A Jewish Philosophy of Man
A Lecture Series by Rabbi Joseph B. Soloveitchik
Lecture 3: Three Approaches to Man
Delivered December 4, 1958
Summary by Mark Smilowitz: Modern philosophy knows of three approaches to the question, what is Man: the Biblical, the Classical Greek, and the modern scientific views. The Classical Greek and Biblical anthropologies agree that man is unique and incongruous with the natural order, while the modern scientific view considers man as just a more skilled animal. The Classical and Biblical views also agree that the uniqueness of man is not granted to him as a gift but as a task to be achieved. The two also agree that the intellect is the greatest tool available to man to develop his uniqueness. They disagree, however, as to whether the development of the intellect is the final goal or just a tool to achieve a greater goal. The highest form of human engagement for Judaism is something beyond intellectual achievement, something to be identified and discussed not now but in a future lecture, but for now we can say that Judaism is not logocentric as the Greeks were. Judaism also differed from the Classical Greek view of Man in that the Classical view concerned itself with Man as a universal, anonymous being, with Mankind, with the community, and not with the individual, lonely person. They saw the individual as a meon, which in Greek means a non-existence or semi-existence, while the general species is an ontos on, a true existence. Individual Divine Providence, in this view, depends on the degree to which the single person contributes to society. This Greek “class absolutism” measures the worth and dignity of an individual by his usefulness to society. Greek democracy is based on political equality, not axiological (value) equality. Axiological equality measures the worth of a person based not on his contribution to society but on his intrinsic value. This question of class absolutism vs. axiological democracy has tremendous practical implications on how and why to allocate social services. The Classical view yields a theory of social services based on pragmatic, not moral, concerns that would favor those who have the most to contribute to society. Children would be prioritized over the elderly and gifted children over the mediocre. Education would serve not what is best for the child but what would best serve society. Judaism has a different view, which will be discussed in a future lecture.
00:02:46 Three anthropologies regarding the essence of Man
00:06:17 Whether Man is unique or just a more skilled animal
00:14:29 The uniqueness of Man as a task and challenge, not a gift
00:38:49 Human intellect as the final goal, or just a tool to a achieve a greater goal
00:59:40 Classical Greek thought on the priority of society over the individual
01:24:03 Practical implications of Greek “class absolutism” on social services
For Further Study: The question of Man as unique or as part of nature is taken up in the Rav’s The Emergence of Ethical Man. The question of measuring a person’s worth by his or her contributions to society vs. by the intrinsic value of every individual bears similarities to the dialectic between Adam I and Adam II in “The Lonely Man of Faith.” Lectures 4–6 of this series will elaborate on the Jewish view of this question.
<< Back to Lecture 2 | Home | Proceed to Lecture 4 >>