Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 12

Cheung 1 Kelly Cheung Block 1, 2011: Philosophy of Emotions Final Paper Love and Universal Identity From morning

to night we heap up shavings, ashes, scraps Our unstable societies fear lest a false movement cause them to lose their balance We say that man does not invent, that he discovered. We reduce the new to the told Everything is full, everything hangs together, everything is in order, everything has always existed, the world is a museum of which we are the curators. Jean-Paul Sartre (from Saint Genet, Actor and Martyr) Introduction As inherently social beings, the struggle to define oneself brings humans at odds with both the association and dissociation from culture and history. Because we value the uniqueness of the individual while seeking his connection to presupposed human conditions, defining ones own identity becomes an ontological conflict between the finite and infinite. The Hegelian view of the teleological progression of History places humans, their societies and their cultures under History's inescapable control, yet does not ignore the significance of the individual in shaping through the passions of human beings in History. People seek the meaning of life, despite life's impending finality in the form of death. Mortality, at least on a corporeal level, is a noncontestable end result to human life but that does not mean the quest is a futile effort to seek at least a temporal meaning and definition behind our existence. Defining oneself is based upon a creation and adherence to a set of criteria that guide our attention to the world around us. The objective existence of the world, unchanging irregardless of human interaction with it, serves as the raw materiali which we evaluate to elucidate the things in this world worth paying attention to. Love's role in defining the value-judgement criteria is reciprocal to its role in being defined by such criteria. Hegel, Marion and Frankfurt's belief in the futility of the pursuit of the pure reason and the objective viewpoint contrasts with Kant, Heidegger and Scheler's valuing of the a

Cheung 2 priori. They disagree on the authority of experience and feeling, metaphysics ii, among other things but these two groups are not totally discordant. Philosophers from each side include theories from the opposing side therefore a synthesis of the Hegelian and Kantian parties serves to elucidate on the certainty of our own existence in this world, especially as both individual and collective human identity become defined by the rational assessment of external objects' value to us. Justification of existence of the self In continually experiencing the successive experiences which define living, individuals become more aware of their own ontological existence and effects on the present, the future and even the pastiii. As members of a society, each personal experience of current members of society will hold some extent of corollary in the advancement of history. Marion's description of the relationship between the unstopping passing of time and the finitude of human life challenges the strictness of the delineation between pure and practical reason. iv ... Time is defined as the order of successives, of all the beings that cannot exist together without rendering one another mutually impossible they must be replaced in the same place, passing from one instant to another and exchanging instants. Every now comes from a completed before and is destined right away to become an after.v Time can serve as one of the more intimate experiences humans can have of the notion of pure reason. The passing of what we term as time, is an inherent occurrence in the natural world but time takes on an entirely different and greater value in its usefulness in delineating the happening and happenings of life. The universality and permanent nature of the experience of

Cheung 3 time serves to connect all humans across history through this eternally understood and shared measurement tool. Time is one of the simpler universal attributes that exists regardless of people, but is elevated after being ascribed meaning in its usefulness to humanity. In Philosophy of Right, Hegel even uses time to define philosophy: Philosophy is its own time raised to the level of thought. Time is often viewed as one of the truest objective factors of the world because it does not have preference nor power regarding human life. vi Time's simplicity stems from its solely quantitative basis. Time becomes more idiosyncratic with the infusion of a consciousness, therefore elevating its own value. Unlike thought, time does not innately possess the ability to assess the value of both the individuals and objects in our environment. Hegel's insistence on the historical context of philosophical inquiry totally fuses his view of existence with the subjectivity of the personal, human experience. The historical context is the coupling of the accumulation of objective time with self-conscious thought. Conversely, if we operate and assess value on the belief that pure reason vii does exist, then Kantian views are centered around our transcendental experience of things that we never have and never will experience. The transcendental world is inaccessible due to the limitations of our perception, yet because according to Kant we have pure reason, we are able to access these nonphysical things. This transcendental experience fits better into the phenomenological viii lens of which to view the world because what we see through that lens need not be grounded in empirical reality. Phenomenological facts are independent from all sensory content, ix which results in an ability to achieve a level of dissociation between the already value-laden self and the phenomenological fact. By viewing phenomenological facts more objectively, the facts are less tainted by our individualized views. In using this phenomenological knowledge, the

