The Experience and Relation Amalgamation According to Martin Buber

...

Ethics Application

Do unto others as you would unto you; a fair reflection of the message Buber wishes to convey when talking about the basic word I-Thou. This “golden rule” or the law of reciprocity, emphasizes the importance of reflecting your personal feelings and/or desires unto another individual and understanding that what you do to them could in turn be done to yourself, therefore one needs to be conscious of treating others with morality. In the basic word I-Thou, one must reflect his or her personal being unto the whole being of another subject and consider them as a being in themselves, meaning that the I must treat the subject as another being such as themselves would wish to be treated, which is humanely. Without the golden rule, or without the I-Thou relation between two beings, the world will turn to chaos as no being would be treated respectfully; everybody would act in their own self-interest, excluding the consequences his or her actions reflect unto others. “In the relationships through which we live, the innate You is realized in the You we encounter”: Buber says this to support the idea that we generate relationships based on the reflection one makes of him or herself on another being to be able to treat him in terms of the golden rule.

Concerning the basic word, I-It, Buber mentions that “without IT a human cannot live”, meaning that a human needs experience in his or her life to be able to live, without it life would be tasteless. But, Buber grounds this statement by saying that “whomever lives only with [IT] is not human”. It is logical for the philosopher to say such a thing; one needs experience in his or her life to be able to obtain knowledge and grow, but if one only lives on that basis only, one loses his or her sense of humanity because his or her being is never reflected unto that of another, therefore one cannot be considered to be human since they are not able to treat people in a humane way. What Buber implicitly suggests is that one must find a balance or mean between his or her indulgences in terms of the basic words I-It and I-Thou in order to be considered human with a worthy life, or at least use both basic words in their living without using one in excess over the other; if there is no balance between the I-It and the I-Thou, an individual will either lack in experience and knowledge gained from the interaction with an “It” or will be excluded from society for the lack of recognizing a human as a being in themselves, or in other words, acting on the basis of what is morally correct.

“An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind”; Mahatma Gandhi was spot on when explaining how acting with violence to retaliate other violence will only lead the world to further violence and anarchy. This quote further explains what Buber’s I-Thou relation is about; once a subject enters a state of hatred and violence, the human essence is lost in him and of the Thou participating in the relationship. Buber says that “hatred remains blind by its nature; one can hate only part of a being” and that “one cannot say ‘you’ in hating a whole being”. What Buber is trying to say is that once a subject enters into a state of loathing towards another subject, the I-Thou relation is broken between them, meaning that the subject itself is losing part of his or her being in the process of engaging in this behaviour. If for example, I enter into conflict with a close friend and begin to generate feelings of hatred, I only hate the part of the friend which is in conflict with my being, thus reiterating that relation is reciprocity; as I have lost part of my being in being angry at my friend, so has he or she in doing so his or herself. Turning back to Gandhi, with the I-Thou relation, the subject respects the Thou and would never turn against him or her with violence since the subject should expect to be treated conversely in the way he has to the Thou he is relating to.

After discussing the similarities and differences between Buber’s two forms of existing or basic words, we get the sense that there needs to be a balance of both in the life of any individual in order to live in ethical and liveable terms; there is a close relation with the meaning behind the I-Thou relation and the universal “golden rule” which focuses on reciprocity. The I-It provides knowledge to the individual through experience and can never be experienced with one’s whole self, whilst the I-Thou is what makes a human human, acceptable in the eyes of another and is experience solely with one’s complete self; at the moment one breaks part of his or herself, the relation ceases to be an I-Thou relation. According to Buber, one cannot live about only by experiencing things in a partial state of being as he or she would not be considered human, one must be able to engage with his whole self in relation to other beings roaming in his or her surroundings in order to be considered acceptable and human.

References (APA)

Buber, M. (1958). I and Thou. New York: Scribner.

Longpré, R. G. (2010, May 30). I-Thou and I-It Relationships. Retrieved November 06, 2016, from https://retiredeagle.wordpress.com/2010/05/30/i-thou-and-i-it-relationships/

Puka, B. (n.d.). Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved November 06, 2016, from http://www.iep.utm.edu/goldrule/

Scott, S. (n.d.). Martin Buber (1878—1965). Retrieved November 5, 2016, from http://www.iep.utm.edu/buber/#SH2b

Wyschogrod, M. (1967). Buber's I-Thou Insight. Retrieved November 5, 2016, from http://www.philosophicalsociety.com/Archives/Buber's Insight.htm