Is there such a thing as “the essence of man”? The eighteenth century was rather optimistic about the essence of man. The general picture in that century was that man is reasonable, good, and easily directed or influenced in the direction of the good. Some people like Reinhold Niebuhr and others assure us that it is almost sinful to have such a naïve belief, and belief in the goodness of man. But I don’t believe we need such exhortations: The period we have lived through and are living through gives us sufficient proof of the irrationality and even insanity of man that we don’t really need to be reminded how evil man can be. The question is, and I think the essential question for the science of man to discover is: What is the essence of man? What is that can be objectively be described as human? I want to stress that the essence of man is not a substance, that it isn’t that man is good or man is bad, but that there is an essence that remains she same throughout history. The essence of man is a constellation or, as Heideberger called it, a configuration – a basic configuration. And as I see it, this configuration is precisely one of an existential dichotomy or, to use somewhat less technical language, it is precisely one of a contradiction between man as an animal who is within nature and between man as the only thing in nature that has awareness of itself. Hence, man can be aware of his separateness and losteness and weakness. Hence, man has to find new ways of union with nature and with his fellow man. Man was born, historically and individually, and, when he become aware of this separateness from the world, he would become insane unless he found a method to overcome his separateness and find union. This is, I am sure, the strongest passion in man, to avoid and overcome the full experience of separateness and to find new union.
The history of religion, and the history of man in general (and of individuals, too) show, that there are two ways of overcoming separateness and of achieving union. The one you will find in all primitive religions, and it is a way to return to nature, to make man again into a pre-human animal, as it were, and to eliminate that in man which is specifically human: his reason, his awareness. This elimination is done in all sorts of ways; by drugs, by orgies, or simply by identification with animals, by putting oneself in the state of the animal – especially in the state of, say, a bear, a lion, or a wolf. In other words, it is an attempt to overcome the sense of separateness by ceasing to be human and by regressing, if you please, to the natural state in which man is part of nature and in which he might become an animal. But, as the bible expressed it symbolically, once Adam and Eve had left the Paradise – that is, that state of oneness in which man is not yet born as man – two angels with fiery swords watch the entrance and man cannot return.
Mankind’s other solution to overcome separateness and gaining union seems to have been found in the period between 1500 B.C in China, India, Egypt, Palestine, and Greece: Man found oneness not by regressing but by developing his specifically human powers of reason and of love to such an extent that the world became his home; by becoming fully human he lived in a new harmony with himself, with his fellow men, and even with nature. This was the idea of prophetic messianism. It was also the idea of late medieval religious thought. And it was the idea of eighteenth century humanism. In fact, it is still the essence of religious thought and spiritual thought of the Western tradition: Man’s task is to develop his humanity, and in the development of his humanity he will find a new harmony and hence the only way in which he can solve the problem of his being born. Being born, we are all asked the question and we have to give an answer – not one with our mind and our brain, but, every moment, one with our whole person. There are only really two answers. One answer is to regress and one answer is to develop our humanity. And there are many people – and I suppose these days most people – who try to avoid the answer and who fill the time with all the many things that we call entertainment or diversion or leisure time or whatever it may be. But I believe we find ultimately that this solution is no solution, that the people who choose it are bored and depressed, except that they are not aware of it.
