An Introduction to the Foundation of the Concept of the Individual in Western Ways of Thinking Between Antiquity and Medieval Times

Definition

The individual, as found primarily in modern Western civilization, is defined as “the independent, autonomous and thus (essentially) nonsocial moral being”, “the rational being” who is “the normative subject of institutions”. This is the definition of the individual we adhere to in this text. This text delves into the intricate dimensions of the concept of the individual by exploring the theological foundations inherent in Western thought. Rooted in Max Weber’s assertion regarding the theological meanings of Man’s self-perception, the entry emphasizes the pivotal role of theological understandings in shaping the concept of the individual. Focusing on the influence of Christian perspectives on the development of the concept of the individual, the article traces the historical entwining of theology and the concept of Man between antiquity and medieval times.

1. Introduction

The concept of the individual in the ways of thinking of a people is crucial not only for instituting and sustaining democracy as a form of political governance but also as a way of life. Democracy and individualism, the foundational concepts in political and social systems, interact and complement each other. Exploring their main principles reveals how they contribute to a well-functioning society. Key aspects include respect for individual rights and freedoms, the empowerment of individuals, inclusivity and equality, accountability and transparency, pluralism and a diversity of ideas, and the protection of minority rights [1].

Studying the evolution of the concept of the individual in the Western mindset is crucial to comprehending the development of key institutions in the Western world. Additionally, it is essential to address contemporary threats to individualism and democracy in the West, where issues such as racism, fascism, and religious and political fundamentalism pose significant challenges (see, for example, [2,3]).

When exploring the individual as a concept, it becomes imperative to delve into ideas that encompass the metaphysical and theological dimensions of humanity. The God–man relationship emerges as a central theme, offering insight into the evolution of the individual concept. Guided by scholars like Dumont, Mauss, and Durand, this article centers on the prevalent dualistic view’s role in shaping the concept of the individual. In this regard, the narrative briefly explores first the dualistic impact of Greek thought on Christianity. While constrained by space, this concise text aims to highlight key aspects essential for grasping the evolution of the concept of the individual within Occidental thought (In this first section of the text, the paper is limited to the period spanning from antiquity to the pre-Reformation era).

According to Parsons, the validation of Man’s position in the world and his alignment with it is rooted in “what Weber referred to as the theological meanings of Man’s conceptions of himself and his place in the universe” [4] (p. xxxii).

These conceptions not only lend significance to Man’s varied pursuits but also play a pivotal role in shaping his metaphysical and theological understanding of self.

A fundamental aspect crucial to the formulation of Man’s metaphysical and theological conceptions revolves around how he perceives his relationship with a transcendental Being. In Weber’s analysis of the influence of individuals’ notions of Divinity on their social interactions, one can discern the extent to which the concept of Man as an individual owes its development to Christianity’s interpretation of the connection between Man and God.

Examining the history of philosophy briefly reveals that, at least until modern times, the evolution of the concept of Man was inherently tied to theology. The profound impact of Christian theological perspectives on Man has been widely acknowledged for shaping the trajectory of the notion of Man within the realms of modern philosophy, psychology, and sociology.

Recognizing the importance of metaphysical and theological conceptions in philosophical and analytical psychology underscores their enduring relevance in understanding the multifaceted nature of the human experience.

All that has been previously mentioned is widely recognized, and we reiterate it here to underscore the significance of the God–man relationship in the exploration of the evolution of the concept of the individual. First, in examining the influence of the dualistic perspective on the burgeoning concern for the individual self in Western thought, which we are introducing with a focused lens on specific aspects of reality, we must clarify that we do not assert this dualistic conception as the sole or authentic perspective. When we refer to the duality between body and soul in Christianity, we intend to highlight the prevalence of such dualism within the understanding of this religion as it is assimilated into Western thought. Therefore, throughout this article, our reference to Christianity primarily pertains to this mainstream understanding, unless explicitly stated otherwise.

