Janzl B. Ong / AB Philosophy 2-1 Ethics / / Mr.

Bolaos

The Hermeneutic of The Subject

Right after reading the text, all I said was: There was nothing new. I was not amazed by the context, rather, I was happy, for I was able to read and to grasp that there is already a specific writing about this. Epimeleia heatuo, which is in Greek that means to concern oneself. I was not surprised about this, for even before reading the text, I was actually applying this to my life, and I was surprised that somehow, how I live my life is good, as what the text justifies. It is evident that the concern to oneself is directly related to knowing oneself. As in antiquity, this was taught and manifested by Socrates. His teachings was so productive that by teaching one person to turn back and acknowledge and take care of themselves, it turns out that they would do good even to their society. So as Gregory of Nyssa, that says in order to rediscover the effigy of God imprinted in our soul and that the body has covered with grime, one must take care of oneself. We could say then, that to take care of oneself , indicates that we need the knowledge that we should take care of ourselves, and from this knowledge, practice must come out. One can ascertain that the care of oneself not just a principle, but a constant practice. As I have said earlier, before I read this topic, I was actually doing this even though I did not know the principle. Personally, I knew that the best things that I have is myself, that I should take care of my self. This is a large example, of the knowledge needed before going into practice. In the text, it was said that attending to oneself is not just a momentary preparation for living, but it is the actual form of living. One must first attend to himself, before he can attend to others and be productive. This is what I am doing with my life; I take care of myself, so that I could be productive in my own ways. As what I have read from the internet, but I forgot who the philosopher that gave out this quote: One cannot give what one does not have. It is inevitable then, that one must take care of himself, and to attend to himself.

The text says that from attending to oneself, one somehow becomes a teacher to himself. One learns criticality, which is the practice that get rids of the bad things in ones life, even bad ideas, that could be attended through unlearning- somehow connected to Taoism, learning through non-learning, which I also apply in my life. Also; ones struggle, which means that one needs the courage to fight in a battlefield for change. This change then is somehow equated with medicine that has therapeutic function; for the curing and betterment of ones soul. Even antiquity speaks on this i.e. cynics, Pythagoreans; philosophy is the greatest purge for the soul. It is just simple and basic, actually this could be summarized through one word; philosophizing. By philosophizing and rationalizing, one could attend to himself in the sense that he filters every thing in time, wether past, present, but most of all the future. In the text then, I am not with the author in the sense that I dont agree with him saying that: One could not attend to oneself without the help of another which means that there is a need for a helping hand. In my perspective, I can say that one couldnt think to attend and help oneself without external factors, such as dominant ideas that could influence one which could trigger change into a mans heart. But to say that no one was strong enough to get on his own out of the state of stultitia, that I condemn, for Ive done it, through constant meditation, and selfishness. I could not directly react to the text or to Michel Foucault, if I was not mistaken, because I admit that I still dont have enough readings on him. But just as a mere comprehension on the text, he just made a step-by-step process; to listen, to write, and the importance of habitual reflection and meditation. Overall, I agree on him that we really need to attend to oneself, plus the facts that through contemplating we could really negate the bad things that could hurt us, such as death. Above, Ive emphasized the word selfishness. Personally, I admit that I am selfish, but this selfishness is somehow different to the conventional notion of it. It is not even equal to what the sophists term as that the greatest good is pleasure, or being a hedonist. But what I actually apply is that I am selfish, in the sense that what I do,and before I act, passes through meditation, reflecting and contemplating, to an end that it would be beneficial for my self. Actually, I do not know why some people dont accept this fact, that they wont do things that would harm them, in a sense, selfishness. This selfishness however, does not negate social relations, that I dont care

to what other people say anymore, for before my acts were done, they are the first question that passes through my mind; what would other people feel, and so I could say that if a thing harms other people, or is a bad thing for other people, this would then mean that it would be bad for me, but still, it is subjugated to the idea that what I do must me beneficial to me. In relatio n to the text, as what I had comprehended, all the things then, must pass through contemplative factors. Epimeleia heatuo. Now I know that I am really attending to myself. Ive comprehended the text, and as a conclusion I could say that people must not take this concept as mere selfishness, for in a larger scale, attending to oneself also mean to attend to others, respectively. As what the title indicates, Hermeneutic, people must interpret things, in order to negate the bad ones and get rid of them, and in another way around, see the good sides, apply them, to attain a change; which is a change for the better, not for the worse.