III: Theory Of The Original Human Nature

23. What is the Theory of the Original Human Nature? Why do we need this Theory?

The Theory of the Original Human Nature refers to the original status of mankind before the fall of man. Traditional philosophy has no such field. The true status of man will be a matter of importance when we establish an ideal society in the future and also when we deal with the true view of life. Therefore, philosophy in the future requires the Theory of the Original Human Nature.

24. What is the difference between the Original Nature, essence and existence?

Essence and phenomenon are used as relative concepts. Essence relates to the universal and unchanging quality of a thing (being). On the other hand, the Original Human Nature is used only in the case of mankind and refers to the true reality (both essence and phenomenon are included) of mankind before the fall of man. Existentialism regards realistic and unreasonable man as having lost something and fallen into error, and also maintains that there must be the original self which is called existence. But existentialism does not deal with anything concerning the fall of man, so the original self (existence) is quite different from the Original Nature.

25. What is the relationship between Sung Sang and Hyung Sang in the Original Nature?

The relationship between Sung Sang and Hyung Sang in the Original Nature is that between mind and body, spirit mind and physical mind, and spirit man and physical man. Especially important is the relationship between the spirit mind and the physical mind. The position of the spirit mind, as subject, is to pursue and realize the values of truth, goodness, beauty and love. The role of the physical mind, as object, is to control the instinctive desires for food, clothing, shelter, and sex. Since the object is to obey the subject, the original way of life dictates that a life of value should precede that of food, clothing, and shelter. In the restored original world, we will truly be able to live this way of life.

26. What is the relationship between positivity and negativity in the Theory of the Original Human Nature?

The relationship between positivity and negativity in the Theory of the Original Human Nature is that between man and woman, and husband and wife. Each man and woman are only parts of wholes, so they can become the perfect whole only when both are united into one. Man is the encapsulation of all the positive things in the cosmos and is their representative, and woman is the encapsulation of all the negative things in the cosmos and represents them, Man represents all men and woman represents all women. So, the union of man and woman means the perfection of the cosmos and also the realization of perfect human society. Therefore, this union has cosmic value. In the union between man and woman, not only the harmony of positivity and negativity but also the norm of the Logos is established and maintained as well.

27. What is the meaning of individuality in the Theory of the Original Human Nature?

Individuality, as an innate quality, reflects an Individual Image of God, so it must be respected. To ignore this individuality means to profane the Divine Image of God. Therefore, individuality in the society of the future will necessarily have to be respected as an original human nature.

28. What is the Object Position? What is its necessity?

Man who reflects the Original Image, is first the object of God. Secondly, man is a connected body which exists either as subject or as object. Man was created to be the object of God first of all, so he has an innate tendency to live for the subject. Therefore, it is man’s original attitude that he wants to have object consciousness and object position. In today’s democratic societies, object consciousness is small. We must reflect on this.

29. What is the Subject Position? What is its necessity?

Man was created to be the subject who dominates all things. Also, in human relationships man, as a connected body, has a subject position to disciples or inferiors in some responsible field. The subject dominates the object by means of love, so the subject must have a heartistic and value oriented attitude. Today, science and technology have made progress without such an attitude, and because of this man is losing his subjectivity as a dominator. So it is absolutely necessary to establish the heartistic view of value in order to restore his subjectivity.

30. What is true democracy from the viewpoint of the Theory of the Original Human Nature?

The idea of the people’s sovereignty and of the equality of right in democracy has neither scientific ground nor historical proof. It is just a simple human request, which results from an ideal which man has. Now, right is exercised only in terms of position, and therefore the equality of right means the equality of position.

Man’s ideal is simply a desire of realizing purpose. From the viewpoint of the Divine Principle the purpose is what we call the purpose of creation. So the ideal is to realize the purpose of creation, namely, to establish the families and the world which reflect the Original Image of God. These families and the world are based upon love and order. Order means a rank of positions, namely, the difference of rights.

This is why we cannot accept the appropriateness of the idea of the equality of right. Equality should not be the equality of right, but the equality of personality and the equality of love. Therefore, the true democracy is democracy of love and also democracy of personality. (In democracy of personality, the equality of vote can automatically be enjoyed.)

31. What is Being with Heart?

The most essential aspect of the Original Image of God is Heart. Therefore, in the case of man too, Heart is superior to reason and will. Heart is the starting point of love and love is the source of life. Life is the motive power of development. So, in order for families, nations and the world to enjoy peace, prosperity and development, Heart and love should precede knowledge.

32. What is Being of Logos?

Man (and all things as well) was created by the “Logos”. So, just as the natural world moves based upon laws, man has an innate tendency of living based upon norm (rule).

While man grows from childhood, he can be taught the correct Heavenly rule. And he becomes a being with norm in the sense of becoming the substance of the Word, and can observe a certain law (family law, national law, heavenly law).