Secondly, while we acknowledge dualism in Western thought as a noteworthy factor contributing to the conceptual development of the individual, it is crucial to note that we do not perceive the entire history of Western philosophy as exclusively a history of dualism (see, for instance, [5]). Undeniably, non-dualistic trends exist in Western philosophy, exemplified by figures such as Spinoza, who advocated ideas akin to the unity of existence [6]. Nevertheless, guided by the research of scholars like Dumont, Mauss, Durand, and others, whose investigations encompass the concept of the individual in both traditional and modern societies, our focus remains on delving into the dualistic view. This perspective, prevalent in Western ways of thinking, has played a pivotal role in shaping the evolution of the individual concept.

In this context, we will briefly examine the initial impact of the dualistic view in Greek thought on Christianity concerning the conception of Man. Subsequently, we will provide a concise exploration of the post-Christian period on the Western dualistic perspective. Throughout this effort, emphasis will be placed on elucidating the role of the dualistic view in the emergence of Man as an individual. Space constraints compel us to compromise on the depth and/or breadth of this text. While this concise introduction to the dualistic facet of Occidental thought cannot fully capture the richness of Occidental philosophy, it serves to identify key aspects crucial for comprehending the evolution of the concept of the individual.

2. Dualism and the Development of the Concept of the Individual

The Impact of Greek Thought on the Western Ways of Thinking

An exploration of Greek mythology unveils the distinctly human characteristics attributed to the Greek gods. These deities not only assume human forms but also exhibit human psychological traits. Their vulnerabilities and strengths, along with their interactions with humans and amongst themselves, collectively create an impression of human nature. Even Zeus, the chief deity, experiences emotions such as love, hatred, and jealousy. Similarly, his seven daughters, each representing a distinct art or vocation, display human sentiments. It is precisely in instances like the conflict between Zeus and Heracles over the fate of Prometheus that the divine struggle mirrors human conflicts. Recognizing the human traits inherent in Greek gods, Jean-Pierre Vernant, in his exploration of aspects of the “person” in Greek religion, reflects on this phenomenon. He emphasizes that for a Greek, Zeus is related to various forms of sovereignty, power over others, and certain human attitudes and behaviors: respect for supplicants and strangers, contracts, oaths, marriage… [7].

In ancient Greek religion, we encounter not eternal and omnipotent gods, but rather, deities distinguished from humans by their supernatural bodily and epistemic powers, wielded much like that of a human being. Consequently, the separation between the human realm and the realm of the gods is not a spiritual gap between this world and the beyond; instead, it is a physical one. The gods reside in distant Olympian mountains, far removed from human territory.

Given this scenario, it is unsurprising that the relationship between humans and gods in ancient Greek religion mirrors that of two earthly powers vying for dominance over the world. While the gods seek control over the fate of humanity, humans endeavor to assert their freedom and even aspire to replace the gods. Consider, for instance, the theft of fire by Prometheus, an act that incurred Zeus’s wrath as he sought to restrict humans’ access to fire. Fire, seen as the source of knowledge and power, had the potential to empower humans to rival the gods. Stories like the creation of Pandora, the first woman who “brought all the evil upon mankind which Zeus had planned” [8], further illustrate that the interactions between Greek gods and humans were not akin to those of lovers or worshippers, but rather those of rivals (see, for instance, [9]).

Another significant aspect regarding the relationship between humans and gods in Greek mythology is that the destiny of humanity is not believed to be solely in the hands of the gods, but rather, in the hands of humans themselves. The significance attributed to heroic deeds in Greek mythology stems from the belief that, despite the gods’ power over humans, an individual’s fate is shaped by their own actions. As Jean-Pierre Vernant asserts, what defines him, within his very human destiny, are the acts he has dared to undertake and accomplished: his exploits. Heroic exploits encapsulate all the virtues and dangers of human action…it appears that the Greeks expressed, in the form of the ‘heroic’, issues related to human action and its integration into the order of the world [7] (p. 90).

