The Individual and the Person: A Prolegomena

Last updated on: April 19, 2017 at 10:40 pm by voxnovablog

The Individual and the Person: A Prolegomena 2017-04-19T22:40:55-05:00 voxnovablog

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

Readers familiar with the contents and themes of Vox Nova will recognize that oftentimes what rests at the heart of many of its postings is a concern for an authentic understanding of personhood, an understanding of the human being that is resistant to the notion of individualism that governs so much of the present age’s social thinking. Put simply, it strikes me that a great number of contributors capitalize on the distinction between ‘individual’ and the ‘person’ in order to make their arguments. To help substantiate and buttress my collaborators’ arguments I intend to sketch out in only a cursory form the basic contours of this distinction from a Thomistic perspective–lest I be accused of being infected with modernism. This is hardly a novel enterprise since the entire Catholic intellectual tradition faithfully records such a distinction and has more recently given renewed expression to it in the form of Jacques Maritain’s The Person and the Common Good. To articulate clearly the distinction between the person and the individual that I have in mind, I must first venture, for better or for worse, into metaphysical terrain. But such a discussion cannot remain indefinitely in the thin atmosphere of metaphysical speculations so vital to the human spirit, for man is also animal whose flesh must be sustained through the concrete nurturing of the world. Though the distinction between the ‘individual’ and the ‘person’ has its basis within a metaphysical framework, its consequences reach beyond to the practical circumstances that affect deeply and existentially man’s sociality.

The Individual

In drawing out the nature and implications of the distinction between ‘individual’ and the ‘person,’ I should make clear that what is at issue is not a distinction between two different ‘things.’ It is not as if a particular human being is composed of personhood over and against his individuality, the two entering into composition producing a haphazard and tenuous unity. Quite the contrary, to be a person is to be an individual—but, we note well, the converse does not hold. We thus find Thomas following Boethius to a certain degree when the former maintains that a person is a subsistent individual of a rational nature (cf. Summa theologiae I, q. 29, a. 3). As Thomas sees it, then, to be a person is to be a certain kind of individual, namely, one of a subsistent rational nature. ‘Individuality’ does not designate something other than or opposed to personhood but rather is the necessary, unifying condition for the ontological possibility of personhood. That is, only individuals—be they persons or not—exist.

The utter uniqueness and transcendental value of persons begins to emerge, however, when one considers their unique kind of individuality over and against that which one encounters in the natural world. In nature, one often (if not always) finds its to be the case that an individual is subordinated to, and for the sake of, its species. A plant grows only to produce seeds so that they may propagate more plants of the same species; some insects hatch and, having literally only hours to live, rush to mate securing the future of the species; and in the Hellenistic world, for which the notion of personhood was absent, the individual human being was only understood as a part of civil society. Accordingly, the good of the state was seen to be superior to the good of the individual. It’s not too much of a stretch, then, to regard the individual in terms of a part, part of species, collective, or even state. As such, a part is always directed to the good of the whole, even if the good and very existence of the part must be sacrificed.

The Person

With the emergence of the Christian conception of the person, however, individuality vis-à-vis human personhood undergoes a considerable metamorphosis. For now, though the human person continues to be understood as an individual and therefore a member of the species ‘rational animal,’ through the creative act, that individuality is consecrated and elevated to sublime height in which man is posited man in such a unique relation to the divine that he now bears within himself the imago Dei. But, as Thomas explains (cf. ST I-II, prologus) to be created in the image of God is precisely to be endowed with reason, will, and, consequently, the capacity to love—hence the second part of the original Boethian definition of ‘person.’ No other individual within the material realm of creation possesses such a unique rational nature, and it is the uniqueness of that nature which elevates the individuality of the human person to a new degree of sublimity and dignity. Thomas writes, “[I]n a more special and perfect way, the particular and the individual are found in the rational substances which have dominion over their own actions; and which are not only made to act, like others; but which can act of themselves…” (ST I, q. 29, a. 1).

Because human persons are individuals possessing reason and will, they are spiritual centers of self-consciousness that can act with the power of self-determination and, through love, give themselves over to another person through an act of self-donation. Accordingly, a person is constituted as an end in itself, whose self-determining actions proceed from, but ultimately reflect back upon, itself. Thomas tells us, “Intellectual creatures [i.e., persons] are ruled by God as though He cared for them for their own sake, while other creatures are ruled as being directed to rational creatures…. Therefore the intellectual nature alone is requisite for its own sake in the universe, and all others for its sake” (Summa contra gentiles III, c. 112). With personhood, then, we reach the climactic pinnacle of the creative act—“Person signifies what is most perfect in all nature…” (ST I, q. 29, a. 3)—nothing else is so ordained for its own sake. The whole of material creation is created not as its own end but to for the sake of man and, ultimately through man as its responsible steward, to God. In contrast, man is created for his own sake, that is, for the perfection of his rational nature. But since that rational nature can only be perfected through universal truth (the perfection of the intellect) and universal goodness (the perfection of the will) man can only find his own ultimate end in the beatific vision, wherein he enters into a kind of personal unity with God.

