Philosophical Foundations: Ethics, Personhood, and Autonomy

Cultural Relativism and Intercultural Dialogue

Cultural Relativism proposes to analyze various cultures based on their own values, promoting tolerance. However, it faces constraints, often leading to a lack of dialogue and being very enclosed.

Challenges of Relativism

• Racism: Some believe that separation is best to preserve culture, advocating against mixing cultures.
• Romantic Contact: An exaggerated attitude focusing only on the positive aspects of different cultures, often defending a static vision of culture and the preservation of traditions.

Dialogue Between Cultures: Relativity or Universality?

Dialogue between cultures is a requirement of our time, necessary to provide common answers for humanity. According to the challenges of relativism, communication between cultures is almost impossible, while universalism values shared principles.

We must discover universal values:

• Respect for human rights.
• Appreciation of freedom, equality, and solidarity.

An attitude of active dialogue and tolerance is essential for world construction, and intercultural dialogue is a cornerstone.

The Symbolic Universe

The universe provides Symbolism, which relates human beings (SH) through language and artistic expressions, leading to a symbolic universe or world.

Symbols and objects are not isolated from other things. They are a mixture of experiences and lived realities (vivencias). Art and language are necessary for us to connect with reality and give meaning to the objects around us.

Ancient and Medieval Roots of the Concept of Person

The word person comes from the Greek prosopon, which signifies a mask used in the theater of character. In the early centuries, it referred to the three divine persons (God the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit).

Later, it acquired a human sense, particularly in legal and juridical contexts (Subject).

Boethius' Definition

Boethius defined the person as: "individual substance of rational nature."

Material Ethics

Material Ethics establishes a supreme good for the human being (SH) as a criterion for the goodness or badness of their conduct. We find two elements:

• There are real, good things.
• Rules aimed at reaching this good have specific content.

Kant's Formal Ethics

Kant contrasts formal ethics with material ethics:

• Material ethics are empirical, hypothetical, and heteronomous.
• Formal ethics must be universal, rational, and a priori; they must be categorical and autonomous.

A universal ethic must be formal, meaning it lacks specific content (it does not provide any real good, but rather dictates how to act, not what to do).

The Person: Being, Becoming, and Existence

Incarnate Existence

The person exists in flesh and bone (reality) and is open to the world from their privacy (existing).

Communication

The sense of being precedes the "You." Being a person means being able to take the point of view of another ("I").

Freedom in Daily Life

To be free is to accept the conditional character of freedom as freedom that is supported by reality.

Commitment

A person's identity is forged through the critical commitments they acquire.

Capacity

Being a person means being able to say "no."

Proximity and Friendship

The person does not only live in society but also in close proximity, which is friendship. Self-giving is donating something else due to necessity, whereas friendship is willing the good of another person.

Understanding Moral Conscience

Conscience means realizing something. Moral capacity is the ability to realize which forms of life are morally more humanizing than others. It is the layer that captures the principles distinguishing between the morally good and bad.

Making Moral Decisions

To make decisions, we must move from general principles to practical judgments and concrete trials. Example: The conscience regarding lying to spare someone.

The best way to understand what a moral principle requires is to try to apply and fulfill it. Conscience also serves an autocritical function.

The Concept of Autonomy

Kant states that we can choose not only the means but also the ends; thus, we are autonomous.

The Law of Freedom

Freedom is the property of the will to be a law unto itself. (Example: Knowing that killing is wrong, even if one does it.)

Two Perspectives on Law

1. External Events: Natural laws to which physical beings are submitted.
2. The Human Will: The laws of freedom, given by rational beings.

Rational beings can organize their lives and live together, allowing us to open new paths toward the goals we set.