INTRODUCTION
1.1
General Introduction
Through
this paper I would like to look at the communication from the point of view of
Martin Buber. As I have stated above the growth in the field of communication
is a positive one having little defects which can be corrected. In this paper I
would like to look at one defect rather I would say one particular problem that
is present in the field of communication and suggest the remedy that Martin
Buber expresses in his major writings.
1.2 Structure of the Paper
In
the above paragraph I have mentioned that I would like to state a particular
problem that Martin Buber perceives to be present in communication and the
remedy that he suggest as my aim for the paper. And so the structure of the
paper is also based on this aim. First I have mentioned the life of Martin
Buber to put the readers into the perspective. In the second chapter I have
presented the main problem that is present in communication. In this chapter, I
have made it a point to clarify the idea of communication that Martin Buber
speaks about and the terms that Buber uses in his writings. In the third
chapter I have explained the remedy that Buber suggests to solve the problem
that is present in communication. In the same chapter I have also explained the
application of the remedy that Buber suggests. In the fourth chapter I have
presented the summary of the paper and my own critique.
1.3
Life of Martin Buber (February 8, 1878 – June 13, 1965)
Martin Buber was and Austrian-born Israeli, born
in Vienna in February 8, 1878. He came away from his Jewish custom to
pursue secular studies in philosophy. In 1923 he wrote his famous essay on
existence namely Ich und Du which was later translated into English
as I and Thou. In the year1925 he began translating the Hebrew
Bible into the German language. Buber's wife’s name was Paula and she
died in the year 1958. Buber died at his home at Talbiyeh a place near
Jerusalem on June 13, 1965.[1]
1.4
Methodological Limitations
The main
limitation of this paper is that I have referred few books of Martin Buber.
More reading of the works of Buber would have helped me to go into the topic
little deeper. The other limitation could be that I have used only few net
articles as secondary sources in this paper.
THE
PROBLEM IN RELATIONSHIP
In
the first chapter I have tried to explain the present scenario with regard to
the field of communication and the brief mentioning of the life of Martin
Buber. In this chapter let me explain to you the particular problem that Buber
sees in communication. Before entering into the problem proper let me clarify
certain terms which will make the reading of this paper quiet clear.
2.1
Clarification of the Terms
2.1.1
Dialogue
Buber makes one point
very clear saying that the whole life is an encounter.[2] By
this above expression Buber makes it very clear that in this world everything
is in encounter with each other. Basically Buber speaks of two types of
relationship, the first one is I-It relationship and the other is I-Thou
relationship.[3]
He says that what happens in I-Thou relationship is dialogue and what happens
in I-It relationship is monologue. In dialogue the other is considered as
person, there is respect for the person and his views and the ethics and values
are respected. But what happens in monologue is that the other is not
considered as a person, only personal achievements are important, it is a means
for some purpose and the ethics and values have no place, only personal motives
are important in this relationship.[4] He
also says that there are many things which are considered as dialogues but they
are not dialogues.[5]
Buber also says that it is not hat a man or woman lives a life of monologue in solitude. But he or she begins to live in this monologue because they are not capable of knowing the real world where in he or she has to live in community by entering into dialogue. That is to say man has to realize that he or she has to enter into the I-Thou relationship. When we fail to realize this then we enter inside in this monologue though living with many individuals around. The dialogue that Buber speaks about is not identified with love but with out this love dialogue is not possible.[6]
2.1.2
The Two Basic Word Pairs
Before entering
into the topic proper I think we need to be clear of the two basic words that
Buber uses. There are two basic word pairs that Buber speaks about. The first
one is I-It and the next one is I-Thou. Here the I in both the words have
different meanings all together. The word I is always understood in relation to
the other. When a man says I it has no meaning. But if he relates that I to
thou or it then there is meaning. So this I have two fold meaning in relation
to thou or it. To give an example; when somebody says, “I want some thing,” or
“I imagine something,” that particular individual is speaking about I-It word. [7]
2.2
The Problem in Relationship
Buber in his book I and Thou explains very clearly about
the problem that is present in relationship or in communicating with the other.
He says this modern world makes man to be always in I-It[8]
world. Buber says that in our life there are very important two spheres:
economy and state which makes the man to be in I-It relationship all the times.