And yet, just as grace does not take away nature but perfects it, so too one must understand that personhood does not take away individuality but perfects. That is, a person, though rendered utterly unique on account of his rational nature and directed to God as his ultimate end, remains an individual. ‘Individuality’ is not something contrary or opposed to personhood, rather personhood is the sacramental consummation of the individual within the creative plan. Thomas points out, “The rational soul is capable of perpetuity, not only in respect of the species, like other creatures, but also in respect of the individual… Rational creatures alone are directed by God to their actions for the sake, not only of the species, but also of the individual… Rational creatures alone are directed to God” (Summa contra gentiles III, c. 113). Here we arrive at a locus of tension: a human being is at one and the same time an individual, a member of a species who enters into community and subordination to that species, but also a person possessed of reason and self-determination having as its supernatural end and destiny the divine. This tension certainly cannot be assuaged through an appeal to the natural order for it can only find its resolution within the mystery of the Holy Trinity. Still, this tension, or perhaps better put, ‘dialectic’ is certainly played out within nature, within man’s natural disposition toward sociality.

At the very least, I hope that the present discussion has prepared us adequately to appreciate the moral and social implications that I shall point out as following directly from the distinction between ‘individual’ and ‘person.’ That is why I have entitled the present posting “prolegomena,” the metaphysical foreword to the socio-political. I hope to get to that posting soon in which I shall be able to bring the present posting to a conclusion while simultaneously resolving the paradox of self-giving in the mystery of the Holy Trinity, the theme of an earlier posting that I began earlier with respect to Karol Wojtyła. Given the absolute madness of my life at present, however, I can make no promise that my understanding of “soon” will be in any way conventional.

Anxietas

Personalism

Philosophy

Previous Post

June 2, 2007

More on Brownback and Evolution

Next Post

June 4, 2007 Ready, aim . . .

