Integrating Contexts & Philosophical Matters: The Meaning of “Being at Home” Part 2 UPDATE
My philosophical work has been in attributing a philosophical reflection of what it is “to be at home” in the world. I am interested in the different ways we concurrently speak of the notion, and how each one affects the normative significance in terms of how things matter to me and how this matters to institutions and governments for thinking not only about major social global issues of the past, the present, and future, but also our freedom as agents in creating a home for ourselves and for others.
A second gear to the project, which I have already begun here, is to explore how my own philosophical disposition in conceiving of the human person as a self-interpretive person, and as an inherently social one, critiques and gives us further insights into the ways of achieving more insights the various definitions of home. I hypothesize that the conception of the self as self-interpretive offers a way to explore the notion of home as possessing more than ethical or cultural components but also in sharing and creating of life with others. Unpacking this philosophical conception and intellectual tradition will help further develop this conception of home by exploring how we create and share a life with others, how love, incredible moments, and connections — expressed in our sense of home in context — have been given, shaped, and can be further expressed in our life, in our civilization and in responses to the social global issues we collectively share.
Answering these questions will require defining my inherited intellectual heritage in order to locate within our concepts of self-interpretation and sociality the diverse intellectual resources open to me and that I will be able to use to recover different senses of sociality to further explores and assess the various conceptions of home and the sense of self related to them. Thinking about the person as creating and wanting to share a life with others relates not only to questions of self-discovery and self-creation, but also to what I believe are the dynamic of self-interpreting the place that others have in our life and self-interpreting the place we believe we hold in our society and with those whom we are asked to share a life or with whom we actually at the moment share one.
These questions also highlight practical ones as well, those that imply new perspectives in thinking about diverse sources of legitimation and the need to recognize and also understand how one lives and shares a life with other persons, sometimes strangers, that have different self-understandings, cultures, identities, practices, and for whom the world, its shared problems and solutions, are viable and legitimated from different background and faiths. Since some of our current major social and political problems are not only global but also shared, they thus require diverse sources of legitimation in order to work, for solution(s) to be plausible, and answers that work in helping us live and share a life with other(s).
How much can our self-understanding of home in terms of a shared life with another(s) change with new insight and articulation(s) into our self-interpretive as subjects to experience? And what impact can each have on the normative significance it has in terms of how things matter to me and how this matters to institutions and governments for thinking about major social global issues at the present, and our freedom as agents in creating a home for ourselves and for others? Perhaps, articulating the epistemic deficit, its conditions and limitation, articulating and overcoming the operational limits through self-awareness and partnerships, articulating the role of philosophy in this quest for home, will all be equally vital.