(Originally written July 31, 2006 in Book 5)
Book Three of Russell's The History of Western Philosophy will be considered later. Here will be the beginning stages of The Metaphysics of Christopher Linehan.
Introduction/Caveat
Metaphysics is a new subject for me. I am by no means an expert. For this reason my arguments could be subject to change and/or revisal. I do not have a complete grasp on the subject so I will focus only on a few crucial questions.
1) What are the features of the world? (The world is everything that exists, not merely the physical universe). What sorts of things doe the World contain? What is the world like?
2) Why does the world exist? Why does this world exist rather than another one? Why does anything exist rather than nothing?
3) What is humanity's place in the world? How do we fit in?
These questions are broad and demand a lot of attention. I admit that I could wholly devote my life and work to answering these questions and not come up with an answer wholly suitable to everyone or even wholly suitable to myself. But that does not deter me any, nor should it discourage you.
What?
The world is everything that exists. The most obvious question to deal with then is: what exists?
First and foremost, I exist. It is self-evident to me (but not to you) that I exist. If I didn't exist I could not write these words or think about my fiancé at Subway right now. I could not even possess a finance or even know the concept of Subway or finance if I did not exist. While I know that I exist, I have yet to determine how I exist.
There are a number of possibilities to how I exist. I could exist simply as a composite of matter. I could exist as matter and intellect. I could exist as intellect, but not as matter. I could exist as intellect, matter and spirit. I could exist as spirit alone or spirt and mater or spirit and mind. So, how do I exist.
First, I will consider the one of these three, but not the most obvious. Prior to studying philosophy I would have considered material existence first, but I don't see how that is at all plausible. to consider anything I would have to possess some form of intellect, wouldn't I? I feel it is so, and thus, I will consider intellect first.
What is the intellect? The intellect is a process of thinking. It is an act of considering. Basically intellect is thought; intellect is mind.
Is mind matter? The brain is material that is composed of physical matter (seemingly as I have not discovered matter as being real or existent). So is it possible that the thought process is simply a manifestation of matter rearranging itself to produce thoughts, emotions, considerations, etc? Yes, but if mind were simply matter then we would have concrete scientific ways of measuring how matter creates mind. I am not aware of such a process. Sure, brainwaves can be monitored when certain thoughts are processed and chemicals in the brain are released during emotions; but, do we have physical proof (which science itself demands to be called science) that thoughts occur because of brainwaves or emotions occur because of chemicals? Isn't it at least as plausible that emotions cause the chemicals to be released or that thoughts trigger the brainwaves?
In all honesty I need to study the anatomy and scientific data on brains to be certain, but as of right now (7/31/06) I am content to state that either brainwaves cause thoughts or thoughts cause brainwaves are as equally plausible.
So here we are faced with the first dilemma. Do thoughts cause brainwaves (mind cause matter) or do brainwaves cause thoughts (matter cause mind)? From a scientific point of view, of matter caused mind, then we would necessarily have a way to empirically observe a thought.
A thought is simply a process of the intellect. I am using the word very vaguely right now so I apologize for any ambiguity or confusion. For the purposes of this writing I consider any process of the mind (thought, emotion, belief, memory, etc) a thought. A serious work on epistemology is another goal of mine, but for this essay understand that when I write 'thought' I am referring to any process of the mind whatsoever.
So where are we in the question: how do I exist? Not very far sadly. I exist and if I have thoughts then I necessarily have a mind or intellect. I have thoughts. Therefore I exist and have mind. But now I face a tough question: Is the mind material or immaterial?
If the mind were material, that is, if matter causes thoughts then thoughts would be empirical observable because they too would be material. If anything is material then it is empirically observable. If something is empirically observable then it falls under the scope of science. If something is not empirically observable then it falls under the scope of something other than science (religion and philosophy fall under non-empirical investigatory tools). The question of whether matter creates mind or mind creates matter is similarly asked as 'is mind empirically observable and thus a subject of science?'