Alone and confronted by supernatural forces, Man, expecting no mercy from the gods, relied solely on his physical abilities as a means of attaining freedom and power [10]. The outcome was the exploration of the internal dimensions of the self and the heightened sense of responsibility, both contributing to the growing emphasis on the individual self in Greek thought. As Wilhelm Schmid noted, Michel Foucault devoted considerable attention to the revelation of the authentic “self” in antiquity. Hence, Michel Foucault, while reading texts from Antiquity, discovered that the “know thyself” was contingent on the imperative of “taking care of oneself” and that ancient philosophy was consistently concerned with the techniques of self [11].

The crucial point here is not only the presence of the concept of personality in Greek thought but, as asserted by Foucault, the acknowledgment of the idea of “souci de soi”—or the cultivation of the self—alongside the imperative of “connais toi-même”—or “know thyself” [12]. In essence, for the Greeks, self-awareness is intricately linked to self-care and, consequently, to “shaping oneself”. These directives do not merely emphasize the understanding of oneself, as directed by many religions, but emphasize the active transformation of oneself. It is essential to note that the mandates of “souci de soi” and “former soi-même” presuppose an awareness of being an individual, highlighting the individual’s relationship with oneself [11] (p. 42).

While there is a presence of a certain form of “individualism” in ancient societies, this should not overshadow the existence of robust social relationships within these societies. Indeed, when discussing individualism, as [11] reminds us, it is crucial to distinguish between three attitudes:

• The individualistic attitude, marked by the absolute value attributed to the individual in their uniqueness and the degree of independence granted to them in relation to the group and institutions.
• The positive valuation of private life, emphasizing the importance placed on family relationships, domestic activities, and the realm of personal interests.
• The intensity of self-relations, encompassing the ways in which individuals are called upon to treat themselves as objects of knowledge and fields of action. This involves transforming, correcting, purifying oneself, and seeking salvation.

While the mentioned attitudes can be interconnected, as Foucault illustrates through various examples, such interconnections are not obligatory. Therefore, we observe a pronounced inclination towards the “taking care of the self” attitude in Greek culture, as well as in the Hellenistic and Roman worlds. This is noteworthy despite the robust systems of local family relationships and the prevalent network of economic dependency in these ancient societies [11].

The reasons for this situation are undoubtedly multiple. However, as Foucault demonstrates, the engagement in self-devotion constituted a genuine social practice, often manifesting within more or less institutionalized structures. The authentic social foundation for this attention to the self in ancient societies did not primarily rest on the existence of institutions like schools, lectures, or spiritual direction professionals. Instead, this self-concern found ample support in the intricate web of customary relations such as kinship, friendship, and obligation. In the practice of self-care, when individuals sought guidance and counsel from someone recognized as having the aptitude for it, they were exercising a right within these established relations.

In ancient societies, the practice of self-care did not serve as an impediment to the deepening of social relations, unlike its role in modern societies. In contemporary settings, where private life holds great value and the entire system of individual rights establishes a framework for pursuing different personal goals, self-care can sometimes hinder social intensification. However, what both ancient and modern societies share concerning the concept of individualism is the central role of the self, manifested in the relationship one maintains with oneself, allowing individuals to assert an “I”.

It is precisely due to this central position of the self that individual aspects of existence carry significant weight, not only in modern Western societies where private life is safeguarded but also in ancient Greek and Roman societies. In the latter, where societal norms imposed a tight interdependence on every individual, the centrality of the self remained a common thread.

3. Antiquity and the Development of the Concept of the Individual

The concept of the individual is often traced back to Antiquity, with the notion of the “Person” believed to have originated in Greek drama and solidified through Roman law (see, for example, [13], pp. 33–37).

According to Mauss [14], for the Romans, the term “person” (personne) transcended mere organizational and ritualistic aspects; it was a fundamental legal reality. However, the understanding of the individual in Antiquity differed from our contemporary interpretation. In the ancient world, individuals, while recognizing themselves as autonomous agents pursuing personal interests, were intricately tied to their polis, actively participating in the political lives of their communities. Even Aristotle acknowledged this political dimension, referring to Man as a “political animal”.

