The social person "human being"

 

The central person of the mythical plane of human law is the social person of the human being, a complex narrative that is the evolutionary result of social persons of different mythical planes. As we understand it today in a text such as the  1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights, is the evolutionary result of the fusion of the person of the lyrical citizen -the narrative author of the emotional private sphere- with that of the cosmopolitan citizen of Hellenism (determined by the multicultural scenarios of natural law), as well as with elements of the transnational person of the Christian, based on a transmundane lineage common to all human beings, to which some components of the Enlightenment narrative have been added (especially those of the Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen that the French Revolution published in 1789) as well as some corollaries of the theory of evolution that reinforce liberal economic principles. The metaphysical content of the mixture is explosive in contradictions. The 1948 Declaration shows the paradox of the universalization of human law described above, universalization that is carried out by building the corresponding social person. In fact, two people are built, among which total identity is proclaimed: the human being, and the person who acts these rights, and who is subject to the obligations that those imply. Most of the articles of the Declaration begin with the formula Every person ..., or, Every human being ..., that is, the Declaration as such is the identity narration of this subject, a transnational and transtemporal identity that began with the fusion of the narrative of the lyrical citizen and the cosmopolitan metaphysics of Hellenism. Greek cosmopolitanism is the result of skepticism regarding national identity narratives brought about by the end of Alexander the Great's empire . The cynics contribute to them with their criticism of the social order and the desecration of the territory which paved the way for the Stoic ideology of law universalism. The differences between local law and universal law are due to the ignorance of the legislator, not because there is an internal conflict. The solution to the discrepancies between universal moral law and natural law is given, as in Confucianism, by appealing to a common substratum, in the Greek case, to an intelligence that underlies everything, the logos . The universality of the logos is not limited to the law but the human being, barbarian or Greek, slave or free, is the possessor of this logos . As Marco Aurelio expresses , the community of logos and the law among men makes them partakers of the same citizenship, which the whole human race enjoys. However, it is not only through the narrative of philosophy and its influence on the arts that this identity is generated, but also from a general economic practice such as that facilitated by the Roman Empire, with the concessions of citizenship to the conquered peoples, something that Alexander had already tried by mixing Macedonians, Greeks, Persians and other ethnic groups in his empire. For its part, Christianity takes from Stoicism, among other things, the redefinition of the citizen's person in specific non-territorial terms, now emphasizing a communal transmundane component that was already seminally present in the Egyptian immortality narratives of the New Kingdom (a from the 16th century BC) made by the priests of Osiris . The common citizenship is that of the Celestial Jerusalem , a story initiated by the prophecy of Ezekiel in the 6th century BC in the context of the Babylonian captivity of Israel, which then receives a stoic, and later, mystical reinterpretation, in the Apocalypse of John.

The contribution of Christianity to the narration of the person of the human being will not be practical, it does not imply the definition of an economic identity, but rather transcendental . Christianity, no less than Judaism before, or Islam afterwards, has no problem with slavery, and does not construct economic determinations beyond the narratives of the King-God plane , which are the ones that best integrate with his narratives of primitive determination , inheritors of the harvest rites. But the transcendentalist elements of the person of the human being are not limited to the narratives of the religions of the Book . This transcendentalism is common to all identity narratives, since it is found on the mythical plane of the  Anima Mundi from which they all evolved. Buddhism itself , whose proposals are basically those of an atheistic transcendentalism, recognizes a Buddha nature in all humans and living beings in general, a nature that, within the contradictions of Buddhist metaphysics , is both empty and sacred. . The Buddha nature, such as the Atman , or the Christ within, or the Nur Muhamad, or the Osiris , or the Logos, or any of the equivalent narratives of human identity with a supernatural principle common to all men, underlie the conception of the human being that is expressed in the 1948 Declaration signed as an ideal by most of the nations. Its ideal content has precisely that foundation, and for this reason the identity proposal is compatible with a political and economic practice in the societies that approve it that contradicts the Declaration itself, so its content is absorbed in the mythical- ritual axis as an ideal substrate, metaphysical, as an orientation to action , functioning at the same time as an active element of new narratives of domination.

The 1948 Declaration continues to function as an ideal regulative principle, and it will continue to do so as long as the primitive determinations postulate equality for the most basic social persons (those of the Anima Mundi plane) but not for the economic persons of the most complex mythical planes. Economic equality, that would imply a more homogeneous distribution of property, is contrary to the system of accumulation of surpluses in cities.