Metaphysics: Do We, or Does the World, Exist?
This seems like such an easy question, but, like defining ethics, turns into a knot that requires careful examination.
Am I a dream or a caterpillar, or both?
Usually metaphysical discussion begins with whether God exists, but we have addressed that in detail above. Let us move onto the next two questions: Do we, or does the world, exist?
First, let's talk about us.
Can we say, "I think I am?" This is the question that kicked off the modern world, with Descartes in the early 1600's. The early printing press, at roughly the same time, helped to move learning outside the monestary and into the libraries of universities and of the wealthy. A democratization of knowledge led to questioning of the assumptions of the past. Indirectly, Descartes' scandalous question of whether the self exists was doubting of the existence of the human "soul."
Does thinking mean we are real?
(1) "Does consciousness of being conscious mean the same as self-consciousness?" This is a question asked by the phenomologists, adherants of an European contemporary Philosophy. It's tongue-twister and much fun to consider. Generally, we agree that self-consciousness is something special to humans. However, I have known cats and dogs who appear to "pose" for a camera. Isn't that a kind of self-awareness?
(2) "Can cognition be reduced to calculation?" This is a consideration of current Cognitive Scientists, who question the physical nature of thinking: how much of thinking is a result of biological processes (rather that an inner something that is other than, and more, than merely physical). They also question whether human thought can be mimicked by artificial intelligence. Can human thinking be mechanized, digitized, or biologically copied. Further, can DNA alterations increase the capacity for thinking or inhibit it?
(3) Human thinking does seem to be vulnerable to physical injury of the skull and brain. Yet, rubbing the scalp doesn't seem to help. Small heads seems to think just as well as big heads. Calculators and electronic digital computers are fun and at times amazing in their speedy achievements in mathematics and database searching. Yet, creativity alludes these devices. Randomness is possible, but unguided, intentional creation of tools or art is not. The "Cognitive Science" of studying thinking continues.
(4) Some of the more colorful and enticing examples of examining whether the self exists resides in the poetry of the ancient Chinese Daoist, Chuang Tze. Living before Confucius, roughly 500 b.c., Chuang Tze wrote he had a dream in which he was a caterpillar, then questioned whether he was actually a caterpillar dreaming. What a lovely way of asking whether life is just a dream. I believe he leaves the question unanswered, giving us, at least, a higher respect for caterpillar and butterflies.
(5) In 1637, in Discourse on Method, Descartes, French, also questioned whether life was just a dream. He examined whether he existed, whether God existed, and whether the world existed. As the first of the Rationalists, he began the Modern era.
He decided he must exist because, even if he doubted everything he knew or felt, the one thing he could not doubt was that he was doubting. Doubting requires thinking. In short, his thinking was sufficient proof that he existed. "I think, therefore I am," became the most famous sentence of all of Philosophy.
Next, let us ask, "Is the world real?"
(1) To decide whether the world existed, the next conclusion Descartes made was that God existed. Most Philosophers, particularly the contemporary ones, have moved in the opposite direction, accepting the material world but doubting the need for a Creator of it.
If life was nothing but a dream, or, as Descartes described it, if in our sleep all the world disappeared, only to come back into being when we awake, then all we experience is a delusion. What child has not questioned whether the world goes away when he or she falls asleep?
How do we know whether our sensory perception is a deception? To maintain such a large illusion would require a powerful demon. Such a world would be without meaning, and such a powerful demon would be a great evil. However, Descartes knew that God is good, and therefore would not let us be deceived in all that we experience. Because God is good, therefore, the world must exist.
Descartes argued for dualism: both thinking and the material world are real, but are two separate things, running along parallel courses.
(2) By comparison, the two other famous Rationalists, Spinoza, Jewish-Dutch, and Leibnitz, German, were monists. They both probably studied under Descartes when he was in Amsterdam. They argued that mind and matter are one. Spinoza said everything is only a part of "the infinite and the eternal." There is only one substance.
On the contrary, Leibnitz said there is only one substance, a monad, of which everything else is made. Both argued for Oneness, Spinoza for a universal, and Leibnitz for the smallest particular. All is one: Spinoza saying all is a part of One, and Leibnitz saying that all is made up of an infinite number of an indivisible One.
(3) Interestingly, in the Nineteenth Century, the Pragmatist William James argued that all is one, that everything is made of experience. We know experience from the inner world and from the outer world. One we call thinking, and the other we call material, but they are both aspects of the same thing, experience.
(4) In Twentieth Century European philosophy, intentionality was discussed as the basis of personal existence. Both consciousness and the object of consciousness were generally viewed as a product of intentionality. The self as subject, and the material world as object, came into existence out of intention. However, existence, or metaphysics, was not considered as important a question as how to respond to where we find ourselves. Pondering ultimate reality was not as central as asking how to live.
In summary, the two most famous philosophical answers to metaphysics are (a) dualism, claiming that mind and matter are separate, and, on the other hand, and much less commonly accepted, (b) monism, claiming that all is one.
In Theology, or in the study of world religions, the statement that all is one is sometimes viewed as a description of the religious experience of mysticism, but in the rational world of Philosophy there is no such implication. Some people overlap their discussions of Theology and Philosophy, but mysticism is solely a theological perspective.
These are some of the central threads of metaphysics, from ancient China until the present day. However, many of Twentieth Century philosophers in the English-speaking world are Skeptics. They are not ready to accept easily that the self or the world exist. The discussion of Skepticism follows.
No comments:
Post a Comment