purpose. Thus, there is a distance between the experiencing “I” and the experienced “it” for the former acts as the
subject and the latter as a passive object, a mere recipient of the act (Buber, 1958:4). Since there is no relationship that
occurs in experience, the “I” lacks authentic existence for it’s not socially growing or developing perhaps only gaining
knowledge about the object. So, for Buber, unless the “I” meets an other “I”, that is, an other subject of experience,
relationship is never established. Only when there is an I - I encounter can there be an experience (Buber, 1958).

LC 3: Performs activities that demonstrate an appreciation for the talents of persons

with disabilities and those from the underprivileged sectors of society
A. Who are the Underprivileged Sectors of Society/
Dimensions of Poverty
The notion of poverty is not one- dimensional; rather it is multidimensional. A number of different concepts and measures
of poverty relate to its various dimensions. Each of these dimensions has the common characteristic of representing
deprivation that can encompasses:
 Income
 Health
 Education
 Empowerment
 Working Condition

The most common measure of the underprivileged is income poverty, which is defined in terms of consumption of good
and services. There is lack of goods and services. The World Bank categorizes poverty in two levels: poor and extremely
poor. Those living below US 1.25/day are extremely poor. There is a growing recognition that income poverty is not the
only important measure of deprivation. Poor health is also an important aspect of poverty. Globally, millions die due to
AIDS, Ebola virus, tuberculosis and malaria as well as number of infant deaths from largely preventable causes of
diarrheal disease. Health deprivation had become focal point for the underprivileged

A. Appreciate the Talents of Persons with Disabilities (PWDs) and those from the Underprivileged Sectors of
Society and Their Contributions.

Appreciating the talents of persons with disabilities and individuals from underprivileged sectors of society involves
recognizing and valuing their unique abilities, skills, and contributions. Here are some ways to show appreciation:

Recognize Individual Strengths: Take the time to identify and acknowledge the specific talents and skills of persons
with disabilities and individuals from underprivileged backgrounds. Highlight their strengths and abilities rather than
focusing solely on their limitations or challenges.

Provide Opportunities for Participation: Create inclusive environments that provide opportunities for persons with
disabilities and individuals from underprivileged backgrounds to showcase their talents and skills. Offer platforms for
participation in activities, events, and projects where they can contribute and excel.

Promote Accessibility: Ensure that physical spaces, resources, and information are accessible to persons with
disabilities. Make accommodations as needed to facilitate their full participation and engagement in various activities and
opportunities for skill development and expression.

Offer Support and Resources: Provide support services, training programs, and resources to help individuals from
underprivileged backgrounds develop their talents and skills. Offer mentorship, coaching, and guidance to help them
reach their full potential.

Celebrate Achievements: Celebrate the achievements and successes of persons with disabilities and individuals from
underprivileged sectors of society. Recognize their accomplishments publicly and express appreciation for their hard
work, dedication, and perseverance.
Raise Awareness: Raise awareness about the talents and capabilities of persons with disabilities and individuals from
underprivileged backgrounds. Challenge stereotypes and misconceptions by sharing positive stories and examples of their
achievements.

Encourage Inclusion: Foster a culture of inclusion and acceptance where everyone is valued and respected for their
unique talents and contributions. Encourage collaboration and teamwork that brings together individuals from diverse
backgrounds and abilities.

Advocate for Equal Opportunities: Advocate for policies and initiatives that promote equal opportunities for persons
with disabilities and individuals from underprivileged sectors of society. Support efforts to remove barriers to education,
employment, and participation in social and cultural activities.

PERFORMANCE TASK.
The class will be divided into two groups. Each group will plan and execute an outreach activity in the community of
their choice. Make sure that all members will participate.