Yet, the relationship between the Greek individual and the polis contained an inherent contradiction that eventually gave rise to the emergence of the modern concept of the individual. On the one hand, individuals sought to achieve their telos or purpose within the framework of a political community pursuing the good life. On the other hand, active participation in politics required the recognition of the individual as a free and autonomous person, a prerequisite for the democratic ideals central to Greek thought.

This contradiction found resolution, particularly with the Stoics and the Epicureans, who championed the idea of the individual as an autonomous being. They asserted that an individual’s fate was a personal matter, marking a shift toward radical individualism, as noted by Ketcham ([13], p. 36). Nevertheless, the transition from this quasi-autonomous individual in Antiquity to the fully realized modern autonomous individual was a gradual process. According to Mauss ([14], pp. 14–23), the concept of the “person” had to evolve from being a moral fact to finding a metaphysical foundation before transforming into the independent, socially disconnected, and self-willed individuals we recognize today.

The initial stride toward redefining the concept of the person was facilitated by the Stoics, who appended a moral dimension to its juridical meaning. Specifically, they introduced a profound “sense of being conscious, independent, autonomous, free, and responsible” ([14], p. 18); however, within the Stoic framework, while every individual possesses free will, this freedom is circumscribed by worldly desires. In particular, happiness, wealth, and possessions are not deemed inherently good in an individual’s life. According to the Stoics, the sole criterion for the goodness of an individual’s life is to live in harmony with Nature.

For the Stoics, this harmony with Nature entails aligning one’s will with the same ends as those dictated by Nature—an idea encapsulated in the core of Stoicist theory known as Virtue. The concept of Virtue, as understood by the Stoics, is inherently individualistic. It revolves around the individual’s virtue itself, divorced from any connection with the well-being of others. In this perspective, love, friendship, and affection, as well as negative passions, are perceived as impediments to the realization of an individual’s virtue.

The sage does not experience sympathy in the conventional sense. When his wife or children pass away, he reflects that such events are not obstacles to his own virtue, and as a result, he does not suffer deeply. Friendship, while valued, must not reach a level where a friend’s misfortunes disrupt the sage’s inner tranquility.

For the Stoic, virtue is pursued not to bring good to others but rather as a means to embody goodness. The idea of loving one’s neighbor as oneself does not feature in his philosophy; love, beyond a superficial level, is absent from his understanding of virtue [15].

According to Russell, the Stoic perspective on virtue as the cornerstone of morality differs markedly from Early Christian beliefs. In the Stoic view, virtue is not intended to benefit others—whether friends, neighbors, or humanity as a whole—but is rather seen as serving the individual’s own interests. This outlook, unfamiliar to Early Christians, bears resemblance to the spirit of Protestantism. Protestantism engenders an unparalleled inner solitude for the individual, where personal salvation takes precedence, akin to the Stoic concept of achieving holy calm. Weber asserts that reading Bunyan’s The Pilgrim’s Progress illuminates the profound spiritual isolation experienced by Calvinists and elucidates why their singular preoccupation is with personal salvation [16]. While a Calvinist seeks salvation through labor, a Stoic attains holy calm through virtue, impervious to external forces. Both perspectives share a commonality: they regard the “individual” and their satisfaction as the ultimate goal of human endeavors.

It should be noted that, while both views differ from the modern conception of the individual, they share an aspect akin to it. Both emphasize the “private” aspects of existence, encouraging individuals to focus inward and underscore the significance of personal conduct.

The subsequent development involved providing the concept of “person” with a metaphysical underpinning. According to Mauss, this was accomplished by Christianity, wherein the “moral person” (personne morale) was elevated to a metaphysical entity, acknowledging its religious potency [14] (p. 18).

The central concern here lies in the unity of “person” (personne) and the unity of the Church, both interconnected with the unity of God. Christianity transformed the notion of “person” into a rational, indivisible, and individual substance. Mauss supports this assertion by pointing to the entire history of the Church. However, the transition from this rational, indivisible, individual substance to the contemporary concept of the person as a consciousness and a category was relatively swift. In the subsequent exploration, we will delve into the influence of Greek thought on Christianity and illustrate how Christianity provided a metaphysical foundation for the notion of “person”.

