1

(A Treatise on the Philosophy of Gabriel Marcel)

Dissertation submitted to the University of Kerala

In partial fulfillment of the requirement for the Post Graduation in philosophy

Presented by

BAIJU N.T.

Department of Philosophy

University College, Thiruvananthapuram

2006

2

CONTENTS

PREFACE

ABBRIVIATION

INTRODUCTION

CHAPTER ONE: THE BROKEN BRIDGE

1.1. The Broken World

1.2. De-humanization

1.3. Alienation

1.4. Despair, Anxiety and Uneasiness

CHAPTER TWO: THE BRIDGE

2.1. Mystery and Problem

2.2. Incarnation

2.3. Being and Having

2.4. I-Thou

2.5. Intersubjectivity

CHAPTER THREE: PILLARS OF THE BRIDGE

3.1 Disponability

3.2 Freedom and Fraternity

3.3 Absolute Thou and Fidelity

3.4 Faith, Hope and Love

GENERAL CONCLUSION

BIBLIOGRAPHY

3

PREFACE

“Love means presence, i.e., „to be available‟ to others”. This is how Gabriel

Marcel defines love. The definition is surprisingly extraordinary, right? Frankly

speaking, it was this definition of love, which stimulated my curiosity to inquire

more about leading French philosopher and Christian existentialist Gabriel Marcel.

When I started to look deeply into his thoughts, the mere curiosity turned out to be

a research, dedicating my complete attention to understand the significance of

Gabriel Marcel‟s philosophy in this contemporary world. I am glad to tell you now

that I did find an answer, which I was searching for, capable of healing the

wounds in our relationships in this irreplaceably broken world. To put in a single

work, the answer was „Intersubjectivity‟.

This dissertation is an exposition of Gabriel Marcel‟s reflections on

Intersubjectivity, deeply rooted in an aesthetic „I-Thou‟ relationship. I am

extremely happy that besides my personal readings, this dissertation on an

academic level could also give a good impact on my understandings on the

centuries-old human quest: “Who am I, in relation to others and God?” I thank the

Absolute Thou for giving such an astounding opportunity.

At this moment, I gratefully remember and thank all those who helped me

to make this dissertation a reality. First and foremost, my heartfelt gratitude goes

to Mr. Y. Saji, the guest lecture of our department of Philosophy, for his constant

guidance, loving encouragement and efforts set aside for me during the entire

course of the work. I express my sincere thanks to Mrs. Sulekha, Head of the

department of Philosophy, and my teachers for helping me to fulfill all my

academic requirements successfully. And finally, I am thankful to my dear friends

especially to Mr. Lijo John, for making them „available‟ in making this study an

unforgettable event in my life.

4

ABBRIVIATION

BH Being and Having

-Gabriel Marcel

BPC Being, Person and Community

-V.J. Manimala

EWG Existentialism- With or Without God

-Francis J. Lescoe

MAH Man against Humanity

-Gabriel Marcel

MB Mystery of Being

-Gabriel Marcel

PE The Philosophy of Existentialism

-Gabriel Marcel

PGM The Philosophy of Gabriel Marcel

-Paul Arthur Schilpp and Lewis Edwin Hahn

SIG Self Realization and Intersubjectivity in Gabriel

Marcel

-Dominic Anton Joseph-

5

INTRODUCTION

Today, we are living in a crucial period of human history! It is a glorious

age marked by the stupendous scientific and technological achievements of man.

The world is undergoing fast and tremendous changes in all areas of its existence

ever before. Man has been replaced by machines and his technology has taken him

to moon, mars and almost to the boundaries of the universe, overturning the entire

story of man on earth. But is it the whole story? Nope. It is only one side and there

remains another side, mostly unsaid and dark in all sense. It is also “the terrible

time”, we happen to live, tainted with unheard of cruelties of man against man and

devastating wars of nation against nation. Though man glories his achievements,

he is threatened by the products of his own ingenuity. It is an age of material

progress and moral regress. The value of culture, religion, tradition, family,

relationships and morality is at shake. So, the result is in the midst of progress and

affluence, human life is filled with anxiety and threatened by meaninglessness.

Just look at the daily newspapers and you would see how this world is

going around. Divorce cases increase day by day. The security of women, children

and poor has no guarantee. They are exploited and used. The value of life is at the

edge of disaster. Family has almost lost its stability. Crimes, terrorism, wars,

poverty and exploitation crush man. Today‟s man has every thing, but is nothing.

Man has built walls around him, limiting himself and creating a different world for

his own, where he lives like a king of his selfishness and pride. Is he concerned

about others? Does he have time to maintain relationship with others? Sadly, the

other is a „hell‟ or object to be thrown or used. This capitalistic mentality has

changed the man‟s vision on life and his dignity has value at all. These facts

indicate a sort of dangerous point of reference of human consciousness and

modern civilisation.

Gabriel Marcel, one of the well-known existentialist philosophers, has a

sensitive mind about all these issues. He presents the significance of love and

intersubjectivity that can change the existing world. He says that the last word

about life is not absurdity or nausea, but love and joy. Love can rebuild the broken

world of relations, he emphasises. Love means presence, i.e., to be available to the

other. There is no doubt that Gabriel Marcel‟s treatise on intersubjectivity can

make a qualitative difference in human relations.

