From your post, it appears that there is a deep connection between love and humanity. Would you agree that loving affirms something about humanity, that it is a sort of constitute to humanity and “personhood”? On another note, I want to acknowledge how much I appreciate your eloquent activism on behalf of teenagers like us.
Hey Kiara! Thanks for reading and your kind words! Yes, I definitely believe there is a deep connection between love and humanity. I'd argue--like Saint Augustine and Dostoevsky--that humans are fundamentally loving beings motivated by their hearts' deepest desires, not reason. Could you elaborate on what you mean by love as a "constitute to humanity and 'personhood?'"
I mean that the act of give and receiving love vitalizes our personhood, hence why the term “inhumane” is applied to atrociously unloving deeds. The modern conception of personhood is the locus in cognition and factulties (ie cognito, ergo sum). Thus, the left argues, abortion is morally sound since the fetus isn’t really a person yet—it can’t will or think rationally. Ultimately, this line of thinking has far deeper reaching consequences, though. What about the mentally disabled? Are they now subhuman? John Green in his book Turtle All the Way Down writes from the perspective of a girl with a disabling anxiety disorder. Aza suffers from feeling subhuman because she isn’t always in control of her thoughts and actions. But by the end of the book, she comes to appreciate that her personhood is most enlivened when “going into the meadow”, or have true, heart-felt communion with those that are closest with her. I thought I saw a sort of Aza narrative in your post, but not full developed yet. Do you agree with this definition of personhood? Or would you nuance it in any way?
Yes, I would agree with that as I think Dostoevsky would too. Also, as a Christian, I believe that love binds us to God. God is, in fact, love itself. Furthermore, because God is love and controls the worlds, Love maintains the universe. By loving someone, we bind ourselves to something greater and eternal. So, rather than love being merely a completion of our personhood, it is also an engagement in a divine order.
This idea is not my own. My thoughts on this have been heavily shaped by Augustine, Dante, Boethius, and--of course--Dostoevsky. They express this concept much more elegantly than me, especially Boethius and Augustine.
I highly recommend anyone who's interested in this read "Confessions" and "Consolation of Philosophy." Boethius in "Consolation of Philosophy" engages with many of the ideas championed by Augustine so read "Confessions" first to see all the parallels.
From your post, it appears that there is a deep connection between love and humanity. Would you agree that loving affirms something about humanity, that it is a sort of constitute to humanity and “personhood”? On another note, I want to acknowledge how much I appreciate your eloquent activism on behalf of teenagers like us.
Hey Kiara! Thanks for reading and your kind words! Yes, I definitely believe there is a deep connection between love and humanity. I'd argue--like Saint Augustine and Dostoevsky--that humans are fundamentally loving beings motivated by their hearts' deepest desires, not reason. Could you elaborate on what you mean by love as a "constitute to humanity and 'personhood?'"
I mean that the act of give and receiving love vitalizes our personhood, hence why the term “inhumane” is applied to atrociously unloving deeds. The modern conception of personhood is the locus in cognition and factulties (ie cognito, ergo sum). Thus, the left argues, abortion is morally sound since the fetus isn’t really a person yet—it can’t will or think rationally. Ultimately, this line of thinking has far deeper reaching consequences, though. What about the mentally disabled? Are they now subhuman? John Green in his book Turtle All the Way Down writes from the perspective of a girl with a disabling anxiety disorder. Aza suffers from feeling subhuman because she isn’t always in control of her thoughts and actions. But by the end of the book, she comes to appreciate that her personhood is most enlivened when “going into the meadow”, or have true, heart-felt communion with those that are closest with her. I thought I saw a sort of Aza narrative in your post, but not full developed yet. Do you agree with this definition of personhood? Or would you nuance it in any way?
Yes, I would agree with that as I think Dostoevsky would too. Also, as a Christian, I believe that love binds us to God. God is, in fact, love itself. Furthermore, because God is love and controls the worlds, Love maintains the universe. By loving someone, we bind ourselves to something greater and eternal. So, rather than love being merely a completion of our personhood, it is also an engagement in a divine order.
This idea is not my own. My thoughts on this have been heavily shaped by Augustine, Dante, Boethius, and--of course--Dostoevsky. They express this concept much more elegantly than me, especially Boethius and Augustine.
I highly recommend anyone who's interested in this read "Confessions" and "Consolation of Philosophy." Boethius in "Consolation of Philosophy" engages with many of the ideas championed by Augustine so read "Confessions" first to see all the parallels.
Is the “Consolation of Philosophy” brought up in TGC? Just curious because if not I would consider studying it myself.
That's the one!