33. What is Being with Creativity?

Man was endowed with the creativity of God, so man is to dominate all things by means of Heart (love). Creativity means creative ability by which man develops various creative activities. All those activities, for example, to deal with material creatively in industry and research, are creative activities and also dominion. Because of the fall of man, man has been, without love, dominating all things for selfish purposes up to the present day. So, all things have been sorrowful and men have been continuously fighting against one another. It is because of such non-principled dominion that the problem of diminishing resources has come about today. Resources are to be managed cooperatively and internationally. For this, dominion through love should be realized.

34. Summarize Kierkegaard’s existentialism simply and criticize one of his most important points from the viewpoint of Divine Principle.

(Summary)

He deplored the “leveling” and the “public” of man. He maintained that in order for man to escape from anxiety and despair, he, as an “individual” (Einzelheit), has to pass through first the Aesthetic Stage, next the Ethical Stage and lastly the Religious Stage, in which stage he meets with God. But in order for him to enter into the Religious Stage, he must believe what he cannot understand with reason. This is called the process of the paradoxical dialectic.

(Critique)

In the sinful world, we must go the way of indemnity individually in order to come before God. So it is natural that each of us, as an individual, should seek the original self. But this individual must bear not only his (or her) own problems but also the problems of all mankind. After having met with God, we can be completely liberated from anxiety and despair, not by being sinful individuals, but by having the relationship with God as His children, and the relationship with many other people as brothers and sisters, namely by establishing family relationships. Kierkegaard did not understand this.

35. Explain and criticize Nietzsche’s “Superman” and his view of value simply.

Nietzsche views that faith rather than lack of faith in God causes the ”leveling,” “miniaturization” and “averaging” of man. And in order to magnify man, he declares “the death of God.” He respects the physical body more than spirit, life more than love, and instinct more than reason. He advocates the idea of “morality as nature,” that goodness is to live as life and physical body desire. He advocates the concept of “Superman” (Ubermensch) as the strongest and greatest man that can live this type of life in the most perfect way.

But, since the essence of life itself (if without love) is exclusive, the Ideal of “Superman” cannot go beyond an imaginary being and in reality we cannot avoid the conflict and confusion which will come about between living beings. It was a false god that Nietzsche killed. He should have sought the true God. He should have set up the true love based upon Heart as the standard of ethics and the standard of value. For life can make harmony only when it grows based upon love.

36. What is Jaspers’ “Limit Situation” (Grenzsituation)? How is the existence understood?

Man, as a possible existence, is always linked to the situations around him. When the situation becomes extremely unfavorable, this is called a limit situation. Take the examples of death (Tod), trouble (Lerden), strife (Kamph), the guilt of sin (Schuld), etc. In these limit situations, knowledge is of no use and man has to face frustration (Scheitern). And suddenly the Transcendental expresses itself in the “cipher (chiffre) of frustration.” At this moment the tie of the self with the Transcendental can be found and he is aware of this to be his Existence. This is the clarification of existence (Existenzerhellung).

The cipher is the symbolic expression of the Word of the Transcendental and actually is referring to nature, history, philosophy, theology, mythology, works of art and so on. Namely, when they are symbolically manifested these become different from what they were before. After the clarification of existence, the new features of nature, philosophy, works of art and so on turn out to be the symbol of the Word of the Transcendental who has appeared to man.

37. Simply criticize and conquer the summary of Jaspers’ philosophy.

(1) Jaspers cannot clarify why man is a possible existence and why he is to cope with limit situations. According to the Divine Principle, man fell. So, man becomes a possible existence in the course of restoring the original self before the fall of man, and he should set up a painful condition either consciously or unconsciously based upon the principle of restoration through indemnity. That is the experience under a limit situation.

(2) Jaspers cannot clarify why the existence is understood (linked to the Transcendental) only in the midst of tremendous frustration. According to the Divine Principle, the limit situation is the situation in which all the attachments (relations) to the secular world are broken off. And this is where man, even unconsciously, expects to have a relationship with something new. So, the Transcendental expresses itself in “cipher.” This is based upon the principle that where complete minus is formed, complete plus appears.

(3) But merely having communication with God cannot mean that the existence itself was completely understood. Rather, only the fact that the existence (the original self) has a relationship with the Transcendental was understood. In order for the existence to be understood completely, the attributes of the Transcendental which is the source of the existence and also the purpose of man’s and all things’ existing should be clarified. Only the Divine Principle makes this possible. Accordingly, the true existence of man is the original man before the fall.

38. What are Heidegger’s anxiety (Angst) and concern (Sorge)?

Dasein is thrown out (geworfen) in this world like a die as being-in-the-world (In-der-Weld-sein). After knowing the fact of being thrown out like a die (Geworfenheit), Dasein projects his self toward the possibility of the future. Here anxiety (Angst) comes about. The reason is because he exists with concern (Sorge). If he investigates his being with concern, he knows that he “has already been in” (Schon-sein-in) the world, that he “is by” (Sein-bei) the other things, and that he “is ahead of himself” (Sich-vorweg-sein). In other words, Dasein always has a united concern about these three aspects. So, he is always to live with anxiety. According to Heidegger, the opportunity (situation) which can allow the appearance of anxiety is concern, but the cause of anxiety is not clear.