A few words about Gabriel Marcel are contextual. A brief life sketch of

Gabriel Marcel will be a good introduction to start with his treatise on

Intersubjectivity. Gabriel Marcel was born in Paris on December 7, 1889. His

father was a French ambassador in Sweden. He faced hard realities of life from the

very beginning of his childhood. He lost his mother at his age of four and was

6

brought up by his step mother. Both his father and step mother were agnostics.

After his education, he volunteered for military service during the First World

War, but was unable to continue in the service due to his ill health. Then he joined

Red Cross and the experiences there helped him to have a good exposure to the

tragic realities of human life. His philosophy was an authentic outcome of his own

life experience. His major works are Being and Having, The Mystery of Being,

Broken World (Drama), Metaphysical Journal, Man against Humanity,

Problematic Man, Homo Viator and The Philosophy of Existence. Towards the

end of his life, Gabriel became very closer to Roman Catholic faith. His

philosophy was an addition to Christianity philosophically and theologically. He

died in 1973.

This work is divided into three chapters. The first chapter explains the

current situation of man in the world. According to Gabriel Marcel, the modern

world is conceived as a Broken World, where man struggles to find meaning for

his existence. The second chapter is the nucleus of this dissertation, presenting the

concept of Intersubjectivity along with his other fundamental concepts. The third

chapter deals with the pillars of relationship. The point discussed there is the

values which support the relationship to be more authentic and stable. Finally, we

meet a general conclusion at the end. It is an open house discussion to which

anyone can contribute more and more in accordance with one‟s conviction and

knowledge.

I am aware that it is practically impossible to explain Marcel‟s philosophy

in a very limited number of pages. For me, it is only an attempt. I have tried to use

all the main works of Gabriel Marcel to prepare this thesis. I hope, my humble

effort could reflect Marcel‟s mind in the same way it is supposed to be!

7

CHAPTER ONE

THE BROKEN BRIDGE

Man is basically a being in a situation. Every man is to be understood along

with his surroundings and circumstances. According to Marcel, today‟s world is a

Broken World and it causes lots stress and tensions in man, giving rise to the

feeling of alienation, despair, anxiety and uneasiness. This chapter is an attempt to

bring forth the specialties of the broken world in which we live.

1.1. The Broken World

Marcel defines modern world as Broken World, which is something like a

broken watch.1 Marcel‟s play „The Broken World‟ presents a heroine called

Christiane who makes a striking statement about this modern world.

Don‟t you feel sometimes that we are living…if you can call it

living…in a broken world? Yes, broken like a broken watch. The main string

has stopped working. Just look at it, nothing has changed. Every thing is in

place. But put the watch to your ear and you don‟t hear any ticking. You know

what I am talking about, the world what we call the world, the world of human

creatures…it seems to me it must have ad a heart at one time, but today you

would say that heart had „stopped beating‟.2

The modern world‟s heart stopped beating. It requires to be repaired. Why

does Marcel describe the modern world as a Broken World? It is because the

structure of society based on true and authentic relations collapses due to several

reasons. Marcel says that the world loses its real unity. The idea of community

becomes more and more impossible.3 “We are living in a world in which the

preposition „with‟ and White head‟s noun „togetherness‟ seems more and more to

be losing its meaning.” 4 Modern technology brings only a superficial unity.

Technology does not help men to be united, but often makes them enemies. Even

in the midst of material sufficiency, man is still against man. The twenty first

centaury man has become a stranger to himself.5

1. Francis J. Lescoe, Existentialism-With or Without God, Alba House, New York, 1974.

p. 116 2. Gabriel Marcel, Mystery of Being, (Vol-I, Reflections and Mystery), Harvill Press Ltd., London, 1950. p. 21, 22. 3. Ibid., p. 27. 4. Ibid., p. 28.

5. EWG, p.116.

8

Marcel is not against technical progress. He says that the technical progress

in the strict sense is good.6 But the technical progress in the modern world has a

destructive function and to some extend is criminal. The technology makes man a

little „less human‟ and it brings man to alienation and leads to de-humanization.

De-humanization caused by the technology is a serious one, where the

human beings are considered as mere objects and as mere Its. Every thing is an It

to be used and utilized. Man started to understand him and others by referring to

technology.7 Each man becomes an island in this world of artificiality. This

isolation can be seen everywhere in the society. Man likes to build boundaries and

keep an extra mile in between him and others. He is a stranger to others. He limits

everything within himself. This isolation of modern man had become a theme of

reflection for many philosophers and writers. The Heidegerian DASSAIN is a best

example for a solitary and isolated individual of this world of throwness,

homelessness and angst.8

Today man has become titled with his functions. He spends hours with his

functions and everything comes under his function even his sleeping. “Time table-

a horrible expression- describes the life of the modern man.”9 Man has become

mere machine in this world of machines. The companionship with the machines

made him a machine. He works like computer and remains like a computer. He is

unable to express his feelings and emotions, and he suppresses them within

himself. Heidegger mourns by saying that the tragedy of modern man is that he is

not even reflecting. “The technical man has lost awareness of himself. Modern

man appears himself and to others as an agglomeration of function.”10 Marcel says

that suicide will be the price that one has to pay for the amazing progress of

technology.11

We live today in a world at war with itself…war is being pushed so far

that it runs the risk of ending something that could properly be described as a

world of suicide…suicide until our own times is an individual possibility. It

seemed to apply to the individual case. It seems now to apply to the case of the

whole human world.12

Technology will lead to self-destruction. An important fact of our present

world is that life is no longer being loved. The modern world provides an

6. Gabriel Marcel, Man Against Humanity, Harvill Press Ltd., London, 1952. p. 22. 7. Gabriel Marcel, Searchings, Newman Press, New York, 1967. p. 43. 8. EWG, p. 13. 9. Gabriel Marcel, The Philosophy Of Existence, Harvill Press Ltd., London, 1948. p. 2. 10. Ibid., p. 1. 11

. Ibid., p. 23. 12. MB-I, p. 23.