One quick caveat or precaution: when I state, 'mind creates matter', I mean that thoughts enact changes in matter. But when I state 'matter creates mind', I mean material actions physically create or alter other matter to become thoughts. Also when I restate the question 'does mind create matter or matter create mind' as 'is the mind empirically observable and thus subject to science'? I do not pin science against philosophy or religion. I simply acknowledge that there are certain things that belong to science and certain things that do not. Philosophy and religion work to fill in the gaps where science leaves them and science is consistent with philosophical and religious parts of a 'true' worldview. True is in quotations because I do not believe any fallible human being can produce an infallible explanation of everything.
But I've digressed. Is mind an empirically observable entity? if the answer to this is yes then matter creates mind and thoughts are material. If no, then either science is not advanced enough as of yet to detect the matter of mind or matter does not create mind.
To my knowledge there is no way of empirically observing a thought. A thought does not contain any physical properties. One cannot touch, smell, taste, hear or see a thought. There is no way of sensing a thought. But is there a testable hypothesis that shows that one could theoretically sense a thought? If it is true that thoughts do not possess physical qualities then I do not possible see how. So, if we cannot sense a thought or test a theory of a material object that is a thought then I cannot admit that mind is in the scope of science.
To answer an obvious objection from a scientist or a scientifically inclined philosopher on the subject of brainwaves or chemical reactions and emotions I will give two examples. A brainwave 'x' can be observed to occur that correlates with thought 'y' in human 'h'. If 'h' then has 'x' then 'y' is occurring. Does this mean that 'x' causes 'y' in 'h' or that 'y' causes 'x' in 'h' or 'x' and 'y' accidentally occur in 'h' simultaneously?
Let's consider option three first. "X" and "Y" are seen to happen a number of times in "h" but there is no causal relationship. If it is observed this way once then we can easily accept this option. If it is observed this way ten out of ten times than it would be harder to accept. If it is observed one hundred out of one hundred times then it becomes even harder to accept and so on. If 'x' and 'y' occur simultaneously in 'h' enough times overtime 'h' is observed it becomes highly improbable that neither 'x' causes 'y' nor 'y' causes 'x'. While we cannot completely dismiss this scenario we can consider it highly improbable and render it useless to us on account of its improbability.
This leaves us with two options:
1) X causes Y in H (matter causes mind)
2) Y causes X in H (mind causes matter)
If option one is correct then we would have to concede that mind is matter because material things can exact changes only of material kind. But, if this were true we would have the consequence of thoughts being empirically observable, which is not true. Thus, option two is the only option we have. Mind causes matter and thus material brainwaves are merely a physical manifestation of an immaterial thought. Chemical releases in the brain occur similarly. (In the actual book add in the example of anger or love and the correlating boost of endorphins).
So, for now we have come to the conclusion that if mind exists it is not material. The fact that I just wrote 'mind is not material' shows the existence of a thought. A thought shows the existence of an entity being capable of processing a thought or thoughts. This entity is intellect or mind. Thus, mind exists as an immaterial entity.
So where are we now in the question, how do I exist. I exist as mind (at least). The mind is immaterial and does not possess physical qualities. If I were not writing with my hand or able to see any part of my body we would conclude there. But, we have much more work to do. (If science proves that thoughts are material, which they may be theoretically capable of doing, then this theory is completely disproved. I feel confident thought that they will never actually accomplish this).
Thus far we have established that the world consist of (at least) me and I exist (at least as) mind. By peering around I can see many things including my own body. Thus all that I can see leads me to know that I and my immaterial mind are not all that compose the world.
So what is this body of mine? How can I tell that it is mine? Well, I can pinch myself and a sensation will occur. I will feel pain. My brain will receive information from nerve endings and the brain will proclaim that this is threatening the existence of the body. This is not a thought though. It is something else entirely.
It is a brain (part of the body) corresponding to a sensation in the arm (where I'm pinching myself). The brain takes the sensation and then discerns whether the sensation is harmful to the body as a whole or if it is not harmful to the body. The brain does not create concepts of pain for harmful sensations or pleasure for not-harmful sensations. The brain does not create concepts; only the mind does. Concepts or thoughts are immaterial and therefore not capable of being possessed or formed by material things.