Christianity and Greek Thought

The religious roots of the personality concept in Greek civilization, characterized by the disparity between humans and gods due to their conflicting relationships, had a significant impact on Greek philosophy, particularly concerning the interplay between body and soul. In this context, the soul, assuming a divine nature, does not reflect the uniqueness of individual humans as subjects; instead, it defines itself as the complement or counterpart to the body [7]. This notion is evident in Plato’s doctrine of Reminiscence and his acknowledgment of the differentiation between the body and the soul (see, for example, [17]).

According to Weinberg ([18], p. 13), Plato posited that before the mind became obscured by its embodiment, the human soul existed in a realm beyond the mundane. Plato asserted that our knowledge of Forms stems from a pre-incarnate existence, a recollection of unconscious experiences triggered by our sensations. Consequently, the physical world is where these Forms are imitated, and unlike the soul, the body is not the principle of life. This distinction allows for the separation of body and soul, with the soul persisting beyond the death of the body.

Considering Plato’s prominent role in shaping Christian philosophy and recognizing that “the distinction of soul from body and the doctrine of knowledge as reminiscence are distinctive and permanently influential features of Plato’s thought” ([18], p. 13), we can grasp the profound impact of the duality of body and soul on the mainstream of Christian thought. While traces of the Greek idea of the soul–body distinction can be found in other religions, it reaches its zenith in Christianity.

In the philosophy of St. Augustine, a pivotal figure whose influence extends deeply into Western Christianity, we discern a reflection of this idea. While delving into Augustine’s philosophy is beyond the scope here, it is worth noting that, according to him, the soul is distinct from the body due to the body’s extension in three dimensions, in contrast to the non-extended nature of the soul. Augustine posits that nothing but the soul is present to itself; hence, the mind does not need to seek itself as if it were elsewhere. This self-awareness of the mind leads to the concept that the soul, endowed with the capacity for understanding, surpasses physical objects, such as the body, which merely exist. This perspective offers insight into the framework that deems flesh and blood as “dirty”, “impure”, and “inferior”, often seen as a major impediment to the unification of humanity with God. Consequently, it becomes clear why Christianity views asceticism, as a method to overcome bodily desires, as a primary means of achieving salvation.

It would be incorrect to assume that Platonic thought was seamlessly integrated into Christian theology without any alterations. Much of the medieval theological discourse involved rigorous debates between Platonists and Aristotelians, the latter deriving their perspective from Aristotle’s epistemological theory that rejected Platonic Forms. Despite these debates, the concept of a fundamental distinction between the soul and the body has endured as an integral component of the Christian theological framework.

It is worth noting that, up until the thirteenth century, both Plato’s and Aristotle’s philosophies were often interpreted through Neoplatonic lenses. However, even as Neoplatonism, particularly the influence of figures like Plotinus, pervaded philosophical discussions, it did not prompt Christianity to fully discard dualism. Despite the monistic inclinations in Plotinus’s system, he fundamentally remained a dualist in his approach to the relationship between the soul and the body.

The profound influence of the dualistic perspective on Christianity is further evident in the infrequent reconciliation of mysticism with Christian thought. In this context, Schluchter asserts that within Christianity, the concept of God compels mystics to recognize the unattainability of an “ultimate union with God” ([19], pp. 25–26). Since some question the existence of ontological dualism in Western thought, particularly due to the significant role of mysticism in Christianity, I will address, more clearly, the infrequent reconciliation of mysticism with Christian thought.

While Schluchter’s assertion may be somewhat overstated, as exemplified by Christian mystics like Meister Eckhardt, St. Teresa, and St. John of the Cross, who do recognize the possibility of an “ultimate union with God”, it elucidates the overarching challenge faced by Christian mystics in reconciling the concept of the “Unity of Existence” with established religious doctrines. Almqvist explores the diverse perspectives on the relationship between God and humanity, drawing a distinction between the mystical view prevalent in Hinduism and Sufism and the perspective found in Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, characterized by the worship of God as a Personal God. He argues that in theological frameworks where God is primarily perceived as a Creator, lacking the perspective of holy radiation, the world appears inherently separated from God ([20], pp. 29–30). In such a context, God is often viewed solely as an object personified for human fear and love, leading to an unavoidable sense of duality (see, for example, [21]).

