Human Person And Ecology Analysis

1857 Words8 Pages
B. Human Person and Ecology:
In the preceding chapters of the study, the researcher had already laid down the essential features of the human person in its metaphysical and phenomenological sense. Hence, as this study progresses, the researcher so far elucidated the link that connects the human person and the natural environment. The discussion above has presented the order of nature. This order illustrates the “cosmic relationship” of each entity which God himself have made so. Even though they are identical, still that is what makes them harmonious.
The discipline that investigates and studies the structure and function of nature is called “ecology”. The word ecology is derived from the two Greek words;  which means “house” or “environment”
…show more content…
On the second chapter of the study, the researcher presented the metaphysical foundation of the human person in St. Karol Wojtyła’s philosophical anthropology. Primarily, it is St. Thomas Aquinas who influenced him on how he viewed person. Person signifies what is most perfect in nature. Man, as an imago Dei, is not just an animal but a ‘rational animal’ that makes him unique in the hierarchy of the created beings. Caldecott asserts that man is placed at the center of the world to take charge for the well-being of it. “We are central because we are persons. To be persons is to have reason; it is to have access to truth.” Certainly, only a human person has the access to cogitate the truth in this world. Also, the only being that could participate in the rational laws of the universe. This is the reason why Wojtyła claims that, “The better we know the world, the more we are able to subordinate it to ourselves and make use of the new resources and riches we discover in it.”
Following this further, the assertion that the person is inseparable with the whole order of nature also implies that the human person is the “nexus of all cosmic realities.” For the simple reason that, the human body is considered as an “environment” of the soul. According to
…show more content…
In fact, in his work Love and Responsibility, he devoted a portion of his discussion on his “critique of utilitarianism.” The word itself is derived from the Latin verb uti (‘to use’, ‘to take advantage of’), and the adjective utilis (‘useful’). True to its etymology, ‘utilitarianism’ puts the emphasis on the usefulness (or otherwise) of any and every human activity. The usefulness is whatever gives pleasure and excludes its opposite, for pleasure is the essential ingredient of human happiness. The context of his analysis on utilitarianism lies on the person to person relationship. Since for him the proper attitude that is only applicable to the person is to love and no more less. Now, if a person becomes utilitarian, he is not treating a person as a person rather as an object of his pleasure. This is unacceptable for him, for it devaluates the dignity of a human person. However, this utilitarian attitude is also applicable on man-nature relationship. Which, in the same way, should not be treated as a mere object of one’s desire or pleasure but treat it with care that is proper to the natural environment. This is an immense issue in the society nowadays, man tends to be anthropocentric and utilitarian. It is, as if, he is entitled to squander his environment without thinking its lasting effect for the future generations. Pope John Paul II once
Open Document