39. Simply criticize and conquer Heidegger’s theory on anxiety and concern.

Every phenomenon must have its cause. Anxiety thus must have not only a situation which can allow its appearance but also its cause. And why man projects his self with concern is not clarified. According to the Divine Principle, anxiety results from the fact that, because of the fall of man, he lost his original position which is the place of order and love, that is, his original world. Since concern itself is for the cognition of nature and the social environment, it cannot be the opportunity of anxiety. To project one’s self (Entwerfenheit) is for the practice of life, that is, the dominion over all things. So, Entwerfenheit cannot be the opportunity of anxiety, either. Man came to live in the sinful and painful world because of the fall of man, so concern and Entwerfenheit seem to be the opportunity of anxiety.

40. What is Heidegger’s temporality (historicity)?

It is the fact of Geworfenheit in the past, namely, “factuality” (Faktizittit) that “Being” of Dasein as “being-in-the-world,” “has alreadybeen in” (Schon-sein-in) the world. It isthe secular “being” of the present time, namely “decadence” (Verfal) that Dasein “is by” (Sein-bei) the other things. It is “being” toward the possibility of the future that Dasein “is ahead of itself” (Sich-vorweg-sein). In this manner, Dasein accepts the fact of Geworfenheit of the past as it is, and escapes from decadence (Verfal) of the present, and projects itself toward the possibility of the future (original self). Dasein has concern for these things and this is temporality of concern. Therefore, Heidegger’s time is not every-day time which means simple continuity of time, but historical time in which Dasein inherits the problems of the past (inheritance), escapes from the decadence of the present time and projects toward the future in which the original self can be attained. Therefore, temporality of Heidegger’s concern is historicity.

41. Simply criticize and conquer Heidegger’s historical time.

Heidegger does not clarify why Dasein has to inherit the inheritance of the past which he does not want, nor why he has to project his self without fail toward the possibility of the future. That is to say, the reason why time has historicity is not clarified.

According to the Divine Principle, because of the human fall, man, who fell into the sinful and painful world, is destined to restore the original world and the original man (the original self) before the fall of man. And man has been struggling to restore the original world and the original self, as a method of realizing the ideal. Man tried his best to fulfill during his generation the responsibility of restoration which had been transmitted like a baton from his predecessors. But he handed his baton to the next generation and fell down. In this manner, in order to fulfill the responsibility on his shoulders, Dasein has to receive the inheritance of the past and project his self toward the future. In this sense, man is different from other living beings, and man’s time has historicity.

42. What are nullification (nentisation) of consciousness and freedom (libert6) according to Sartre?

Sartre regards it as nullification (nentisation) of consciousness that man’s consciousness which is a “being for self” (etre pour soi), becomes aware that all things (being in itself = C-tre en soi) and other people are different from his self. It is also nullification that he is conscious of objects (all things); that he thinks of his past and future; that he, as an object, faces other people (etre pour autrui); that he reconstructs (or reforms) or develops things. Nullification means negation, but it is so-called freedom. This is because the direction of nullification depends upon the decision of consciousness. Anxiety results from this freedom, and not only anxiety but also man’s action results from freedom. This is the fundamental condition for free action.

43. What are Sartre’s existence and subjectivity (subjectivite)?

Since man is free, he can choose anything. So he himself decides his own destiny, that is, the content and way of his life. And he is the subject of his actions. In other words, man’s existence (his original self) is subjectivity. In the case of tools, essence precedes existence (in the sense that the purpose of a tool precedes its existence), but in the case of man, existence precedes essence. In other words, man was given from the beginning neither the oughtness that he should live in a specific way nor the inevitability that he was destined to live in a certain way. (Essence does not precede existence). And he, as a preceding subject, grows and decides his own destiny and his own job to do. Thus, existence decides essence.

44. Criticize and conquer Sartre’s subjectivity.

Satre’s subjectivity is just an idealistic concept. In reality we can neither establish nor maintain this subjectivity, because in order for the subjectivity of a person who has a relationship with another person to be established, the latter should be an object of the former. However, this is logically impossible, because, according to Sartre’s principle, the latter must also want to establish his subjectivity. If he is unable to do this, he wants to go out of sight of the former because he does not like to be treated as a “being in itself” or a being of accidental chance. Both cases prevent the latter from being an object of the former.

According to the Divine Principle, subject and subject engage in conflict with each other and repel each other. Subject and object have smooth give-and-take action and form harmony with each other. Therefore, Sartre’s proposition that existence is subjectivity should be replaced by the proposition that existence is unity of subjectivity arid objectivity.