Within the mainstream of Christian thought, the idea of “ultimate union with God” is seldom deemed achievable. Weinberg, in his exploration of the mystical element in medieval thought, concludes that the fusion of a Neoplatonic system with Christianity presented numerous challenges for individuals. Weinberg highlights the conflict between the desire to be a free individual and the inclination toward pantheism, emphasizing the tension within Christian thought between the plurality of free individuals and the inherent dependence of all beings on God ([18], p. 56).

This conflict represents a facet of the dualism inherent in certain strands of Christian thought. If we acknowledge, on one hand, that mysticism is rooted in the idea of identifying the individual self with God and, on the other hand, recognize that such identification is deemed impossible in a framework where the body is viewed solely as flesh and blood, separated from the soul, then it becomes apparent why asceticism, rather than mysticism, predominates in Christianity.

Weber, in his exploration of historical distinctions between Oriental and Occidental salvation religions, emphasizes this point. He contends that the essential historical disparity lies in the fact that predominantly Oriental and Asiatic salvation religions culminate in contemplation while Occidental ones find their culmination in asceticism. From this perspective, Weber concludes that in the Occident, religions explicitly of a mystical nature typically transform into an active pursuit of virtue, predominantly ascetical in nature, with only a few instances of distinctive quietism observed in modern times ([22], p. 551). He asserts that:

In the West, by contrast, aside from a few proponents of a unique form of quietism that emerged only in modern times, even explicitly mystical religions were consistently transformed into an active pursuit of virtue—one that was predominantly ascetic in nature [22].

It is worth mentioning that when Weber discusses asceticism as the Occidental type of salvation, he specifically focuses on Christianity. According to him, while Christianity exhibits a strong inclination towards asceticism, neither East-Asiatic religions nor Judaism or Islam consider asceticism a decisive type of salvation ([23], p. 625). It is important to note that, despite Weber’s assertion that “early Islamism directly repudiated asceticism”, some degree of asceticism is present in early Sufism, influenced by Christian mysticism. However, in later forms of Sufism, mysticism, not asceticism, becomes dominant ([22], p. 325).

Although Weber’s limitation of asceticism to Christianity overlooks the fact that certain streams in Asian religions and trends in Islam display tendencies toward asceticism, his characterization of Christianity as an ascetical religion and Asian religions as contemplative is generally accepted. In Christianity, the notion of the body as “impure” and a barrier separating Man from God encourages asceticism, whereas in Asian religions, the concept of the “Unity of Existence” tends to culminate in contemplation.

It is not surprising that for a Hindu, Jew, or Muslim, “salvation” can be essentially achieved through contemplation, while for a Christian, it can be realized through asceticism. The absence of a sense of sin, fall from grace, or spiritual guilt and the entire theodicy of suffering in Islam play a significant role in diminishing the inclination toward asceticism. In this regard, the Islamic attitude toward suffering, as Turner ([24], p. 66) maintains, differs markedly from that in the Christian tradition. According to Bowker ([25], pp. 116–117), who asserts that the Qur’an requires that “suffering should be contested and, as far as possible, alleviated”, Turner ([24], p. 66) notes that “suffering is almost dissolved as a problem, because in Islam, there is an overriding emphasis on God’s omnipotence”. While it may be an exaggeration to claim that suffering is resolved as a problem in Islam, we should recognize that Islamic theology addresses suffering in different ways through its emphasis on divine wisdom (hikma), the concept of life as a test (ibtila), and the promise of ultimate justice in the afterlife. These frameworks help to contextualize suffering within a broader theological understanding, although they do not entirely eliminate the philosophical questions it raises.

When exploring the central themes of salvation and suffering in Christianity, it is essential to recognize that the existence of a gap between Man and God, coupled with the separation of body from soul, forms the spiritual backdrop not only for the development of the concept of Man’s sinfulness but also for the emergence of the Trinity. These two ideas vividly illustrate the dualist worldview inherent in Christianity.