Its demands are in such a way that human beings are always caught up in this
I-It relationship where in the other individual is seen as a mere thing to be
used in other way we could say that the persons are considered as mere things that are to be manipulated.
Let us take the example of the statesman and businessman. These people look at
other human beings as things who can be used for becoming popular, rich and means
to gain power and position in the society. They will never be able to see the
persons as thou but always in all circumstances only as it. They know very
clearly that due to the situation they cannot simply confront the people with
whom they have to deal as many carriers of the thou without undoing his own
work. Leave the individuals look at the structure of the society, if we don’t
consider the individuals as it the society looks at us differently. The modern
developments too have led to this pitiful state of looking at the individuals
as mere things for exploitation by its new inventions. It would be absurd to
try to reverse this development. Look at every individual, the will to profit
and the will to power are always present in every individual human being. Due
to this all the human relationship is tending to look at the other person as a
thing to gain profit and to rule over or have dominion over.[9]
2.2.1
The Situation
Buber says that the
peculiar and very basic situation that makes us to be in the I-It relationship
is the inner quest for knowledge. There is an inner tendency in man to gain
experience and get better. For this he or she uses the persons as mere things
and achieve the purpose that they have in their mind. But Buber says that this
desire for gaining experience by using persons is the major obstacle for
relation and genuine dialogue.[10]
In the process of attaining knowledge too we human beings take the experience
as it and store the knowledge also as it, so when we come to the application of
that particular knowledge we tend to apply it as mere it. This could be also
with regard to persons. Buber is very clear in expressing that in the process
of experience and its application man’s power to relate decreases, it remains
as a hindrance to proper relationship with our own selves as well as the other.[11]
We human beings always want to enter inside a relation with things around us.
It is not because we want to have a real relationship but we want to use and
posses the things that is the reason we want to enter inside the relation with
the reality around. This is the situation that is present.[12]
2.2.2
I-It Relationship
2.2.2.1
The Nature of I-It Relationship
The nature of
I-It relationship is not relationship; rather it is only an experience.[13] When I contemplate on a tree I get to
know very many things about the tree. But it remains an object and an
experience.[14]
Buber says that there is an inner deep longing to relate at all the stages of
life.[15]
In I-It relationship the particulars like colour, physical structure and things
alike are taken into consideration. Because of this the other no more remains
to be thou. The other individual is looked at only as an object.[16]In
this relationship there is no ethics is found, individual motives are
important. Individual goals and benefits are given prime important in this kind
of relationship. In this there is no possibility of genuine dialogue.[17]
2.2.2.2
The Process of Moving Towards It World
When a child is born it
is in a stage were it does not distinguishes anything, for a child everything
is same that is to say that it identifies every thing as same thing. Once the
child comes to the awareness it separates itself from every thing else and
beings to separate the reality as subject and object.[18] Buber
says that every thou in this world is doomed to become it. But before becoming
it they were thou, but due to the language of the object that we use the thou
becomes it. Our language is tending to catch only the thing hood of thou.[19]
In the beginning with out our knowledge there was only I-Thou relationship
existing, but when human being recognized itself and others as separate from
then there came the distinction and separation. Here the thou becomes it.[20]
DIALOGICAL RELATIONSHIP (I-THOU)
In the previous
chapter I have explained the problem that Buber sees in relationship (I-It
relationship). He not only stated that there is a problem in relationship or
communication, but he also gives the solution to this problem. The solution
that Buber suggests is nothing but the I-Thou relationship where in the genuine
mutual dialogue is possible. As I have already stated Buber suggests the I-Thou
relationship as the solution for the problem that is present in the
communication or relationship. The fact of human existence is not fully
individual at the same time it is also not fully social. Human existence is
that where in the human beings step into the living relationship with other
individuals.[21]
In this chapter let me explain the three spheres in relationship that Buber
speaks about and then the I thou relationship in detail.