9

immediate taste of enjoyment. Fundamentally nothing can resemble the love of

life. Marcel says that the marriage tie between man and life had been broken.13

1.2. De-humanization

De-humanization is the result of modern technology where man becomes

less human. It is the effect of the Broken World. “Technological method can deal

with human in only one way; it must treat him as an object- a de-humanized and

de-personalized entity.”14 Man loses his „existential weight‟ and his life has been

functionalized. “There are sectors of human life in the present world, where the

process of automatization applies not only to certain techniques but also to what

one would have formally called the inner life, a life which today, on the contrary,

is becoming an outer as possible. As a result of this condition we are witnessing

„devolution of life‟.”15

Today man‟s worth is calculated in terms of functions and he is titled by

his functions. “The intrinsic dignity and sacredness of human being have now

been replaced by his functional values.”16 Technology enjoys the absolute

primacy. The value of human beings is determined by human ability and man

loses his real personality. His life has become a journey without any purpose and

goal. In his essay „On the Ontological Mystery‟, Marcel complains that “man

appears more and more, both to himself and to others as an „agglomeration of

functions‟.”17 Anyway, Marcel is not against technology, but he is against

technocracy, technolotry and techno mania, which are the attitude of worshipping

technical progress.18 In a technocratic world, man‟s life is according to the rhythm

of machines. He does not feel at home. He is crashed under the machines. The

profit and the loss of a company are compared with the human beings. Value of

products and men are equally considered, and procreation and fabrication are

considered to be equal things.19 This is the reason for the unlimited encouragement

of abortion, mercy killing and all other kinds of crimes in the contemporary world.

Marcel says,

Life is no longer considered as a divine gift, but rather as a „dirty joke‟.

The existence of a widely diffused pessimism seems to me a fundamental

given fact about contemporary humanity and it seems to that it is in the

perspective of this widely diffused pessimism as a sort of physical nausea at

13. MAH, p. 41. 14. EWG, p. 17. 15. Ibid., p. 117. 16. Ibid., p. 118. 17. Ibid., p. 119. 18

. Ibid., p. 120. 19. Gabriel Marcel, searching, Op.Cit., p. 45.

10

life that we ought to consider such a serious and significant contemporary fact

as the prevalence for instance of abortion.20

Man is considered only as an instrument among many other instruments.

“He is no longer is a person but a commodity to be used and exploited by some

mass movements whether social, industrial or political.”21 De-humanization

creates two inevitable consequences. The first one is that it makes an easy part for

the tyrant, the dictator and totalitarian state. And the second consequence is that it

makes man a brute for the history.22

1.3. Alienation

The Broken World leads man to alienation which is one of the tragic

experiences of modern man. There are mainly three levels of alienation. In the first

level, one is alienated from God and in the second level he is alienated from the

society, and finally he is alienated even from himself.

Alienation from God happens because of man‟s over-dependence on

technology. Man blindly depends on technology and his own abilities and he loses

faith in God. Man does not need God, but God needs man for His survival. The

material sufficiency of man makes him the king of the world where God has no

part to play.

Man is alienated from the society in which he lives. The fast moving world

does not give time to man to think about others. Parents have no time to be real

parents and children are so engaged that they have no time to look after their old

parents. The result is the disintegration of relations and social setup. Man is

terribly scheduled. The concept of good family, good parent, good children, good

wife, and good friends remains only in the mind but not in reality, because man is

alienated from the rest.

Finally man alienates from himself. He looses the meaning of life. He is

unsatisfied. Man is internally unhappy and lazy because he has lost the taste of

life. He does not have any memories to remember, goal to achieve. He is no more

living, but „simply there‟. Man becomes mere machine or a robot, perhaps because

of his companionship with machines and computer. This alienation is due to the

fact that “…in a world increasingly under the hegemony of technology… in such a

world we lose our „existential weight‟.”23

20. MAH, p. 42. 21. EWG, p. 17. 22

. Ibid., p. 18. 23. Ibid., p. 117.

11

1.4. Despair, Anxiety and Uneasiness

Marcel says that despair, anxiety and uneasiness are one and same

phenomenon which are the outcome of alienation. Despair means total betrayal.

He says that the root cause of despair is indisponability.24 Despair is the feeling of

the total insecurity. A person in despair thinks that there is nothing in this world on

which we can depend. This despair may lead one to suicide.

Anxiety is a psychological phenomenon. According to Briessaud, anxiety is

a psychological disorder which is translated by a feeling of indefinable

insecurity.25 There is an essential difference between anxiety and anguish. An

anxious person has much more violent reaction than an anguished person. Anxious

person does something to get rid off from anxiety, but anguish person does

nothing but freezes in his anguish.26 Uneasiness is a physical phenomenon. It is a

physical sensation dominant in an unhappy situation. Anxiety and uneasiness

cannot be separated. In a technologically progressed world man is happened to be

surrendering himself to uneasiness and justify it. Despair, anxiety and uneasiness

are always beyond human limit and highly destructive in nature.

