Introduction to the Philosophy of

the Human Person

An initiation to the activity and process of philosophical reflection as a search for a
synoptic vision of life. Topics to be discussed include the human experiences of
embodiment, being in the world with others and the environment, freedom,
intersubjectivity, sociality, being unto death.
 ILIGAN
CAGA CAGAYAN
KAPATAGAN

Introduction to the Philosophy of the Human Person

Lesson 2

Lesson Title: (Methods of Philosophizing)

I. Learning Objectives:

At the end of this lesson, students are expected to:

1. The student will be able to distinguish opinion from truth.
2. The students can analyze situations that show the difference between opinion and truth.
3. The students will be able to realize that the methods of philosophy lead to wisdom and
truth.

II. Lesson Content:

TOPIC 1: TRUTH AND PHILOSOPHY

What is truth? What do we mean when we say that something is true? Many of us assume that
truth is a simple term with a singular meaning. Life in this world would be a lot simpler if truth one
meant one thing. Life would have been a matter of simply answering the question whether the things we
say, read about, and discuss are true or false. If we examine the perspective on truth that has been
dominant in society, we would find that people mostly equate truth with scientific truth.
BIOLOGY: Human person is a living being composed of cells, tissues, organs and systems.
CHEMISTRY: A Human person is 99% oxygen, carbon, hydrogen, nitrogen, calcium and phosphorus;
.85% potassium, sulfur, sodium, chlorine and magnesium and 0.15% are more than a dozen trace
elements.
ANTHROPOLOGY: Human person is a “member” of the primate genus Homo, especially a member of
the species Homo sapiens, distinguished from other apes by a large brain and the capacity for speech”.
“PHILOSOPHY as a discipline will not claim to be the sole bearer of truth”
● It is not so much the truth that concern philosophy, rather the way or process by which we can
distinguish claims that are true from those that are false.

PROCESS:
A man who lives away from his family abroad has been in state of coma, sustained by life
support from medical equipment for about two months. Doctors have told his friends that he has
very slow chance of being revived if they take away the life support from him. It seems that they
are left with no other option but to pull the plug, than to keep him in life support for years. As
per hospital regulations, it is only family members who are allowed to consent to pulling the
plug. The man’s brother finally arrived from his home country to give the consent. Something
strange happened, however, the moment the brother started talking to the patient in coma. They
noticed that his vital sign began to stabilize. Days passed, and the patient started to show signs of
rapid improvement. The doctors up to this day are unable to explain what had happened. Friends
of the patient say the prayers of his community for a miracle were granted. Others say that the
presence of his brother had a healing effect on him. Some doctors say that the medication must
have worked in a way that surprised the experts in the field. Today the man has fully survived his
condition and is as normal as he can be.

What do you think truly happened here?

RETURN THIS MODULE 2

 ILIGAN
CAGA CAGAYAN
KAPATAGAN

EXAMPLE:
A study from MSU-IIT shows that Iligan (from Banwaon Term Ilihan which means fortress of
defense) had a Spanish fortification that serve as buffer zone during Spanish-Moro war, and was located
at the present day PNB, Poblacion.

DOMAINS OF TRUTH
1. Objective Domain:

● Truth is tested against empirical evidence.

● Is held true when it is justified by data gathered from careful observation and analysis.
● This refers to the truths that are established based on abstracted theories. This includes scientific
theories or mathematical theories that are currently used as a fundamental basis in establishing
other theories
2. Social Domain
● Truth is tested against the acceptability of a particular group in a particular time in History.
● Norms that have become laws for a particular generation may no longer be true for another
generation.
● This may be the result of the agreement between a society that has been accepted over time. This
does not necessarily mean that something is true but rather, this is about a truth that has been
socially agreed upon as time passed by.
3. Personal Domain
● Truths are tested against the consistency and authenticity of the person who claims it.
● This refers to the truths that are biased towards the person who established it. It may be based in
the experience or theories that a person has. The authenticity and validity of this truth relies on
the person themselves

Richard Porty: (born Oct. 4, 1931, New York, N.Y., U.S.—died June 8, 2007, Palo Alto, Calif.),
American pragmatist philosopher and public intellectual noted for his wide-ranging critique of the
modern conception of philosophy as a quasi-scientific enterprise aimed at reaching certainty and
objective truth.
● Truth can be understood as what has passed the procedures of JUSTIFICATION.
● JUSTIFICTION: process of proving the truth or validity of a statement.

