The Symbolic Nature of Man: Language, Humiliation, and the Quantum Leap
The Symbolic Nature of Man
Man as a Symbolic Animal
Humans possess a symbolic or representative capacity, enabling them to grasp abstract concepts and communicate through verbal language. This capacity for thought and speech distinguishes us as a species. Language, a learned and public system, allows us to objectify and share subjective experiences. It is inherently open to comprehension by intelligent beings.
Who Am I? A Human Being.
Two perspectives shed light on this question:
- Sophocles, in Antigone, highlights the human capacity for wonder and admiration of our impact on the world.
- Pico della Mirandola, in his Discourse on Human Dignity, emphasizes the remarkable potential of human beings and the dignity derived from shaping our own lives.
Defining humans often involves contrasting them with the divine and the animal. We are neither gods nor (arguably) animals.
- We are not gods, as our reliance on them diminishes.
- Our status as non-animals is debatable, given the theoretical efforts to distinguish us and the fables attributing human virtues and vices to animals. This reflects a fear of being equated with beasts.
Despite Darwin’s scientifically accepted theory of evolution, some resist our animal origins due to religious beliefs.
Three Major Theoretical Humiliations
Scientific advancements have challenged religious dogma and modern thought, leading to three major humiliations:
- The heliocentric theory displaced Earth from the center of the universe.
- Darwin demonstrated that humans are part of the interconnected web of life, evolving through mutations rather than divine creation.
- Freud’s theories revealed the complexity of consciousness, influenced by impulses beyond our control.
These humiliations force us to confront aspects of ourselves we may prefer to ignore.
What Else Are We?
The Anthropocentric Perspective
We are often called “rational animals,” but the definition of reason varies. Reason can be the ability to find effective means to achieve desired ends, whether instinctive needs for survival or created needs characteristic of eternally unsatisfied humans. The human mind reinterprets basic needs, leading to complex behaviors like food acquisition.
Human behavior is distinguished from predetermined animal behavior by its free and undetermined nature.
Zoological Differences
- Humans retain emotional bonds throughout life, while animals maintain family ties only within the same group and sex.
- Human monogamy is compatible with group living, unlike primates who are monogamous but live in flocks with monopolized females.
- Humans cooperate across groups for food, defense, and other needs, maintaining significant relationships beyond immediate social circles.
Humans can distance themselves from and objectify the environment, considering it independently of its non-essential appearances.
Max Scheler’s Perspective
Max Scheler distinguishes between the animal and human worlds. In the animal environment, everything serves the survival of the species. The human world encompasses the absent, the failed, the non-existent, the future, the relevant, and the irrelevant.
Philosophical Differences
Xavier Zubiri describes humans as “animals of realities,” capable of objectifying needs and reinterpreting biological requirements.
Thomas Nagel, in Mortal Questions, sees humans as an interference in the animal environment, not a shared participant.
- Our environment includes the factual, the absent, and the future.
- The human environment constantly changes, while the animal environment remains static.
The Role of Language
Language, the means of life without adjourned reference, drives this constant change. Animal language serves vital species needs, while human language has no fixed content or predefined purpose. It transcends warnings and threats, using abstractions to refer to the past, the future, and even the impossible. It enables discussion, plotting, and meta-language.
Language is our most distinctive feature, even with diverse languages. Humans have the “intention” to speak before possessing the means, as evidenced by children’s eagerness to communicate (Savater).
Language fulfills a social desire, helping us understand and participate in the world. It allows us to express emotions and objectify a shared world.
Sapir and Wharf argue that each language opens a different world, independent realities we inhabit even when absent. However, most content can be translated, highlighting the universal desire to understand and be understood.
Otto Jespersen theorized that language originated from emotional exclamations and rhythmic phrases. The breakthrough came when communication superseded the cry.
Ernest Cassier’s Symbolic Animal
Savater agrees with Ernest Cassier’s assertion in Philosophical Anthropology that man is a symbolic animal.
A symbol is a conventional, learned sign representing an idea, emotion, or wish. It indirectly relates to physical reality, pointing to the mental reality humans inhabit. Myths, religion, philosophy, and science are symbolic systems.
Our human condition makes education crucial. Through education, we learn the symbols that shape our lives and identities.
While our primary reality is symbolic, it’s tempting to believe all reality is symbolic, leading to mere description or explanation. Differentiating between symbolic and non-symbolic realities is essential for sanity.