The painful outcome of this Broken World is the utter despair and

alienation from every thing. It may cause one to lead an unethical life. In this state

of life, man treats man as object and means for his personal end. It is the dark

nature of technology and material progress. It always creates broken worlds. It

does not mean that Marcel is totally against technology. He encourages technology

but stands against worshipping technology the result of which is the broken bridge

of interpersonal relations. The aim of this chapter is not to underestimate

everything including technology and developments. Some may argue that a good

thing may have a bad side too; therefore we need not blame technology. We are

only trying to understand the problems of the world today in order to avoid them

and to make our situations better. We ought to build a bridge between human

relations. The next chapter discusses about the bridge.

24. Dominic Anton Joseph, Self Realization and Intersubjectivity in Gabriel Marcel,

Pontifical Urban University, Rome, 1988. p. 150. 25

. Gabriel Marcel, Problematic Man, Herder and Herder, New York, 1967. p. 68. 26. Ibid., p. 68.

12

CHAPTER TWO

THE BRIDGE

We have seen the characteristics of the Broken World in the previous

chapter. Marcel gives a remedy to heal this Broken World. He says that an

authentic inter personal relationship can change the world. Man needs to be open

to his fellow men. Intersubjectivity is the best way of interpersonal relationship,

the bridge between person to person. An authentic relationship can bring meaning

to human existence in this material world. In this chapter, Marcel‟s fundamental

notions like Mystery and Problem, Incarnation, Being and Having and

Intersubjectivity are discussed in detail. All these notions add to highlight the

dignity of man as subject and as a person.

2.1. Mystery and Problem

As many other philosophers in the history of philosophy, Gabriel Marcel

also takes a conscious effort to explicit the unique position of man in the order of

existence. His prime concern is the dignity of human being with all his

possibilities and potentialities. Being aware of the issues against human race in the

modern world, Marcel tries to give a spiritual status to man. He identifies man as a

mystery rather than a problem.

The notion of mystery and problem is one of the most fundamental

concepts of Gabriel Marcel. He brings out the essential difference between

mystery and problem in his famous work, Being and Having. According to him

mystery and problem are entirely opposite to each other.

In fact, it seems very likely that there is this essential difference

between a problem and a mystery. A problem is something which I meet,

which I find complete before me, but which I can therefore lay siege to and

reduce. But a mystery is something in which I am myself involved, and it can

therefore only be thought of as a „sphere where the distinction between what is

in me and what is before me loses its meaning and its initial validity‟. A

genuine problem is subject to an appropriate technique by the exercise of

which it is defined: whereas a mystery by definition, transcends every

conceivable technique.27

By mystery, Marcel neither means revelation nor something unknown, in

the sense that we do not have the means at our disposal of dealing with the

27. Gabriel Marcel, Being and Having, The Fontana Library, London, 1965. p. 127.

13

particular object of our study.28 Mystery is that in which I am engaged. It is a

„problem‟ which cannot be put before me objectively. It is not apart of myself, but

the „total me‟ is engaged in a mystery. Therefore, we cannot speak „about‟ a

mystery. “A mystery is a metaproblematical state of affairs which encroaches on

its own data.”29 We cannot find solution to a mystery. We can only know

something about it by analyzing it.

At the same time, a problem is something out side of me, for which I can

find solutions. Marcel says, “I said that there can only be a problem for me where I

have to deal with facts which are, or which I am at least cause to be, exterior to

myself; facts presenting themselves to me in a certain disorder for which I struggle

to substitute an orderliness capable of satisfying the requirements of my thought.

When this substitution has been effected the problem is solved.”30 A problem is

nothing outside me, objectively. Science always deals with problems.

According to Marcel, „What am I?‟ is a question related to mystery, and not

to problem. Man is a mystery. He is beyond all sciences and technologies. Man

cannot be considered as a mere object or a problem. But people are always

confused with mystery and problem in day today life. Marcel says that by knowing

the distinction between these two, we can avoid a lot of misunderstandings.

2.2. Incarnation

Treating his/her body as an object or an instrument to be used is one of the

major problems of the modern world. Marcel rejects the view that treats body as

secondary or a useless appendage, a constant embarrassment to the pure mind. He

wants to retain the position of body. Therefore, he proposes the theory of

„incarnation‟ in the place against the dualistic view of mind and body, which splits

man into two separate entities.

According to Marcel, “Incarnation is the situation of a being that appears to

him to be, as it were, bound to a body.”31 It is through the body that a person exists

in the world. Body is the undeniable fact of man‟s existence on earth. He

experiences the world through his body. Marcel often says that „I am my body‟,

because the body is an essential reality for a person.

28. EWG, p. 93. 29. V.J. Manimala, Being, Person and Community, Intercultural Publication, New Delhi, 1991.

p. 147. 30

. Gabriel Marcel, Homo Viator, Hasper and Brother, New York, 1962. p. 68. 31. BH, p. 16.

14

Man is not a self-enclosed ego. He is open to the world and to others. This

openness is possible only through body. Marcel says, “When I affirm that

something exists, I always mean that I consider this something as connected with

my body, as able to be put in contact with it, however, this contact may be.”32

„Presence‟ and „participation‟ are possible only through incarnation. (Presence

and participation are discussed later). Incarnation brings about a special feature,

the uniqueness of person. “Each of us is unique expression of the being, we

partially realize. No one can take our place.”33 Every man is unique in his very

nature. Every man has a special role to play in the order of existence. This is how

Marcel specifies the dignity of man.

