MOST ESSENTIAL LEARNING COMPETENCY:

• Realize that intersubjectivity requires accepting differences and not imposing

on others (PPT11/12-IIc-6.1)
• Explain that authentic dialogue means accepting others even if they are
different from themselves (PPT11/12-IId-6.3)
• Perform activities that demonstrate an appreciation for the talents of persons
with disabilities and those from the underprivileged sectors of society
(PPT11/12-IIe-6.4)

At the end of the module, you should be able to:

• Explain that authentic dialogue means accepting others even if they are
different from themselves.

• Differentiate between genuine and mere relationships base from Martin

Buber’s I-Thou relation.

• Demonstrate appreciation for the talents of persons with disabilities and those
from the underprivileged sectors society.

Humans have the natural and universal tendency to relate, establish

attachments, and seek close relationships with other people. Our human nature
drives us to reach out to other people and interact with them in meaningful ways. In
this module, we will be learning about human relations or in philosophical terms,
“intersubjectivity.”

Martin Buber is a philosopher who is well known in dealing with human relations
despite being a philosopher in religion. He is also considered to be one of the
greatest minds of the 20th century in the field of education. According to Buber,
human beings possess a two-fold attitude towards the worlds, which is indicated by
the foundational concepts ‘I-It’ (Ich-Es) and ‘I-Thou’ (Ich-Du). The I –Thou relation
stresses the mutual and holistic existence of two entities. It is an encounter of
equals, who recognize each other as such. It is dialogue. Buber argues that the I-
Thou relation lacks structure and content because infinity and universality are at the
basis of the relation. Any sort of preconception, expectation, or systematization
prevents the IThou relation from arising. This happens when two free rational human
beings encounter one another and recognize each other as equals. Then, an infinite
number of meaningful and dynamic situations may take place. Despite the fact that it
is difficult to establish this kind of relationship, Buber argues that it is real and
perceivable. Examples of the I-Thou relation in our day-to-day life are those of; two
lovers, two friends, a teacher and a student.

Basing on the argument of Martin Buber, he believed that the I-Thou relation is real
and perceivable. In other words, I-Thou relation is the relationship between two
human individuals who recognize each other as persons. This means that human
nature not only enables us to recognize the self that defines our individuality, it
also enables us to recognize that other human beings also possess a self. We are
able to relate meaningfully with other human beings because we consider
ourselves as essentially the same. This notion of recognizing the self in the
other is how philosophers define interpersonal relations.

The interaction between the self and the other is related to the philosophical
concept of intersubjectivity, which is the mutual recognition of each other as
persons. It cannot be denied that we interact with other beings in the world, but
some of these beings that we interact with are persons and must be recognized as
such.
Intersubjectivity also carries the meaning of “a unique relationship between
distinct subjects.” It refers to the characteristic of the human person to engage
in a very intimate and personal relationship with others who are different from
him or her but who are also like him or her. This is possible because the person
has an inner life or interiority. Having an inner life allows the person to give himself or
herself to others. This also allows the individual to receive others in his or her life and
relate with them. Intersubjectivity also allows a person to become closer to others in
many different ways. In everyday social interactions, people have the ability to agree
and cooperate with each other. There is also the experience of shared or “common”
knowledge and shared emotions such as grief, joy, and love.
A closer look at everyday interactions reveals instances where the “self“ interacts
with the “other”. Philosophers identify various levels of self-other interaction.
These are:
- First, the simple awareness of the existence of the other.
o When we see other people walking down the street, we are aware that
there are other beings unique from us, and that they exist outside of
our own awareness or perception.
- Second, the awareness of the self as being seen by others.
o Imagine, for instance, that one of the people you are watching suddenly
stops and looks straight at you. You are immediately aware of this
person’s action as an other – this stranger is looking at your direction.
Also, you are aware of another significant fact – you know that the
stranger, staring at you, is aware of you as a person. This
selfconsciousness is considered by philosophers as a defining
characteristic of the self-other relationship.
o Now, imagine that the person is not a stranger but someone familiar; a
family member, a friend, or even your crush. This awareness of the
 person staring at you will initially result in a feeling of self-
consciousness, even shame. In fact, several questions will begin to run
in your head, such as “What is he or she thinking when he or she looks
at me?” “Am I doing something wrong?” “Is there something wrong with
the way I look?” “Is he or she about to say something to me?”

The unique phenomenon of the human gaze is considered a defining

characteristic which sets apart human interaction from the interaction of other
species. Also, the awareness of the “self in the other” is an important element in all
other aspects of interpersonal interactions. The way we act with other people is often
influenced by our ideals of how these people see us. Therefore, if we have the idea
that our parents think of us as quiet and obedient, we often act that way with them.
However, when we are with our friends and we think that they see us as outgoing
and boisterous, we also adjust our behavior to conform with how we think they
expect us to act. This is also true when considering social contexts; how we behave
in church is different from our behavior in a lively party.

