By JOAO GABRIEL OF THE BIRTH PIRES
The notion of humanity is too broad and too open to define what constitutes being a man in just one definition.
Introduction
When analyzing the human trajectory, as a species from a biological point of view, different theses were discussed to define what man is. Until we arrived at the current and most accepted one called “homo sapiens sapiens” (man who knows). In this way, in the human sciences, which is also a scientific field of knowledge, it could not be different. Which led to its creation as a science to define what man is and produce theories.
In view of this, we can discuss with some authors to develop syntheses. According to Francis Wolff, there are four different types of conceptions in the history of philosophy to define man, namely: The ancient conception, formulated by the Greeks in the personification of Aristotle, which defines man as a thinking animal. The classical conception, defended by René Descartes in the modern age, which defines man as a thinking being. "cogito, ergo sum" (I think, therefore I am).
The conception of Human Sciences, defended mainly in the 20th century, and exemplified by Michel Foucault, in his work The words and things, which states: “Before the 1981th century, man did not exist” (FOUCAULT, 362, p. 363-XNUMX), which leads man to study himself and know himself, leaving man ambiguous, making him subject and object of knowledge. And finally, the conception of cognitive Sciences, already propagated in the XNUMXst century, where man does not have privilege among the objects of study, where everything is very natural, where man is just another being in nature, with everyone on the same horizontal level before other beings.
Thus, it is worth highlighting Michel Foucault, who makes a difficult analysis and directly discusses the formatting of the human sciences as a study of man. Michel Foucault, in his research, says that before the 18th century, no one really discussed “man”, they only used titles to define the being. However, at a certain point it was necessary to stop, reflect and ask: what is man?
As the author states below: “Under these conditions, it was necessary for knowledge of man to emerge, with its scientific scope, as contemporary and from the same vein as biology, economics and philology, so that one of the most decisive advances made in the history of European culture by empirical rationality was seen in it, quite naturally. However, as at the same time the general theory of representation disappeared and, in return, the need to question the being of man as the foundation of all positivities was imposed, an imbalance could not help but occur: man became that from which all knowledge could be constituted in its immediate and unproblematized evidence; he became, a fortiori, that which authorizes the questioning of all knowledge of man.” (FOUCAULT, 1981, p. 362-363).
Therefore, with the aim of understanding and explaining man in the Human Sciences, duality arises: leaving man as a scientist as a director of research and as an object of research for the composition of his work, whether as an anthropologist, sociologist or pedagogue and other areas of study on man.
Development
In the context of knowledge, some people claim that in every culture there are bodies that aim to coordinate reflections on the order of given subjects, however diverse they may be, whether in the exact sciences, languages or other areas. Thus, in line with the philosopher Michel Foucault, who reports on the lack of a specific group until the 18th century to discuss what man is, since there are different ways of understanding man, perhaps a doctor to understand how the human body works? Or perhaps a biologist to understand the point of view of human life? Or perhaps an existentialist philosopher to question the existence of being?
In this context, we can delve into the theories of Immanuel Kant, who states that there are three basic questions to reach the final question “What is man?”, which are: “What should I do?” from an ethical and moral point of view; “What can I know?” from a speculative point of view; or “What can I hope for?” according to a metaphysical or religious view. And thus propose the most plausible definition for this, according to the answers obtained by the questions above.
According to Kant, man is understood as a unique creature, who has a high capacity to create his own character. However, among human beings from different regions and cultures, questions also arise about what it means to be a man, what it means to be human. When we analyze the context of the German Holocaust against the Jewish people as a result of Nazism, we see that the Jewish people were subjugated under the human definition. Seen in this way, only the Aryan people were considered to be truly human; the Jewish people were a kind of sub-human.
Furthermore, we can characterize the current day discussion of what it means to be a man, what it means to be human in the modern world and especially in today's Brazil, as we have the daily massacre of indigenous peoples, LGBTQIA+ people, women, black people, homeless people and so many other minority classes that need laws to ensure and affirm that they are also human and deserve their dignity.