Cheung 4 perceiver is able to look at Being, as it is in itself, not as it presents itself as a mere moment of fulfillment for a symbol brought in from without. It is non-sensory observation and perception of facts for the intrinsic value, rather than attempting to force meaning and proposition on to them. In Formalism, Scheler is arguing that values form an objective a priori order that exists independently from the mind, he affirmed that they can be grasped with evident insight through intellectual intuition. x Scheler is more vague about the origin of values, but certainly places them outside of the individual. In understanding human motivation through Scheler's intellectualized view rather than Kant's vague origin of reason in an inborn, functional apparatus. It seems there is greater justification due to the heightened cognition behind Scheler's view on the origin of reason. In using this Kantian view (with Scheler's modifications), we study love and the way it chooses to reveals itself to us due to its self-evidentially disclosed xi nature. Love is like a phenomenological fact because we cannot use any of the five senses to perceive it, yet it can still be felt and sensed. Love is not passive like time or other phenomenological fact, rather love has an all-consuming ability to exert control over the person to shift his value judgements for the sake of a lover. Discovering identity through our cares Once the validity of the individual's existence has been justified through a an ontological account of realization of our experiences, individuals can then begin to organize the plethora of experiences in a ranked value system that most appropriately diverts the limited resource of caring. Frankfurt intrinsically links humanity with finding and bestowing value on the world around us. Caring about something is essential to our being creatures of the kind that human

Cheung 5 beings arexii because caring affects our actions and mental framework.This provides us with stable ambitions and concerns; it marks our interests and goals. The importance that our caring creates for us defines the framework of standards and aims in terms of which we endeavor to conduct our lives.xiii There is a need for consistency both within our own lives and also in the way we interact with our social and environmental surroundings through conferred value judgements. This consistency allows us to achieve progress in leading a directed life, which in turn confers meaning on our lives. Hegel and Kant both hold views of the ultimate goal of human progression: Hegel terms his with Geist, and Kant with world wholes which both seek a universal and everlasting unity of will. This universal will incorporates all temporal, physical and mental areas because it is an ever-changing product of human progress. Individuals are free and encouraged to pursue personal goals because their achievement brings a gradually increased intimacy with the idea of these ultimate ends. Frankfurt eloquently describes the circularity of the human journey towards this end in identifying the end as a question which we cannot know until we know the answer. It is impossible to define the question exactly, or to see how to go about inquiring into it, until the answer to the question is known,xiv Although we are aware of what Kant and Hegel mean by their end-states due to our ability to transcendentally perceive, nothing is as authentic as the whole mental and physical direct experience of it. The persistency of questioning initially will never be fulfilled, but Scheler reconciles this unfulfillable striving with life through loving: love does not have goals until it discovers a value that needs to be realized. xv Love becomes highly anthropomorphic in the way it itself possesses goals and that both

Cheung 6 humans and God have no choice but to concede to its directive force that provides us the means in which to discern value inherent in the world. Love and time are very similar in that they continue to occur by defining people's lives. Although there are more physicalized markers of the passing of time than the experiencing of love, they inhabit a space of background awareness and foreground control. A defined set of worth and caring provides us with stable ambitions and concerns; it marks our interests and goals. The importance that our caring creates for us defines the framework of standards and aims in terms of which we endeavor to conduct our lives.xvi Because love is just a particular mode of caring xvii the difference being the more intense volition and awareness of love we therefore can effectively affect some parts of the feeling but not others. Such partial control shows that love is internal and external to the individual mind and body, therefore shaping our being by infusing it with the being of other people and objects. Love's identity and our own The debate surrounding the consciousness of love reflects the wide variation of the individual phenomenological experience of loving. Frankfurt, Scheler and Marion argue against human ability to control loving feelings. xviii Instead of ascribing the responsibility of meaning derivation to the individual himself, the three authors show each of their conceptions of love xix itself to make [peoples] lives meaningful, and thus to help make their lives in that way good for them to live.xx In elucidating what is of value for the subject, the subject becomes more aware of his own identity. Identity is synonymous with these value-judgements. Love is the tendency, or as it may be, the act that seeks to lead everything in the direction of the perfection of value proper to it.xxi Love's role in our observation and analysis of the world is weighted with equal