2.3. Being and Having

The foundation of Marcel‟s doctrine of intersubjectivity is based on his

view of „Being and Having‟. Marcel understands, “…being as the „common

foundation‟ and „unity‟ of all beings.”34 Being is existential and „to be‟ is the very

nature of being. Being is interior to the person and „emanates‟ from the self.35

Having is that which is exterior to a person who possesses it. Having objectifies

things. It is a possession. Marcel says, “„I have the power to‟…means „the power

to numbered among my attributes and endowments‟. But that is not at all. „To

have‟ is „to have power to‟, since it is clearly in a sense „to have the disposal of‟.

Here we touch on one of the most obscure and fundamental aspect of having.”36

A being is a subject and the havings are the attributes of the subject. Marcel

says that we cannot express ourselves in terms of having, because the question,

„What am I?‟ cannot be considered in having. The question concerned with having

is „What do I have?‟. Being unites all beings. The authentic relation is possible

only by participating in being. The experience of being arises in communion but

egoistic desire transforms the state of being into the state of having. Today‟s man

is more concerned with his havings rather than his being. Modern man is assessed

by what he possesses, rather than what he is, therefore he is running to gather

more and more havings. The result is remarkably happened to guide man against

man.

Man can transform, meanwhile, his having into being. When one escapes

from his ego-centricity and enters into the realm of self-giving, then the person

becomes capable of transforming his having into being.

32. Ibid., p. 14. 33. Paul Arthur Schilpp and Lewis Edwin Hahh, The Philosophy of Gabriel Marcel, Vol- XVII, The Library of Living Philosophers, America, 1991. p. 127. 34. SIG, p. 84. 35

. BPC, p. 143. 36. BH, p. 163.

15

To transform the relationship of „having‟ into „being‟, it is necessary to

escape from the rigid attitude, which centers everything exclusively either on

the self or the object. Egoistic desire is destructive of personal being, because

desire merely wishes „to have‟ its object. In the realm of being desire gives

way to love, for love „gravitates‟ round a certain position which is neither that

of oneself nor of the other but of the „thou‟.37

2.4. I-Thou

I-Thou relation is the transformation of „having‟ into „being‟. Man can live

in this world as he likes either authentically or inauthentically. An inauthentic

person is self-enclosed, while an authentic person is open to all others and

considers other persons as thous, more than a he or she or it.38 When man

considers others as objects or things to be used, then he goes back to having from

being.

In I-Thou relationship, man becomes present to the other in a mutual

openness and self-giving. He becomes aware of his existence in the most

unqualified manner only when he meets the other as thou, as another subject. The

relationship is a loving encounter, a genuine meeting in love, a friendship and

spiritual availability. In an I-Thou relation, person respects and loves the other as

he loves and respects himself. Here one sacrifices himself for the best of others.

He is governed not by any egoistic desire, but by a self-giving desire.

An I-Thou relation is rooted in a communion. “…I can begin to exist as an

authentic „poursoi‟ only by being with others. The I-Thou is an inescapable

dimension of the „We‟, but the „We‟ is ontological ground of the I-Thou.”39

Absolute Thou brings validity for the I-Thou relationship, because the being finds

depth and dynamism of this relation in the Absolute Thou.40 Marcel points out that

to love a creature is to love him in God. The I-Thou relationship discovers my

freedom, because my freedom is actualized when I am available to my neighbor.

In this relation one is present to the other, in the same way as he participates in the

other‟s being. I-Thou relationship is a pure relation between two subjects, which is

an intersubjective relation.

37. BPC, p. 144. 38. EWG, p. 98. 39

. PGM, p. 140. 40. Ibid., p. 139.

16

2.5. Intersubjectivity

I-Thou relationship prepares room for the presence, participation and

intersubjectivity among human beings. Presence, participation and

intersubjectivity are mutually inclusive. Presence according to Marcel is not being

there but much more than that. Presence is a mystery. It is always dependent on

the experience of being in the world. “It should be noted at once that the

distinction between the presence and the absence is not at all the same as that

between attention and destruction. The most attentive and conscious listener may

give me the impression of not being present.”41 All men are not capable of being

present. A person who makes room for others in him is present for himself.

Presence reveals itself immediately and unmistakably in a look, a smile, an

attention or a hand shake.42

Presence brings participation. Participation is the involvement of one

person in the being of the other. One participates in the being of the other who is

present to him. According to Marcel, participation has three levels. First level is

the incarnation which is actualized through the experience of the body as „mine‟.

In this level, one participates with himself by being present to his own being. One

realizes himself as a subject. Second level is the level of communion, which is

actualized through love, hope and fidelity. In communion, a subject relates with

the being of other subjects with whom he confronts in his daily life. Here one

considers others as subjects and treats them as persons. The third level is the level

of transcendental, actualized through ontological exigency. In this level, a person

participates with the Other.43 Basically participation implies the participation of

one‟s being in the being of others.

Intersubjectivity means the relation between two subjects. It is the „subject

to subject‟ relation, which is opposed to ego-centricity, but founded on love and

harmony with the other. Presence belongs only to the being capable of giving

himself to others. Therefore presence is intersubjective.44 Friendship, marriage,

paternity and fraternity are the various modalities of intersubjectivity. It is through

creative fidelity, hope and love that one can attain the stage of intersubjectivity.

The growth of the society and its every member is based on the intersubjective

relation of the members. We should be open to others and must be able to meet

them without allowing oneself to be dominated or utilized.

41. BPC, p. 150. 42. Ibid. 43

. Ibid. 44. EWG, p. 102.