The Christian doctrine of creation from nothing (creatio ex nihilo) through the Son, and the belief in the Son’s incarnation as Jesus Christ, presents an interesting tension with strict monotheism. While Christianity inherited monotheistic beliefs from Judaism, its emphasis shifted as the incarnation of God in Jesus became central to the faith, leading to the development of Trinitarian theology (see, for example, [26]. The understanding of Christ as one with the Father resulted in Jesus becoming the primary focus of Christian devotion, effectively transforming traditional monotheism into what might be called “monochristianism”. This theological shift had far-reaching implications: it contributed to the diminishing emphasis on creation doctrine and Christian cosmology, which, in turn, influenced the growing divide between theology and science during the Enlightenment period and the concurrent rise of materialism. This tension proved significant in shaping both Christian history and evolving concepts of individual identity.

In the era of the post-Reformation period, a decisive paradigmatic change happened in the Western view of Man and his relation to the world outside, which demands a separate article. We should here note that when the inclination towards interpreting Christian ideas from an anthropological standpoint increased, Christian “dualism” transitioned to the realms of philosophy and social science. When we speak of the dominance of dualism in Western thought, we do not mean that there is a unified set of ideas and values that bridge the differences between societies, cultures, schools of thought, and philosophical schools. There are certainly other ways of viewing the world and Man’s relationship to it within Western thought. However, here we focus only on the way of thinking that contributed to the development of the central school of thought in the West, which attributed a “quasi-sacred” value to each individual. In this regard, some general aspects of this school of thought have been presented here that help us better understand, from a historical perspective, how the concept of individuality developed in different schools of thought.

4. Conclusions

The exploration of the individual in Western thought reveals a profound intellectual journey rooted in theological traditions. From the anthropomorphic gods of Greek mythology to the dualistic view of body and soul in Christianity, the concept of individuality has been continuously shaped by complex cultural, philosophical, and religious paradigms.

The historical trajectory shows how early Greek thought introduced fundamental notions of personal autonomy through philosophical imperatives of self-knowledge and self-care. These conceptualizations were developed through Christian theological interpretations, transforming individual identity from a legal construct into a metaphysically significant, rational substance with spiritual depth.

The persistent dualistic perspective, especially the separation of body and soul, emerged as a critical framework for developing Western notions of personal identity, moral responsibility, and spiritual salvation. This philosophical approach created a nuanced understanding of human existence that emphasized individual agency while placing the person in broader metaphysical contexts.

This paper has highlighted that the Western concept of the individual is not a static construct but a complex, evolving understanding deeply embedded in intellectual traditions. By tracing the intricate development of the concept of the individual, the work has provided crucial insights into the philosophical and theological ideas that shaped understandings of human personhood between antiquity and medieval times.

The relevance of the research for future studies lies in its ability to inspire deeper critical reflection on the historical roots of individual identity. By understanding how these roots influence today’s society, we can better address contemporary challenges to democratic and inclusive ideals. Such an understanding is crucial in an era of rapid change and cultural upheaval, where questions of identity and belonging are becoming increasingly central.

Furthermore, the paper has offered a platform for examining how historical perspectives on the individual and collectivity can inform current debates in areas such as politics, ethics, and social justice. By refining our understanding of the individual’s role in society, future research can help develop more inclusive and equitable models of human interaction and societal structure.

The study of the development of the concept of the individual from the Middle Ages to the present day is of great importance for understanding how our society has been shaped.

Studying the development of the concept of the individual from the Middle Ages to the present day is important because it helps us understand how ideas about freedom, rights and identity have changed over time and shaped our societies.

By analyzing these changes, we can see how historical events, philosophical movements, and economic systems have influenced the view of the role of the individual in relation to the collective. It also gives us deeper insight into the challenges we face today, such as the balance between individual freedom and social responsibility, and how digitalization and globalization affect our self-image. By studying this development, we can make more informed decisions about the society of the future and safeguard both individual rights and collective well-being. This is a crucial task for future studies.