Społeczna natura człowieka a istota społeczeństwa

Abstract

The author takes up the problem - which has been discusseti lately - of the distinction between the individuality and personality of man and of the meaning of this distinction for interpreting the social nature of man and his role in society. He begins by drawing attention to a number of misunderstanldings which arose among those who dealt with the problem. The reason for this was either their misconception of the distinction between individuum and the person, or their misconception of the idea of the individuum, or, finally, their mixing up of the three different ways of thinking: metaphysical, ethical, and sociological. An analysis of the social nature of man is preceeded by a reminder of the well known thesis of thomistic philosophy. Thus the author points out the realism and pluralism of this systhem and draws attention to the thomistic idea of „universum" and the part of man in universo, The fact that man links the material and spiritual world, as he is both material and spiritual, results in his being the only spiritual being of which no unit exhausts its result, materia quantitate signata is here the principle for individualising. As a resuit, individual human beings aim in their activities at the same goods and they obtain in the same way these goods and their own perfection. Thus the importance and even necessity arises to live in a society, though this is not the main reason for man's social living. The reason for social living is to be looked for in the way itself, by which man attains his ends, and in the fact that he realises his ends as a person. Owing to his personality man is able to realise his ends with other people and to achieve his own perfection as well as to build a social reality. It is for this reason that thè social life of man is different from the collective living of beings of different species and from the „functioning" of communities of animais of the same species. Hence, if one understands, that within his specie man is always an individual, he will see, why man forms relationships with other people and achieves his social aims. And through the idea of personality one can see, how man creates social life and what is his attitude to society. The author considers the social nature of man in order to make comprehensible the idea of the essence of society according to the Thomistic view. He analyses each element of the definition of society given by St. Thomas (adunatio hominum ad unum aliquid communiter agendum) stressing above all the dynamie feature of the Thomistic conception of society. He points to the difference which exists between the Thomistic and Marxist view. Stressing the difference between the action of the individual in society and the social action author draws attention to the two particular features of social action: subordination of actions to the common goods and action through social organs. He points oüt the difference between the action through social organs and the division of duties in society; and he analyses a particular form of social action: the work done through institutions. Social organs and institutions are a visible, external, and lasting structure of society, but they are not its essence. The essence of society is a spiritual reality, interpersonal, and humanistic. The author finds that the term „community" may refer, in its direct sense, only to a certain kind of group of rational beings, and the term may be applied in an analogie sense to human and angelic communities and to the „community of the Trinity". The other conclusion refers to the method of inquiry into the social reality of men. The author formulates the following principies: a) one may not study the human community a priori, b) nor study it only externally; the witness of people who form the society is of significance in this inquiry, c) one may, however, study thè human community empirically, d) the human community is of a spiritual kind and therefore it cannot be studied itself, but only through its Symptoms, e) it can be described quantitavely, hence it is possible to use statistic methods, f) the investigator must take into account the dynamie of social phenomena, g) the social reality is an effect of human action - and so, social theories are theories of human activity.