17

Intersubjectivity is essential for the development of the persons because

“…intersubjectivity or the relation to the other, on which the community is based,

provides us with a means of discovering ourselves and of finding bearings in the

world.”45 Marcel calls intersubjectivity as „corner stone of ontology‟.46 A good

illustration of intersubjectivity can be found in the relationship between a musician

playing an opus of chamber music, where each musician plays a role and makes a

contribution in collaboration with others. Society, for its smooth running,

necessarily needs the presence and participation of all members in the society.

Nobody is an exception here. Moreover, man is a transcendental being.

Intersubjectivity helps man to the realization of „vertical‟ and „horizontal‟

transcendence of his own being.47

The whole philosophy of Gabriel Marcel is reflected in his notion of

intersubjectivity. The term „intersubjectivity‟ was first coined and used by Marcel

and it became well-known in ethics and philosophy. It is undoubtedly affirmed

that intersubjectivity is an ideal message which can construct a bridge of authentic

relations in between persons and nations. The bridge is made up of certain values

that can be considered as the pillars of this bridge. The next chapter will explain

the pillars of authentic relation in detail.

45. PGM, p. 343. 46

. Gabriel Marcel, The Mystery of Being, Vol-I, Op.Cit., p. 255. 47. PGM, p. 350-51

18

CHAPTER THREE

PILLARS OF THE BRIDGE

The authentic relationship capable of constructing the world of love is

made up of some values. Availability, faith, hope, love, freedom, fidelity and

fraternity are those values which are called the pillars of the bridge. These values

are not what „we have‟ but what „we are‟. They help us to realise our own self and

strengthen our relationship. Let us analyse them one by one.

3.1. Disponability

Disponability is one of the original contributions of Gabriel Marcel, found

in his work Metaphysical Journal. Disponibilite is a French word extremely

difficult to convey in English. „Availability‟ would be a better word to mean

disponability literally. Disponability implies openness, welcoming, surrender,

readiness to respond, loving attitude, sympathy, admiration and commitment.

Marcel says that disponability and commitment go hand in hand.48 Marcel does

not agree with the utilitarian concept of availability. “Availability as a human

virtue does not involve being passively and instrumentally used by another person;

rather it involves responding in a complete freedom to a direct appeal. It involves,

for example, my being respective to an appeal addressed directly to me as a person

not as an object.”49 Availability presupposes sacrifice. One should be ready to

sacrifice his life for the sake of others. “I say that the person who is at my disposal

is the one who is capable of being with me with the whole of himself when I am in

need,”50 Marcel says.

Disponability refers unqualified and unreserved availability. It is just like

the availability of the mother for her child. One becomes totally available for the

other without foreseeing any egoistic profit. There is not place for „having‟ in

disponability. “To be a disponable person, one has to shrug off pride or self-

sufficiency in all that one needs, and remove all self defects and be in a state of

readiness for interaction with the others.”51 In such a disponability, we can find the

presence of faith, hope, love, openness and mutual co-operation. On the contrary

to availability, unavailability is not a simple contrast between a single virtue and

corresponding vice, but it is a basic and fundamental contrast between two

fundamental styles of human life.52 Being indisponable, a self-enclosed person

48. PGM, p. 179. 49. Ibid., p. 183. 50. PE, p. 26. 51

. SIG, p. 160. 52. PGM, p. 182.

19

will go after his havings. Indisponability is not an opposite term, but an opposite

life-style.

3.2. Freedom and Fraternity

Marcel gives a vital place for freedom in his philosophy. He prefers

to call his own philosophy as the philosophy of being and freedom.53 Freedom has

a great role in a society, because freedom used by each member in the society can

change the entire life in the society. Freedom is not choice but response. It is the

response to choose the freedom of others and acceptance of others‟ freedom. Man

discovers his freedom by becoming available to each other. He finds his own

responsibility to others. “Freedom does not exist for its own sake but it is way of

achieving our participation in the being.”54 It is possible only in the level of inter

personal relationship of two free subjects. Marcel gives equal place to freedom

and fraternity. “The freest man is also the most fraternal…. The fraternal man is

linked to his neighbour in such a way that this tie of fraternity not only does not

fitter him but frees him from himself.”55 The unfree man is the most self-enclosed

within himself. Freedom grabs the uniqueness of individuality.

Fraternity enhances the individuals to exercise their freedom. Freedom

strengthens our relationship. Marcel says, “Each of us has a duty to multiply as

much as possible around him the bonds between being and being… these bonds

with being and being that I am speaking of cannot be anything else that what has

traditionally been called „fraternity‟.”56 Therefore fraternity is the expression of

the I-Thou relationship. He says that a fraternal man is enriched by his brother and

the society becomes strong in its nature. But the concept of fraternity disappears

now from the modern society. Only an interpersonal relationship which is the

higher expression of fraternity and love can change the society in its all levels.

3.3. Absolute Thou and Fidelity

Man is naturally oriented towards God, the Unlimited, and the All Perfect

Being. Man existentially tends to go beyond his restrictions as a limited being in

the material world. When we can break the shells of self-enclosed ego, pride and

possessiveness of havings, we can find God. According to Marcel, God is not a he,

she or it, but a Thou, the Absolute Thou. When we enter into an authentic

relationship, we will begin to participate in the Unconditioned Being. Marcel

says, “I would be prepared to say dogmatically that very relation of being to being

53. James Collins, The Existentialists, A Gate Way Edition, Chicago, 1963. p. 163. 54. Ibid., p. 162. 55

. BPC, p. 160. 56. MAH, p. 155.