Cheung 7 significance in its role in observation and analysis of our own being. The process of discovering of our true selves must run in conjunction with the discovering of our natural environment and socio-cultural context. Love is not the only feeling which brings us closer to discovering meaning in ourselves and life; but love holds a unique advantage of being both socially-grounded and above individual voluntariness. Each author offers a slightly different definition of what love is,xxii by placing varying degrees of emphasis on existence, concern and value. A possible synthesis of these definition of love (in a human-to-human context xxiii) is a human individual's involuntary want to recognize and pursue the goals of the beloved, in order to experience what their own existence means. The pessimistic view that love actually nihilates individual identity is an incomplete understanding of the mutuality behind loving relationships. Love means knowing and living out our beloved's ordo amoris.xxiv In order fully realize what constitutes another's ordo amoris, the beloved and the lover must be in a equal state of openness. This self-transcendence in which a Being opens itself towards another Being in order to partake in its Being is what is called Lovexxv Mutual commitment to the value of loving encourages people accept this total transparency and vulnerability of self because of an the unparalleled value in love's greater teleological purpose. True love enhances the distinctive character of both the lover and belovedxxvi in its induction of a genuine desire to wholly reveal oneself. Another's ordo amoris can only be disclosed through understanding that is based in love.xxvii Despite a total empathy with the beloved, the lover also holds a sort of third-eye view of the beloved. The lover is deeply involved and wholly understands the concerns, goals and values of the beloved to the degree that the lover's original ordo amoris seamlessly assimilates.

Cheung 8 This dissociation of disparate views of what constitutes the proper ordo amoris between lovers negates the primacy of the first person view of our individuality. The distinction between your ordo amoris and mine is not even perceptible, and even greater progression results in a total fluidity between individual and collective identity that spans across all time, culture and space. The loving nature of the relationship helps us to see and to become who we really are and achieve the ideal end-state where wills and goals maintain their uniqueness yet also can fully feel the equal validity of those of other people. It is certain that the collective humanity has not reached the end-state, but it is possible that through a microcosmical inquiry we observe that achievement here in this temporal, material world. The heart is itself a structured counter-image of the cosmos of all possible things worthy of love; to this extent it is a microcosmos of the world of values.xxviii Because a loving heart holds this ultra-empathy of others' ordo amoris, it it intimately weaves a connection between one's heart and all hearts. A relationship which truly adheres to the principles of love innately is a result of and results in a unified will, characteristic of the Ideal end-state. Because we know that this authentic love has existed, does exist and will never cease to exist, we are therefore reaffirmed in the purpose of our lives to attempt to universally achieve it ourselves. Conclusion To achieve a meaningful life, one must be equally cognizant of the finitude of individual's lives themselves, but also their inherent implication in the quest to unify the wills that drive the actions and emotions that constitute our lives. Without love, perception of our environment would be impossible because love categorizes the worldly objects in a hierarchical value-system. Knowledge of the world comes from the emotive value we place on objects, allowing humans to

Cheung 9 bring the lover's will in conjunction with his beloved. xxix The human inability to evade mortality is not as disadvantageous to the quest for meaning as we believe. The finitude of death looms constantly, but without awareness of a definite, impending end, individuals would have no impetus to achieve goals. The pressure to ascribe meaning to our everyday actions causes us to modify them to initially fit into what we think is appropriate and meaningful. From culturally propositional content, personal modifications to make them more attune to our own value judgements. Love is the origin of everything, validating existence, illuminating knowledge, creating value systems which result in emotions. And emotions are all some expression of love even if they seem totally removed from it. Because love is the apparatus we use to make sense of the forms, both physical and transcendental, it lies at the basis of every reaction. Love necessitates the formation and adherence to value judgements. The mere fact that every feeling thing has a semblance of value criteria connects individuals is amazing. When we find similar criteria in others, a bond of familiarity and empathy is found. xxx Relationships like this are necessary prerequisites to finding love. Love does require an adjustment of one's own views for the sake of the beloved, but not in any self-deprecating and self-denying way. By becoming closer to the beloved, we see our own views more clearly than before being in love. Instead of negating our own identity for the beloved, we instead become more familiar with ourselves in becoming more familiar with others. The problem of mortality affects all levels of finite intimacy, but progress towards greater unity in values continues across successive generations which follow a teleological trajectory. Achievement of Geist and world-wholes is possible, even if the proposed plans of action

Cheung 10 are not strictly followed. A universal spirit does not need to be universally recognized to be real. The small glimpses of universal spirit are evident in loving relationships, xxxi even if mortals play the role of lovers. Their impending deaths do not discourage from achieving deeper love between themselves or attempting to love more things that are also worthy of their loving.