In this way, summarizing Francis Wolff, it is possible to dialogue with the ideas of cognitive sciences, where man loses his essence as a human and becomes just another piece of nature, with little regard for his human condition, which converges with the ancient concept of cynicism, brought by Greek philosophy, materialized in Diogenes, who claims that one can live life as it is, without worrying about anything, and just exist.
This is an idea of human evolution from a social point of view, such as the “forgetting” of the characteristics that make up humans, for which they are often judged and biased towards prejudices such as gender, sexuality, economic class, race or creed, which would be just more traits of man, just as there are black, white and caramel dogs and this is not a reason for distinction between them, just physical aspects that make up the nature of each of them.
Even though during the period of man's rise, social minorities were already forgotten and unfortunately continue to be so today, in this way in Cognitive Sciences everything becomes so natural that we forget that in the social composition, not everyone is aligned horizontally, but rather vertically, creating groupings of people by similarity, which ends up generating a pyramid in the social structure, where few are at the top and the majority at the base, opening up a space for everyone to be placed at equivalent levels in the social pyramid, without a division between them.
Thus, Cognitive Sciences rescue the idea that everything is just elements that make up nature, which in a way is very positive for society, as it breaks every paradigm of right or wrong, moral or immoral in certain issues such as gender, sexuality, and others, which guide discussions today, generating positive or negative criticism, which were also worked on by Michel Foucault in his time.
However, Michel Foucault will still state that the figure of man, although created very recently, has its end very close. As he quotes: “Man is an invention, and the archaeology of his thought clearly shows his origin and perhaps his end”. For the author, man only begins to appear as a defining concept in the 19th century, but his peak occurs in the 20th century, especially in the 1960s, when the world experienced great revolutions in fashion, social, political, philosophical and other areas. However, revolutions become archives of human history and consequently lead to the end, which for the author is close, perhaps even in the 21st century with the rise of Cognitive Sciences proclaimed by Francis Wolff.
In view of this, we can risk paraphrasing in a simple way the German philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche, who debates in his work the gay science, “God is dead”. Dead, yes, not because of the existential meaning that ceases to exist or suffers from death, but because people no longer need God to meet their demands such as water, food, and their daily needs; which leaves death as a metaphor for insignificance.
Therefore, man will also die, not because of human extinction or the fact that he is subject to death, but because of the fact that he is important, man ceases to be important and becomes as natural as possible, just another animal in nature. He also ceases to be an object of research, a master of nature and does not fit into any configuration for the human sciences.
Conclusion
Therefore, it can be concluded that the conceptions and formats of man can be as varied as possible and change over time. This is part of the purpose of giving different meanings to the same being. However, since human beings establish their existence, even though they are called human by worldwide consecration, they are often subjugated to the sense of humanity, suffering from social ills and stigmas, however diverse they may be, whether prejudice, stereotyping of the being, or a lack of understanding of the culture of the other, and so on.
Thus, it is worth noting that the notion of humanity is too broad and too open to define what constitutes a man in just one definition. This makes the assertion that man is close to his end more and more vivid, becoming increasingly naturalized as a mere being of nature. Even though there is a vast debate to define what man was, what he is, or what he will be throughout history. And as Michel Foucault himself says in The words and things, man is not the oldest problem nor the most constant that has been posed to human knowledge.
Thus, we can conclude and affirm that man seeks to empty himself of his purpose, leaving the being increasingly uninhabited, more natural in his creation, being the one who does not fit in anywhere, but is inserted everywhere, the one who is useless but at the same time promotes everything. This is the modern man, propagated by Cognitive Sciences and out of place in himself. Seen this way, man does not have the obligation to define himself to make sense, but only to exist.
*João Gabriel of the Birth Pires is a philosophy major at the Federal University of Juiz de Fora (UFJF).
References
WOLFF. The four conceptions of man, 2009.
FOUCAULT. Words and Things: An Archaeology of the Human Sciences. pp. 361- 404, New York: Routledge, 1981.
NIETZSCHE. the gay science. New York: University of Chicago Press 2012.
the earth is round there is thanks to our readers and supporters.
Help us keep this idea going.
CONTRIBUTE