3.1
Relationship
3.1.1
Three Spheres of Relationship
Buber says that the world of relation arises in three spheres namely: life with the nature, life with man and the life with Spiritual beings.[22] He is calling us to have I-Thou relationship in all these three spheres of relationship. In this world of relation every I encounters the thou and in these thou the I has relation with the Eternal Thou.[23] In these three spheres the first and the third does not have much connection to language, where as in the second sphere the language has a very significant place. In this sphere the language is perfected as sequence and becomes speech and reply. It is only in this sphere there is encounter and reply, the word is formed into a language, the answer and the question are present in the same tongue and here along the beholding and being beheld, recognizing and being recognized, loving and being loved are existing. He also goes further in saying that the relationship with men is the perfect metaphor for relation with God.[24] But in God all answer is found God reveals himself to us as language. [25] He also makes one point clear that is human beings are part of nature yet the sphere of relationship is different.[26]
3.1.2
Relationship is Both Passive and Active
The relationship
or the dialogue that Buber is talking about is both passive and active. This
relationship is both chosen as well as choosing. He explains this further by
giving the example of you and me meeting some body on the way. When we walk we
meet some body who is coming on the same way. We know our way but we do not
know the way of the person whom we meet on our way. Here the encounter happens
by itself, but we made it a point to walk it is because that also the encounter
happened. In the same way in relationship too it happens and in a way we also
choose to relate.[27]
3.2
Relationship as Basis for Community
Buber says that with in
an individual there is a basic separation of two districts one is I district
and the other is it district which in other word he calls as feeling and
institutions. Institutions are the externals, which are like the place of work,
the persons whom we meet and things alike. Feelings are internal this is the
area through which an individual comes out of the impact caused by the
institutions that is the outer world. According to him the true community in
communion does not come in to existence because people have feelings for each
other, though it is required to build a community life it is not the only thing
that make the people to come into communion and live as community. But what
makes them to come together as one community in the first place are two things
the first is that they have to stand in a living reciprocal relationship to a
single living center and the second one is that they stand in living reciprocal
relationship to one another. In simple word we could say that we human beings
come in communion because there is a single living center in which we are all
in single and reciprocal relationship. We are in single reciprocal relationship
to each other this second one has its base ultimately in the first one that is
there is one single center towards which we are in reciprocal relationship.[28]
After explaining this
concept Buber goes on to say that there are two forms of association; one is
the personal life and the other is the public life. For these two kinds of life
feelings are required, but the human life is not only made up of these two
forms of life. There is a third element required for the human life; this third
element is nothing but the central presence of thou in human life. By this he
or she makes it very clear that the life is not only made up of an individual
and his or her relation to other but in this relation considering the other as
well as him or herself as thou. So ultimately what make the life meaningful is
considering the other and our selves as thou; this is the single living center
of reciprocal relationship.[29]
He also makes another point very clear with regard to community. He says that
since we are living in community our decision is always threatened by
collective decision. So we must participate in this collective decision through
the dialogue that is the I-Thou relationship.[30]
3.3
The Process of Moving Towards I-Thou Relationship
Buber
while explaining abut the process of moving towards the I-Thou relationship
brings in the concept of I-consciousness. He says that in life many things come
and go but what remains constant is the I-consciousness. This occurs only when
the I is able to see itself as thou. Only when an individual is able to see him
or herself as thou he or she will be able to enter into the relationship in
full consciousness. Man becomes an I through a thou, that is when he confronts
a thing as thou then he or she becomes aware of his or her own self; this is
the I-consciousness. Here the dialogue takes place. [31]
3.4
Nature of I-Thou Relationship
In the previous
chapter I have explained the nature of I-It relationship, I think it will be
better to explain the specific nature of I-Thou relationship in this part of
the chapter. Buber says that when we confront a person as our own thou, he or
she no longer remains it, that individual ceases to be it and becomes a person
same like us. Here even though that individual is having particulars (colour,
size and etc.), we will begin to see
everything in the light of that individual. So the person is seen as a whole
being not as means to achieve some hidden motives.[32]
Buber also makes a very clear point that this relationship leads us to God.[33] When we consider the other as thou we
ourselves become whole persons. In this relationship we are able to enter
inside a supreme encounter, here we are not loosing ourselves but involving
ourselves. We give up the false drive for self affirmation and satisfaction and
begin to see other as thou.[34]
3.5
The Meaning of the Word I in I-It and I-Thou Relationship
I have explained
the two kinds of relationship that Martin Buber speaks about. In these
relationships that is the I-It relationship and the I-Thou relationship the
word I has completely different meanings all together. This difference is not
some thing that I am trying to make but Buber himself explains it very clearly.
He says that the I of I-It word and I of I-Thou word are totally different.