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category 2019 A Consistent Ethic of Life Aaron Weldon Abortion absurdity Abuse Scandal Academics Adoption Advent Africa agreement/disagreement with Church teaching Alexander Schmemann Alexham Alterity America Amnesty International Anarchism angels Anglicanism Animals Annual Statistics Anthony Anxietas Apocalyptic Apophatic Appalachia Aquinas Art Atheism Atonement Augustine Authority Baptism Beauty Bible biblical criticism biblical scholarship Bioethics Bishops Black Catholics Black Theology Blackadder Blogs Books Breastfeeding Brett Salkeld Buddhism Bush administration Byzantine Catholic Calvinism Canada Canon Law Capital Punishment Capitalism Caryll Houselander Catholic Blog Awards Catholic Blogging Catholic League Catholic Social Teaching Catholic Worker Movement Catholicity CFL Charity Children Chris West Christ and Culture Christian Democracy Christian Unity Christmas Christology Church Church Doctrine Church History Climate Change Cohabitation Colbert Collegiality Communion Communism Comparative Theology Competition Conferences conscience conscience rights Consequentialism Consistent Life Ethics Consumerism Contraception Contrition Conversion Converts Coptic COVID-19 Creation Critical Thinking Cross Cuba Culture Culture of Death Culture of Life Darfur David Cruz-Uribe David Wheeler-Reed Death Death Penalty Democracy Demons Desert Fathers Devil Dialogue dignity Disability Disarmament discernment Discipleship discrimination Dissent Distributism Division Doctrine Domestic Church Dorothy Day Double Effect Doubt Down syndrome Driving Early Church Easter Eastern Churches Ecclesiology Economics Economy Ecumenism Education El Salvador Election Election 2020 Ellul Embryonic Stem Cell Research Empire Energy Enlighenment Environmentalism Ephraim Radner Episcopal Church epistemology Equality Eschatology Ethics Eucharist Europe Euthanasia Evangelization Evil Evolution Excommunication F.X. Durrwell Facism Facts Fair Trade Faith Family Fashion Feddie Feminism Feminist theology Fertility Fetal Rights Fiction Film Finances First Things flags Folk Religion Food Foreign Affairs Forgiveness Frank Sheed Free Speech Freedom gay & lesbian persons Genocide George W. Bush George Weigel Gerald L. Campbell Girard/Mimetic Theory Global Warming Globalization Gnosticism Good Friday Grace Gratitude Greed Grey Cup 2009 Guadalupe Guest Post Guest Posts Gun Control Gustave Martelet Habitat for Humanity Hans Urs von Balthasar Harry Potter Hate Speech Health Health Care Healthcare Heather King Hebrew Bible Henri de Lubac Henry Karlson Herbert McCabe Heresy HHS Mandate Controversy History Holidays Holiness Holy Spirit Homiletics Homily Homosexuality Hope Hospitality How Far Can We Go? How Far Can We Go? Human Person Human Rights Humanae Vitae Humility Humor Hunger Hunting Identity Idolatry Ignacio Ellacuría Imagination Immigration In Memoriam Income Inequality Inculturation Indigenous People Individualism Inklings Intellect Interdependence Internet Interpretation Interviews Introduction Iraq War Islam Israel Jain James Alison James Martin Jazz Jesus Christ Jews Joe Biden Joe Hargrave Johann Baptist Metz John Allen John Henry Newman John Paul II John the Baptist John XXIII Jonathan Josef Pieper Joseph (the husband of Mary) Joseph Bernardin Joseph Ratzinger Josh Brumfield Journals Joy Judgment Just War Justice Kari Lundgren Karl Rahner Katerina Ivanovna Kenya Keynes Kingdom of God Kyle R. Cupp Labor Language Latin America Law Leanne Ogasawara Legion of Christ Leisure Lent Liberalism Liberation Theology Libertarianism Libya Lies Life life & dignity & responsibility of the human person Literature Little Way Liturgical music Liturgical Year Liturgy Living Simply Living Wage Local Church Lombard Lord of the Rings Louis Dupre Love M.Z. Magic Magisterium Mark DeFrancisis Mark Gordon Marriage Martin Luther Martin Luther King Jr. Martyrdom Marxism Mary Masculinity Matt Talbot Matthew Fish Matthew Levering McCain Media Memorial Day Mennonites Mental Illness mercy Michael Iafrate Middle East militarism Miroslav Volf Mitt Romney Modesty Moral Theology Morality Mormonism Morning's Minion Mother Teresa Music Muslims Natalie Nate Wildermuth Nationalism Native Americans Nature Nazis Neuhaus New Evangelization New York City News NFP nihilism Nonviolence Not Abortion Nova's Ordo Nuclear weapons Nuns Obama Occult Old Age Opus Dei Ordination ordination of women original sin Orthodoxy Oscar Romero Other Voices Pacifism Palestine Palin Papacy Papal Peace Messages Papal Social Encyclicals Particular Affections Partisanship Patriotism Paul Paul Ryan Paul VI Peace Pentimento persecution Personalism Phantastes Philosophy PKD Planned Parenthood Pluralism Poetry Policraticus Politcal Apathy Politics Poll Pope Benedict XVI Pope Francis Pope John Paul II Pope Leo XIV Population Postcolonialsim Poverty Power Prayer Preaching Predictions Predictions for 2012 President Barack Obama priestly formation & discernment Pro-Life Progress Prophetic Witness Proportionalism Public Diplomacy Public Policy Question Quotes Rachel Maddow Racism Radical Catholic Mom Radical Catholicism Raymund Schwager Real Catholic TV Real Presence Reconciliation Reginald Garrigou-Lagrange Religion religious freedom Responsibility Ressourcement Resurrection Rick Garnett Ridiculous Crap You Never Thought You'd See Robert Barron Roe v. Wade Roman Curia Rome Russia Sacraments Saints Salvation History Sam Harris Sam Rocha Same-sex Marriage Saskatchewan Roughriders Satire School of the Americas Science Scripture Seamless Garment Second Vatican Council Seeing Sex sexual violence Sexuality Sia Sin social justice Social Security Socialism Society of Jesus Sofia Loves Wisdom Solidarity Sophia soteriology Soutenus Spirituality Sports St. Dismas St. Joseph Stanley Hauerwas Statistics Stimulus Suffering Sunday Reflections Supernatural Supreme Court Symbolism Syria Taxing Technology Terrorism The State The Tea Party The Trump Administration Theological Anthropology Theology Theotokos Thomas Merton Throwaway Culture Tim Muldoon Tim Riley Tim Tebow Time Titian Tolkien Torture Toys Trade Traditionalism Transgender Transportation Transubstantiation Trinity Truth TV U.S. Affairs Uncategorized Unions unity among people who disagree US Catholicism USCCB Usury Utilitarianism Utopia Valentine's Day Vatican Vatican II Veterans Vicarious Suffering Video Violence Virgin Mary Vocations Voluntary Associations Voluntary Poverty Voting Vox Nova vox nova blog war War and Peace War Strategy Wealth Weirdness Welfare state Women Women Priests Work Woundedness Youth

Select a Month June 2026 May 2025 February 2025 January 2025 July 2024 May 2024 April 2024 March 2024 February 2024 January 2024 December 2023 July 2023 March 2023 January 2023 December 2022 November 2022 October 2022 September 2022 August 2022 July 2022 June 2022 November 2021 September 2021 July 2021 June 2021 May 2021 April 2021 February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 October 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 June 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 February 2010 January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

What is the key message of Proverbs about how to live?

Select your answer to see how you score.

Seek power Pursue wisdom Amass riches Win battles