RETURN THIS MODULE 3

 ILIGAN
CAGA CAGAYAN
KAPATAGAN

TOPIC 2: TRUTH AND OPINION

Philosophy as a discipline will not claim to be the sole bearer of truth. It is not so much “the
TRUTH” that concerns philosophy, but rather the way or process by which we can distinguish claims
that are true from those that are false.
VOCABULARY BUILDING
● OPINION- is a statement of judgement of a person about something in the world.
● ARGUMENT- is a group of statements that serves to support a conclusion.
● CLAIM- the conclusion of an argument
● PREMISES- the reasons used to support the conclusion.
● FALLACY/FALLACIES - are groups of statements that appear to be arguments, but fail to
support the conclusion.

How to critically examine opinions:

We have shown that in order for an opinion to gain the status of truth, it must be able to pass the
test of justification. In other words, whoever makes the opinion must be able to argue for it in the most
reasonable way. A philosophical mind must then be prepared to examine arguments supporting an
opinion. For example,

There is no hope in the Philippine Government.

This is not yet an argument. It is an expression of an opinion. If the person wants to convince
another person that his opinion is true, then he must provide reasons to support this claim. So the
argument would look like this.

There is no hope in the Philippine Government, because many officials are corrupt, and Filipino voters
continue to elect them.

Here, the person is claiming that there is no hope in the Philippine government. And he supports
this claim by providing two reasons: a) government officials are corrupt; b) Filipino voters continue to
elect them. This is what an argument looks like. It is composed of claim (the conclusion of the
argument) and premises (the reason used to support the conclusion).

Clearly, not all arguments are good arguments. The Branch of Philosophy called logic studies
and elaborates on good argumentation. Using the example above, a fallacious form of that argument
would appear as follows.

There is no hope in the Philippine Government because the Philippines is a tropical country.

The stated reason (the Philippines is a tropical country) totally fails to give logical support to the
claim (There is no hope in the Philippine Government).

Correct and Defective Argument Forms

In logic an argument consists of a set of statements, the premises, whose truth supposedly
supports the truth of a single statement called the conclusion of the argument. An argument is
deductively valid when the truth of the premises guarantees the truth of the conclusion; i.e., the
conclusion must be true, because of the form of the argument, whenever the premises are true. Some
arguments that fail to be deductively valid are acceptable on grounds other than formal logic, and their
conclusions are supported with less than logical necessity. In other potentially persuasive arguments, the
premises give no rational grounds for accepting the conclusion. These defective forms of argument are
called fallacies. An argument may be fallacious in three ways: in its material content, through a
misstatement of the facts; in its wording, through an incorrect use of terms; or in its structure (or form),
through the use of an improper process of inference.

RETURN THIS MODULE 4

 ILIGAN
CAGA CAGAYAN
KAPATAGAN

ARGUMENTUM AD HOMINEM (Argument against the Person)

● This is a fallacy used when people convince others that someone’s argument should be rejected
because of the person’s personal background- his history, nationality, race socio economic
status, family, associations, religion and other circumstances.
Logical Form:
Person 1 is claiming Y.
Person 1 is a moron.
Therefore, Y is not true.
Ex. He’s not a great athlete; he’s a fraud, a cheat and a liar.
C P
ARGUMENTUM AD BACULUM (Appeal to Force)
● When force, coercion, or even a threat of force is used in place of a reason in an attempt to
justify a conclusion
Logical Form:
If you don’t accept X as true, I will hurt you.
Jordan is a God fearing son because he spent his summer at Jesus Camp.
C P
Jordan: Dad, why do I have to spend my summer at Jesus camp?
Dad: Because if you don’t, you will spend your entire summer in your room with nothing but your Bible!

ARGUMENTUM AD MISERICORDIAN (Appeal to Pity)

● This fallacy is also called appeal to emotion. It is argument used by people who want to win
people over by manipulating their emotions. The attempt to distract from the truth of the
conclusion by the use of pity.
Logical Forms:
Person 1 is accused of Y, but person 1 is pathetic.
Therefore, person 1 is innocent.
X is true because person 1 worked really hard at making X true.
Example: I really deserve an “A” on this paper, professor. Not only did I study during my
grandmother’s funeral, but I also passed up the heart transplant surgery, even though that was the first
matching donor in 3 years.
ARGUMENTUM AD PAPULUM (Bandwagon Fallacy)
● A fallacious argument that concludes a proposition to be true because many or most people
believe it; it alleges: “If many believe so, it is so”
Logical Form:
A lot of people believe X.
Therefore, X must be true.
Example: “Every boy of your age has a girlfriend, therefore you should go and find one”

RETURN THIS MODULE 5

 ILIGAN
CAGA CAGAYAN
KAPATAGAN

TOPIC 3: METHODS OF PHILOSOPHIZING

● Philosophy is not like the Sciences that have a clear method in arriving- at truth. (Gabriel
Marcel,1960)
● The journey of philosophizing is a very personal journey. (There is no specific method to follow
in determining the truth.)
● It is important that we constantly engage others to help us examine- these truths we hold.