Though they look similar both the I have different meanings altogether. The I
of the I-It word means ego, for it becomes conscious of itself as subject apart
from the other which is considered as a mere object. This ego sets itself apart
from other egos. This one is the spiritual form of differentiation. The mere
purpose for setting oneself apart from others is to experience and use the
other. But the I of the I-Thou word is totally different here the I is a person
and it is conscious of its own self as subjectivity. Here the I is person
because it enters into relation to other persons and it is the natural
association. The mere purpose of this relation is not manipulation. Buber
believes that when an individual touches a thou through relation he or she is
touched by a breath of eternal life.[35]
The above
paragraph explains clearly how the I of the two kinds of relationship is
different. He further says that this separation does not mean that there are
two kinds of human beings. He says, “There are not two kinds of human beings,
but there are two poles of humanity.” Buber is also very clear in his
expression saying that there are no pure egos and pure persons. All the human
beings live in a two fold way, that is to say that we have both the qualities
of person in I-Thou relationship as well as the qualities of ego in the I-It
relationship. It is between these two the history[36]
takes place.[37]
3.6
Freedom in I-Thou Relationship
In
the I-Thou relationship Buber speaks about the significant presence of freedom.
In this relationship the I is not limited by the thou and vice versa. Both I
and thou enjoy compete freedom.[38]
Buber explains this idea of freedom further by explaining the causality that is
present in the It world. In the It-world every event is considered to be of
necessity that is caused and a cause. This unlimited sway of causality in the
It-world is of fundamental importance for the scientific offering of nature.
Yet the man is not confine to this It-world but free to step out of it again
and again into the world of relation. It is only here I and thou confront each
other freely in a reciprocity that is not tainted by any causality. In this
relationship we find guaranteed. Only the people who know relation and who know
of the presence of the thou have the capacity for making a free decision. When
we are able to make decision we are free. A human being in this relationship to
whom the freedom is guaranteed does not feel that he or she is oppressed by the
causality. This individual being is very much aware that the very nature of his
or her mortal life is a circle between thou and it.[39]
3.7
I-Thou Relationship is the Three Spheres of Relationship
In the beginning
of this chapter I have explained in detail about the three spheres of
relationship that Buber talks about. After having explained or rather I would
say after inviting every one in the world to enter into the I-Thou relationship
Buber goes on to say how this I-Thou relationship could be in the three spheres
of relationship.
3.7.1
Nature
In the previous
section dealing about the three spheres of relationship in the beginning of the
chapter I have mentioned that in this first sphere of relationship there is no
language that is spoken. Even thou the thing that are present in the nature are
mere things Buber is inviting us to have the I-Thou relationship with nature
too. I think Buber is trying to say that though they are things we must not
exploit them. This exploitation may lead us towards other problems like natural
instability and things alike.[40]
Buber says that when we contemplate on the nature we get to know many things
and here the nature remains a mere object. For example when we look at a tree
we get to know many things. But when I enter into the I thou relationship I
begin to see the nature as it is. The tree remains a tree for me nothing else
comes to my mind.[41]
In this I-Thou relationship we confront the nature ant the nature also
confronts us.[42]
The moment we begin to look at a thing in the nature as thou or soul we enter
inside a world wide dialogue with the whole environment around.[43]
3.7.2
Men and Women
The I-Thou
relationship that I have explained in this chapter is basically the
relationship that Buber invites us to have with our fellow human beings. I
think that is sufficiently enough about the I-Thou relationship that Buber asks
us to have with one another. Yet I would like to make a little comment on this
point over here. Buber says that the I-Thou relationship is inclusive of all
relationships. We can not remain isolated in our relationships. That is to say
that we can not say that since I am in relationship with one particular
individual or a group I need not to relate with other individuals or groups.
The relationship that Buber is speaking about is all-embracing relationship.[44]
In speaking about the relationship that exists between a man and woman, Buber
says that when a man loves a woman and looks at her as thou her eyes make him
to have the taste of the Eternal Thou.[45]
But when he begins to see her with lust as an object that satisfies his sexual
hunger then that is not a genuine relationship.[46]
3.7.3
God
Buber is very
clear in his explanation about human beings having the I-Thou relationship with
God. He says that when we do not look at the thou as it, this leads us to God.