G. W. F Hegel, Introduction to the Philosophy of History, Translated by Leo Rauch, Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing Company, 1988. ii A frequent criticism (see Karl Popper, The Open Society and Its Enemies. (London: Routledge, 1996)) of Hegelian history is its total dependency on a God-figure who knows, exists and is the culmination of all of history's progress. This God exists wholly in a non-experiential sense because His immortality and omniscience stands in total contrast to human temporality and finitude. iii At least in how people conceive of the meaning and their effects on each of these time periods. iv Practical reason is the process by which individuals use their uniquely human ability to asses the values of each action we can take. We look beyond the action as a mere means to satisfying biological needs; and instead, we take into consideration a subjectively established criteria for assigning value. v Jean-Luc Marion, The Erotic Phenomenon, Translated by Stephen E. Lewis (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2007): 32. vi Because time does not possess the faculties to establish preference. This is unlike the power we perceive love to possess. vii Kantian pure reason is the way we know things a priori. A priori is knowledge that does not rely on experiences or observations. viiiA phenomena is anything that appears or presents itself reflexively to the stream of consciousness as it is ordinarily experienced by the individual consciousness. Anything which appears in and gives itself reflexively to the stream of immanent consciousness is a legitimate area of phenomenological analysis (Vandenberghe 22). ix Frdric Vandenberghe, "Sociology of the Heart: Max Scheler's Epistemology of Love," Theory, Culture & Society 25, no. 17 (2008): 25. x Vandenberghe 23. xi Vandenberghe 24. xii Harry G. Frankfurt, The Reasons of Love, (Princeton: Princeton UP, 2004): 17. xiiiFrankfurt 23. xiv Frankfurt 25. xv Max Scheler, "Ordo Amoris," In Selected Philisophical Essays, Translated by David R. Lachterma (Evanston: Northwestern UP, 1973):158. xvi Frankfurt 23. xviiFrankfurt 31. xviiiFrankfurt: a necessary feature of love that it is not under our direct and immediate voluntary control (44) and There are no necessities of logic or of rationality that dictate what we are to love. What we love is shaped by the universal exigencies of of human life, together with those other needs and interests that derive more particularly from the features of individual character and experience (47) Scheler:love is preeminently a spontaneous act directed towards valuable objects (161, emphasis added) Marion: there exists an inescapable adherence to a 'greater rationality' that which does not limit itself to the world of things... but which instead rules our hearts, our individuality, our life and our death, in short that which defines us deep down in all that concerns us in the final instance (5) xix Frankfurt says care is the necessary preliminary stage to love; and love is a particular mode of caring (31). We hold more volition over what we care about, but it is not wholly under the individual's control. xx Frankfurt 99 xxi Scheler 109 xxiiFrankfurt: Love is, most centrally, a disinterested concern for the existence of what is loved, and for what is good for it (42) Marion: ...from the starting point of the fact that I love even before being, because I am not, except insofar as I experience love, and experience it as a logic (8) Scheler: Love is the tendency, or as it may be, the act that seeks to lead everything in the direction of the perfection of value proper to it -- and succeeds, when no obstacles are present (109) xxiiiThe notion of whole-hearted love can only be ascribed to humans rather than any other living species because humans hold a unique ability to be self-aware and judge themselves, their feelings, and their actions. Upon making judgements, they then have a choice to make changes in order to fit more closely with the accepted cultural context. xxivScheler borrows the term ordo amoris from Augustine which means the order of love. It a ranking system of what we love and defines the goal-directed core of the person... by which he exists and lives morally (Scheler 100). xxvVandenbergh 29. xxviEdward V., Vaveck S.J, "Scheler's Phenomenology of Love," The Journal of Religion 62, no. 2 (1982): 161. xxviiVandenbergh 41 xxviiiScheler 116. xxixThis is comparable to Hegel's discussion of the transition from desire to will in Phenomenology. This transition is a journey to a joint self-aware knowledge of the world.

xxxI purposefully use found rather a more creative word like made because I believe people find the world, in a Heideggerian sense outlined in Being and Time: World is always already there in all things at hand. World is already discovered beforehand together with everything encountered... (81) Because we live in the world, we are implicated into sociality, and therefore seek commonalities to make life bearable and sensible. xxxiSee Frankfurt for discussion on parent's love for their children as an example of unconditional, whole love. Other totally loving relationships exist as well.