20

is personal and that the relation between me and God is nothing if it is not a realm

of being with being.”57

The Absolute Thou is present to me through faith. Faith is the highest

expression of fidelity. Faith and fidelity are mutually interconnected. Fidelity

implies an unconditional vow to anther person.58 But it is possible only through

faith. In fidelity, we make commitment and promise in order to which we need

faithfulness, a „creative fidelity‟. Fidelity, according to Marcel, is a risk and a leap

to darkness in the sense that “…in swearing fidelity to a person, I do not know

what future awaits us or even, in a sense, what person he will be tomorrow; the

very fact of my not-knowing is what gives worth and weight to my promise.”59

Fidelity is not fidelity to oneself but to others. It is through fidelity a

believer enters into the faithfulness to the Absolute Thou. All other relations in

man‟s life are grounded in the Absolute Thou and the fidelity to others is grounded

in the faith to the Thou. The Thou makes eternal fidelity possible. Marcel says,

“…as a matter of fact the code of ethics, which is beginning to shape in many

places- above all, of course, is necessarily based on fidelity.”60

3.4. Faith, Hope and Love

Faith is the highest expression of fidelity. Faith can be understood in two

ways, i.e., as conviction and as commitment.61 In a genuine commitment one

engages in a mystical encounter with the other. This is an unconditional vow to the

other person. This commitment to the other is unrewarded and unreserved and it

goes on the level of being. Marcel explains faith as conviction, “…when I believe

in God and when one asks me questions about this faith or I question myself about

it, I would, of necessity, have to declare that I am convinced of the existence of

God.”62 For a believer, all his faith is based on eternal fidelity. “Faith, understood

as commitment, is far more enriching and productive because it carries with it the

richness of a binding obligation.”63 In a commitment we involve in the totality of

our being. The commitment is grounded upon the faith which collects all the

forces of our being and makes us disponable to the Absolute Thou that is the

absolute commitment. According to Marcel, faith is also remains in the level of

mystery and being.

57. EWG, p. 106. 58 BPC, p.164. 59. BH, p. 53. 60. Gabriel Marcel, Homo Viator, Op.Cit., p. 125. 61. EWG, p. 109. 62

. BPC, p. 164. 63. Ibid.

21

Faith in the Absolute Thou always brings hope. Marcel says, “…it is

permanently through hope that I discover my relation to the Absolute Thou.

Because I realise my complete dependence on this Infinite Being, I am forever

protected from despair. I am not tortured by a Heidegerian dread and

homelessness; neither am I overwhelmed by Sarter‟s absurdity or nausea. I am, in

truth, a homo viator, a pilgrim, a wayfarer but not a wanderer of endless and

confusing „forest trails‟.”64 Marcel says that hope is fundamental presupposition of

fulfilled human life. Hope gives meaning to man‟s existence. Hope is born from

humility and not from pride, because a proud man is cut off from certain form of

communion from his fellow men. Hope is always liberative and is not a way to

escape from realities. A genuine hope is not at all escapism. Hope is not only a

personal appeal to the self but an appeal to the selves of all of us. “The subject of

hope is not „I‟ or „You‟, but „We‟ born out of love.”65 Marcel illustrates his point

with the example of an ill person.

So long as he „Clings to the idea that he will be well by a certain time‟,

he can be disappointed if things do not work out as he has imagined them.

What is necessary is a „purification and transformation‟ of his inner attitude,

which comes about when he realises that is „everything is by no means lost

even if he is not restored to help‟. He thus comes firmly to believe that he is

not failing into a bottomless void but rather remains somehow sustained

securely by an all-encompassing presence. This fundamentally unspecifiable

„somehow‟ is part of the inner most nature of genuine hope.66

Whenever there is faith, it will carry love. Genuine love brings a binding

force around the person who loves. There are different categories of love, like

“…the „the love of God by man‟, „the love of man by God‟ and „the love of man

by his fellowmen‟.”67 Marcel says, “Anxiety, in my view cannot be the end. It is

my deepest conviction that only love and joy can have the last word.”68 The

problem with Sartre is that he thought that anxiety and absurdity are the last word

about man‟s existence. Unfortunately he could not find the place of love in one‟s

life. Love gives meaning to human existence. All forms of authentic relationship

find its climax in love. Therefore, love cannot be objectified and categorised with

having. He says, “Love is substantial, love is rooted in being, love is not

commensurate with anything on which a value can be set or with anything

„marketable‟.”69 All our expressions of love are ultimately based on love of God.

“It is this love which gives value to man‟s actions. And so, really to love a creature

64. EWG, p. 112. 65. BPC, p. 168. 66. PGM, p. 189, 190. 67. EWG, p. 110. 68

. PGM, p. 181. 69. MAH, p. 142.

22

…is to love him in God.”70 To love a person means to participate in his being.

Love is capable of reuniting everything.

There is not doubt that the pillars of Gabriel Marcel namely disponability,

freedom, faith, hope and love can rebuild the broken world into a heaven like.

These virtues are as strong as pillars of the bridge and systematically set up for

better firmness. The concept of intersubjectivity has to be analysed more and more

in its depth. Let us do it in our conclusion.

70. EWG, p. 110.

23

GENERAL CONCLUSION

An assessment on the concept of intersubjectivity of Gabriel Marcel is

worthwhile reaching at a point of conclusion. A reader can, by the time, easily

realize the relevance of Marcel‟s philosophy in this post modern world. The

Broken World is still broken into small pieces day by day. The bridge of relations

is in serious danger that it can collapse at any time. Man is born island. Love and

moral values are buried under the huge machines and jailed in religious books.