Rene Descartes and Western modern thinking (1596-1650)

● Only the mind, not the body can arrive at clear and distinct ideas which cannot be doubted.
● The body and the senses cannot be trusted when it comes to arriving at indubitable truths,
● There is one thing that cannot be doubted, and that is, doubt itself.
● The more he doubts that he is thinking, the clearer it appears that he is actually thinking.
● “I am! I exist!” when one thinks one intuitively or immediately realizes that he exists.

HISTORICAL SCHOOL MAIN FEATURES PROPONENTS,

PERIOD OF MAJOR TEXTS
THOUGHT
Ca. 200 BCE TAOISM Emphasis on the unity and harmony Lao Tzu
(East Asia) among opposing elements (yin and I Ching, Tao Te
yang); individuals must seek to Ching, and Zhuangzi
understand and act in accordance
with the natural order.
Ca. 1500 BCE HINDUISM Belief in a pantheon of gods, with The Vedas
(India, South three main gods- Brahma, Shiva, and
Asia) Vishnu
Belief in a cycle of birth and rebirth
(samsara), which is broken when a
person achieves ultimate union with
the divine (moksha).

RETURN THIS MODULE 6

 ILIGAN
CAGA CAGAYAN
KAPATAGAN

Taoist Theory of Yin and Yang

● Ability to transform into one another- Yin transform into Yang and vice versa.
● The central tenet of Taoism is that everything is Qi, which literally means energy.
● Taoist thought stresses that human being is one with the universe: everything that happens in the
universe will ultimately affect man and everything that man does will affect the universe.
What is the Taoist “method” to understand truth?
● It is by striving to achieve balance in everything- a balance between thinking and moving, resting
and working, taking in and letting go.

SUMMARY
The journey of Philosophizing is a very personal journey. There is no specific method to follow.
Whatever glimpse of the truth we get will always be partial and different from others because we all
look at truth differently and use different approaches to arriving at truth. No one has the final answer to
everything. That is why it is important that we constantly engage ourselves to others to help us examine
and reflect on the truths that we hold.

Congratulations! You have successfully completed Lesson 2. Please proceed to Lesson 3.

RETURN THIS MODULE 7

 ILIGAN
CAGA CAGAYAN
KAPATAGAN

ASSESSMENT

Quiz 2
Instruction: TRUE OR FALSE: Check the appropriate box that describes best to the statement.

1. Philosophy is like the sciences that have a clear method in arriving at truth.
True
False

2. Only the mind and the body can arrive at clear and distinct ideas which cannot be doubted.
True
False

3. The perspective of truth that is dominant in society is scientific truth, since it is accepted only to a
particular time and place.
True
False

4. Truth is on the basis of passing the process of justification.

True
False

5. The journey of Philosophizing is a very personal journey.

True
False

6. Taoist believes that human being is separate from the universe.

True
False

7. Lao Tzu is the main proponent of the Taoist Philosophy

True
False

8. According to Rene “The body and the senses cannot be trusted when it comes to arriving at
indubitable truths.”
True
False

9. The basis of existing is thru thinking.

True
False

10. Philosophy is concern with the truth rather than the process.
True
False

RETURN THIS MODULE 8

 ILIGAN
CAGA CAGAYAN
KAPATAGAN

ACTIVITY

Instruction: Research three fallacies that are not included in the discussion and plot your answer on a table. One
column should contain the three fallacies you’ve researched, another column for definition or characteristics, and
the last column for the examples (two examples) for each fallacy. Examples must be related to your personal
experiences or observations.

FALLACY DESCRIPTION EXAMPLES

Example: Example: Example:

 People have been praying to
Appeal to ignorance fallacies occur God for years. No one can
when someone asserts a claim that prove He doesn't exist.
Appeal to must be accepted because no one else Therefore, He exists.
Ignorance can prove otherwise.  Since the students have no
questions concerning the
topics discussed in class, the
students are ready for a test.

RETURN THIS MODULE 9

 ILIGAN
CAGA CAGAYAN
KAPATAGAN

References

Content
 Corpuz, B. Corpuz R. Corpuz-Paclibar M.L, Paclibar S. (2016). Introduction to the Philosophy of the
Human Person. Quezon City, Manila: Lorimar Publishing Inc.

Image
 (bit.ly/3x7t4Kc)

RETURN THIS MODULE 10