But if we see thou as it then that leads us to nothingness.[47]
In this relationship with God too there is something very important that Buber
speaks about. He says that we human beings have an inner deep longing to relate
and to dialogue with God. We need God and He means more that anything to us.
But we must also remember that God also needs us in the similar manner. If God
does not need man then why do we exist in this mere world? We human beings need
God in order to be that is to say for our own existence. In the similar manner
God needs us to add meaning to our own life. If we are not existing then there
can not be any meaning or rather there own be life itself. So in relationship
to God also there is a mutual dialogue or relationship that is happening.[48]
He explains further
saying that the relationship that a human being has towards the world and God
are the same, we can not say that we love God in truth and use the world. We
have to love God in the world and therefore look at the nature also as thou in
view of the Eternal Thou.[49]
He also says that when the self becomes transparent and united with the
absolute that is God we attain self responsibility.[50]
Three spheres of relationship that Buber speaks of is all interlinked with on
another. We can not love one or have relationship with one and avoid the other.
Through this Buber is inviting every individual human being to enter into this
dialogical relationship.
3.8
The Narrow Ridge of Communication
Buber, after having
explained that we must have this I-Thou relationship goes on to say that when
this relationship occurs the participants take part in the narrow ridge of
communication. This is the place when the participants are able to see and
share the view point of the other. Here the participants do not compromise or
sacrifice their ideas in order to suit the other but in genuine respect they
come to the common understanding. This is the guide to the development of the
Community. Here there is no manipulation; we look at the other as Thou.[51]
CONCLUSION
4.1
Summary
Buber
considers the dialogue as the meaningful communication. This dialogue happens
only in the I-Thou relationship. He makes a very clear distinction between the
I-Thou relationship and the I-It relationship. At this present era due to the
roles and functions that the society places on the individuals every one is
tending to look at the other as mere object of manipulation. We are relating
with each other for our own selfish motives. Due to this the human beings are
reduced to mere objects. This drive for manipulation has entered in the spheres
of nature and God. There are three spheres of relationship in our lives, which
is relationship with nature, man and God. Due to the problem of looking at the
other as mere object of fulfilling selfish motives the relationship is
hindered. The relationship in which we
consider the other as a thing is called as I-It relationship. This relationship
has no room for ethics and common good only selfish motives gain the dominant
place in this relationship. Though the other is a person by his or her nature
we tend to look at that individual as a thing for our selfish motives.
The
problem of this I-It relationship can be solved by all of us human beings by
entering inside this I-Thou relationship in all the three spheres of
relationship. In this relationship the other person is looked at as person
(Thou). This relationship provides complete freedom to the participants of this
genuine dialogue. This relationship will enable every one to have concern for
one another and will help us all to build a better community of human beings.
Though there are three spheres of relationship the first two spheres that is
relationship with nature and man ultimately leads us to enter inside a mutual
dialogical relationship with the Eternal Thou that is God. Only this I-Thou
relationship can make us human beings to have respect for each other, this
relationship will not abandon the rules of the society that is to say that this
relationship will give much importance for ethics and good of the society.
4.2
Critique
I have read only
few works of Martin Buber, but I am able see the marvelous contribution that he
has made in the field of Philosophy. The intensity of his thought is some thing
that makes me to admire his work more and more. More over his concept of
intersubjectivity is some thing unique and praise worthy. His way of looking at
the problem that is present in relationship and the solution that he himself
offers is something that is very useful and meaningful for the present day
situation. His ideas on this I-Thou relationship that I have spoken in this
paper is his unique contribution that he has made in the field of philosophy.
In
the beginning of my critique I have mentioned that I have read only few of his
books. Having read his few works I noticed that he uses the masculine gender
(man) to mean the humanity in general. If he used the common gender it would
have been much richer. Except for this particular minor thing I consider his
works as some thing marvelous and unique.
SELECT BIBLIOGRAPHY
PRIMARY SOURSES
Buber,
Martin. The Knowledge of Man: A
Philosophy of the Inter Human. Edited, Translated and Introduction by
Maurice Friedman .New York: Harper & Row Publishers, 1965.
_____,
I and Thou, Translated and
Introduction by Walter Kaufmann. Edinburgh: I & T Clark, 1970.
_____,
Between Man and Man, Translated and
Introduction by Ronald Gregor Smith. Collins: Fount Paperbacks, 1979.