Man is treated as an instrument of production and product to make profit. The

world is pregnant with despair, anxiety, uneasiness and alienation, and finally it

gives birth to a Broken World. We can not let the world to be broken again and

again. It is here we find the immeasurable relevance of Marcel‟s philosophy.

Man is essentially a being-in-world. He is in the world not like the animals

or other creatures, which are conditioned by their needs and natural impulses.

There is no authentic relationship between an animal to the world. Man exists in

the world in a different way. Being a conscious rational creature on earth, he can

not be conditioned or directed according to the power of his needs and impulses.

Man is free and therefore responsible to a great extent.

Man makes relations and his existence on earth fundamentally co-exists

with everything in this world including plants, animals, other fellowmen and

nature. He can not live isolated from them at any point of his life. The relationship

towards others and the world is determined by two essential attitudes; I-Thou and

I-It. As examined in the previous chapters, I-Thou expresses the authentic

characteristics of presence, reciprocity, involvement between individuals as

persons and subjects. In this relationship, we find sharing, participation, respect,

dialogue and communion. I-It attitude expresses the non-authentic, impersonal,

person to thing, subject to object relation, that is dominated by the attitude of use,

dominion, control, self-centeredness and monologue. Marcel advocates, I-Thou

attitude is the only gateway to the better future of the mankind.

Every man is an „individual‟ and a „person‟. The individuality refers to a

man‟s relation to himself, to his specific identity, as something distinct from the

world. It is a feeling of „I‟ that assumes the attitude of I-It. Person refers to one

whose whole being is an open sharing and participation. Here is in the person,

where we assume the attitude of I-Thou. By entering into relation to another as

thou, addressing him as a person, by sharing with him what I am and what I have,

I become a person. According to Martin Buber, we are born as individuals, not

persons; we become persons. When we try to become persons, it will be a new

horizon.

24

Unlike other existentialist philosophers, Marcel is optimistic in his view of

the world, even though he describes it as a Broken World. He extends man‟s life

from despair and nausea to love and joy. He is no upset with the situations of

modern man, unlike Sartre and Camus. He is not worried about the

meaninglessness of life, but brings forth the meaning of life in meaninglessness.

Marcel could contribute many original notions to philosophy like Mystery and

Problem, Being and Having and Incarnation. His philosophical ideas could open a

new perspective in the world of philosophy and religion. The contemporary

Christian philosophy and theology have a good source from his all original

treatises. They could become germs to many schools of philosophy especially in

the West. The ideas he presents before us are, in my opinion, nuclear ideas. They

contain the germ of a whole philosophy. His concept of intersubjectivity,

disponability, and I-Thou could find new space in the mind of each of us. There is

no doubt that they can influence generations living and yet to come.

In this fast moving world, Gabriel Marcel is well aware of the dangers of

material developments and technology. As we have seen, he is not fully against

technology and material developments. In spite of accumulating material

sufficiency, he gives special attention to the over all development of man as an

individual and more over as a social being. Material sufficiency alone does not

sense to the well-being of man. Here Marcel makes a lot of difference in between

man and technology. Man needs technology, but it should not alienate him from

his life. Man‟s life is fulfilled not with havings, but with beings. It is not what we

have, but what we are that leads to greater self-realization. Man is essentially a

being open to the world outside and his existence is a co-existence. The meaning

of this world does not arise from him alone. It is not „my world‟, or „your world‟,

but „our world‟.

25

BIBLIOGRPHY

PRIMARY SOURCE

MARCEL, Gabriel, Being and Having, The Fontana Library, London, 1965.

MARCEL, Gabriel, Homo Viator, Hasper and Brother, New York, 1962.

MARCEL, Gabriel, Man against Humanity, Harvill Press Ltd., London, 1952.

MARCEL, Gabriel, Mystery of Being, (Vol-I, Reflections and Mystery), Harvill

Press Ltd., London, 1950.

MARCEL, Gabriel, Problematic Man, Herder and Herder, New York, 1967.

MARCEL, Gabriel, Royce’s Metaphysics, trans. by Virginia and Gordon Ringer,

Henry Regnery Company, Chicago, 1956.

MARCEL, Gabriel, Searchings, Newman Press, New York, 1967.

MARCEL, Gabriel, The Philosophy Of Existence, Harvill Press Ltd., London,

1948.

SECONDARY SOURCE

BUBER, Martin, I and Though, trans. by Ronald Gregor Smith, T&T Clark Ltd.,

Edinburgh, 1994.

COLLINS, James, The Existentialists- A Critical Study, A Gate Way Edition,

Chicago, 1963.

EDWARDS, Paul, The Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Vol-V, MacMillian Inc.,

USA, 1967.

GORDON, Psychology for You, Oxford Book Company, New York, 1974.

JOSEPH, Anton Dominic, Self Realization and Intersubjectivity in Gabriel

Marcel, Pontifical Urban University, Rome, 1988.

LESCOE , Francis J., Existentialism-With or Without God, Alba House, New

York, 1974.

MANIMALA, V.J., Being, Person and Community, Intercultural Publication,

New Delhi, 1991.

SCHILPP , Arthur , Paul and Lewis Edwin Hahh (ed.), The Philosophy of

Gabriel Marcel, The Library of Living Philosophers, USA,

1991.