These actions are referred to as seeming – where an individual presents

himself nor herself in a certain way when dealing with others. Persons take on “roles”
or act out characters when dealing with certain people or when in certain situations.
This is considered as an unconscious, natural act on the part of humans. However,
there may be instances when people behave a certain way in order to intentionally
deceive or manipulate other people. Surely you have heard of the terms “plastic” and
“sipsip”, which refer to manipulative behaviors that are done by some people in
pursuit of selfish interests.

What characterizes a genuine human interaction?

Most human interactions, however, are not based on deception. Since our
human nature drives us to uphold dignity and goodness, our interactions with others
are also geared toward what is good and beneficial. These lead humans to strive to
achieve deeper and gain more substantial interactions and relations with other
people. This deeper and more genuine interaction is called a dialogue, and this is
made possible when the self realizes that the other is a genuine and unique
individual. When two individuals begin to view each other as an other – that is, truly
acknowledging each other’s presence – then that is the beginning of an authentic
relationship and a dialogue.

A dialogue is an interaction between persons that happens through speech or

the use of words, expressions, and body language. The person is a being who is
open to others, and is capable of receiving others in a dialogue. Ordinarily, we think
of it as a kind of communication that usually occurs through a conversation.
However, it must be noted that a dialogue is not confined to words. Actions, gestures
and other expressions may be used to convey a person’s inner life. Because persons
are beings with inner lives, the words uttered during a dialogue are rooted in each
person’s inner life. Whenever a person speaks, he or she expresses a personal
interiority and communicates this part of himself or herself to another person. This is
the reason why it is not possible to have a dialogue with a material object, a plant, or
even a pet. Only beings with interiority or an inner life can engage in a dialogue.

A person’s words, expressions, and body language become the means by

which he or she is able to express a part of himself or herself to another person.
Apart from expressing and conveying oneself, the person is also capable of receiving
the words, thoughts, emotions, and ideas of another person. The dialogue, therefore,
becomes a means by which persons are able to share in each other’s lives.

The notion of a dialogue becomes clearer when we reflect on the nature of our
conversations with other people. The conversations you have with casual
acquaintances are different from those with people who are closest to you. Casual
conversations with other people often consists of discussing news or occurrences.
We often conduct our normal conversation in this manner. But when we are with
friends and family, we are comfortable discussing more personal issues like goals,
emotional problems, or moral dilemmas. You will not engage a random stranger on
the street in a conversation about whether or not you should give up your ambitions
in life for the welfare of your family. Instead, you will seek out a person whom you
consider most trustworthy and reliable to listen to your thoughts and concerns.

A dialogue occurs when two persons “open up” to each other and give and
receive one another in their encounter. Genuine dialogue occurs when persons are
willing to share themselves with one another. The awareness of each other’s
presence as a true person is defined by the acceptance of each other’s uniqueness
and differences. When each individual enters into a dialogue with this mind set, then
it is truly a dialogue between equals.

Whilst in the I-Thou relation two beings meet and dialogue, in the I-It relation
entities meet but fail to establish a dialogue. Instead, in the I-It relation a being
confronts another being and, by objectifying it, fails to recognize it as an equal. That
is, in the I-It relation an individual being treats things, including people, as objects to
be used and experienced: they are a means to an end. We live in this worldly reality
and require, to some extent, to manipulate nature, e.g. seek resources to fulfil our
needs and sometimes to use people as a means to an end, e.g. take a taxi from A to
B. The I-It relation fulfils our basic needs.

How does intersubjectivity define our interactions with other persons?

Philosophers agree that it is important for humans to pursue and achieve genuine
relationships to attain development. Human persons naturally seek and are able to
achieve and maintain genuine, meaningful relations with each other. The human
person is considered as a being with others, which means that his or her identity and
destiny are shaped by relating with others. Human existence is a continual dialogue
with the other, and that the self becomes whole through interaction with other people
and his or her surroundings.

Aspects of intersubjectivity;
1. Empathy o The ability to share emotions. o This emotion is driven by a
person’s awareness that the other is a person with thoughts and feelings.
o It enables us to experience another person’s emotions, such as
happiness, anger and sadness.

2. Availability o The willingness of a person to be present and be at the

disposal of another.
o Be willing to help the other in need.
o Example: when someone unfamiliar in your place wants to go to a
famous place in your town, he/she may ask directions. Availability tells
that you should help that person since you know your town better than
him or her.

3. Ethics of Care o An ethical theory that emphasizes the moral dimensions of

relationships and interactions.
o This moral perspective encourages individuals to help other people,
most especially the vulnerable.
o The obligation to respond to the needs of other people.

Not all human interactions, however, are positive. There are those who view
other people negatively and consider human action as being influenced by selfish
interests. This pessimistic view considers human relationships frustrating and often
inauthentic or deceptive. A person that adopts this negative view is said to be
experiencing alienation. This arises when a person ceases to view the other as a
distinct and authentic person, and merely considers the other person as a mere
object or a means to satisfy personal interests.