SECONDARY SOURCES
UNPUBLISHED
MATERIALS
Jans,
Molly. “Martin Buber’s Dialogic
Communication.” http://www.colorado.edu/
communication/metadiscourses/Papers/App_Papers/Jans.htm. 09/07/2012.
Scholz,
Erin. “Martin Buber – Dialogue.” http://www.colorado.edu/communication/
metadiscourses/ Papers/App_Papers/Scholz.htm. 09/07/2012.
[1]
“Martin Buber” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Buber for wiki
article , accessed on 09/07/2012.
[2] Martin Buber, I and Thou, trans. and Introduction by
Walter Kaufmann (Edinburgh: I & T Clark, 1970) 62.
[3] These concepts will be explained
in detail later in this paper.
[4] Molly Jans, “Martin Buber’s Dialogic
Communication” http://www.colorado.edu/
communication/metadiscourses/Papers/App_Papers/Jans.htm, accessed on 09/07/2012.
[5] Martin Buber, Between Man and Man, trans. and
Introduction by Ronald Gregor Smith (Collins: Fount Paperbacks, 1979) 37.
[6] Martin Buber, Between Man and Man, 38-39.
[7] Martin Buber, I and Thou, 53-56.
[8] The concept of I-It relationship
is explained in this same chapter later.
[9] Martin Buber, I and Thou, 96-97.
[10] Martin Buber, I and Thou, 88-89.
[11] Martin Buber, I and Thou, 90-92.
[12] Martin Buber, The Knowledge of Man: A Philosophy of the
Inter Human, ed., trans and Introduction by Maurice Friedman (New York:
Harper & Row, Publishers, 1965) 66.
[13] Martin Buber, I and Thou, 53-56.
[14] Martin Buber, I and Thou, 57-58.
[15] Martin Buber, I and Thou, 77.
[16] Martin Buber, I and Thou, 59-60.
[17]Erin Scholz, “Martin Buber – Dialogue”
http://www.colorado.edu/communication/ metadiscourses/
Papers/App_Papers/Scholz.htm, accessed on 09/07/2012.
[18] Martin Buber, I and Thou, 77-79.
[19] Martin Buber, I and Thou, 69.
[20] Martin Buber, I and Thou, 75.
[21] Martin Buber, Between Man and Man, 244.
[22] Martin Buber, I and Thou, 56.
[23] By the word Eternal Thou Buber
is referring to God.
[24] Here he is meaning to say that
the relation with God is as same as we relating with the other as Thou, in
relation with God also we must never tend to look at Him as a mere thing which
gives us something when we are in need of some thing.
[25] Martin Buber, I and Thou, 149-151.
[26] Martin Buber, The Knowledge of Man, 100.
[27] Martin Buber, I and Thou, 124-125.
[28] Martin Buber, I and Thou, 92-95.
[29] Martin Buber, I and Thou, 92-95.
[30] Martin Buber, Between Man and Man, 90.
[31] Martin Buber, I and Thou, 80.
[32] Martin Buber, I and Thou, 59-60.
[33] Martin Buber, I and Thou, 75.
[34] Martin Buber, I and Thou, 125-126.
[35] Martin Buber, I and Thou, 111-114.
[36] Here, by the word history Buber
literally means the happenings of the earth.
[37] Martin Buber, I and Thou, 114-115.
[38] Martin Buber, I and Thou, 130.
[39] Martin Buber, I and Thou, 100-101.
[40] This is my interpretation of what
Buber says about the I-Thou relationship with the nature.
[41] May be he is trying to say we do
not think of it as fire wood or wood for making furniture.
[42] Martin Buber, I and Thou, 57-58.
[43] Martin Buber, Between Man and Man, 57.
[44] Martin Buber, I and Thou, 129.
[45] Here he is referring to God.
[46] Martin Buber, I and Thou, 154.
[47] Martin Buber, I and Thou, 75.
[48] Martin Buber, I and Thou, 130-131.
[49] Martin Buber, I and Thou, 156.
[50] Martin Buber, Between Man and Man, 35.
[51] Erin Scholz, “Martin Buber – Dialogue” http://www.colorado.edu/communication/
metadiscourses/ Papers/App_Papers/Scholz.htm, accessed on 09/07/2012.
No comments:
Post a Comment