We now come to a point that seems to be an inconsistency. If the brain and thus the rest of the body is matter and the mind is immaterial, it would follow from the argument that mind creates matter, that matter cannot create mind. (Again by create I mean cause or effect or create or change or alter). Here we find a bit of a difficulty. It is true that mind creates matter (i.e. the emotion love is followed by the release of endorphins, thus the concept love causes a material reaction in the body). It is also true that matter does not create mind. So how then does a sensation deemed harmful to the body by the brain cause the concept of pain? It can't because matter cannot create mind.
But fear not because it doesn't actually cause the concept. Consider here the chain of events:
1) My mind has a thought to articulate how to prove my body exists and is mine.
2) My mind comes up with the brilliant idea of pinching my arm.
3) my mind uses thought to enact my hand to pinch my arm (mind creates matter)
4) My body feels a sensation and sends the information to the brain
5) The brain deems the sensation as harmful and will demand that the arm do something to escape.
6) My mind analyzes the situation and the information that the brain deduces from the sensation.
7) The analysis of the mind determines that the harmful conclusion the brain has reach coupled with the sensation falls under the concept of pain.
The concept of main (mind) is not directly arrived at from the conclusion the brain reaches. The conclusion of the brain (matter) is determined to be pain by the analysis of the mind. While the mind uses the conclusion of the brain it still creates the concept of pain on its own account.
This leads us to an interesting point. Mind creates matter and matter does not create mind are true, but what about other possibilities?
1) Mind creates matter - True
2) Mind creates mind - Unknown
3) Matter creates mind - False
4) Matter creates matter
Mind creates mind is true because the mind is the thing that creates or otherwise produces thought, which is not material and therefore not matter. What is left then? Mind. Thus, thought is mind.
Matter creates matter is also true. Take for instance the pinch scenario. A long drawn out process of the mind is not required for the brain to tell the arm to get the hell out of there. Also, a mind does not need to make a conscious decision to breathe. Thus matter creates matter. When this happens in a human it is an instinctive motion. It is an instinct to breathe. It is an instinct for the heart to pump blood. It is an instinct to remove the body from a harmful situation. This last instinctive action is supplemented with the mind creation of fear or pain concepts.
Thus, mind creates matter; mind creates mind; matter does not create mind; and, matter creates matter. So what do we have now? Currently, the world contains me. I am mind and something not-mind. But have we proven the existence of other matter?
Mind is proven to exist (so long as science cannot disprove it some time in the future. This is doubtful, but theoretically possible). Mind is also proven to be a complex structure. What does this mean? We have shown that it is necessary for an intellect or mind to exist if a thought exists. Anything I write proves that a thought exists and thus, mind exists to contain that thought. Likewise, we have proven that if a thought exists then that thought is not an object of physical qualities. We have also proved that matter cannot create mind, thus mind and thought must not be physical or material. But this line of arguing presupposes the notion of matter.
Do we have any good reason for accepting that matter exists? Theoretically, everything I could think could become actual. Thus, I could only be perceiving a body because my mind has created the concept of body or the concept of physicality. If body is actually just a concept of the mind then it is not truly matter, but another form of immaterial thought. This seems to be illogical and even very crazy, but it is not entirely implausible.
Through my mind I have often created scenarios in which my body has reacted. I have created a scenario in which I am shot or stabbed in a dark alley. This scenario issues the concept of fear and pain which I have also created in my mind. Now when my body walks through a dark alley I become tense and my body tightens seemingly instinctively. While I have never been shot or stabbed in an alley I have a thought of that and it creates physical (sensible to the brain) sensations in my body. it is plausible that all scenarios are actually constructs of the mind.
I however cannot control other bodies which are seemingly material. My fiancé is in here and I cannot make her strip off her clothes through the power of my mind. I also cannot cause her to do jumping jacks behind the counter either. I have no control over her body. So it seems impossible that my mind is capable of controlling bodies other than my own. It also seems impossible that I could have created her in my mind. Even if it is possible for me to have created her, it is highly unlikely that every person I have met in my whole life is a mere construct of my mind, let alone all the other things I have come into contact with. It would seem then doubtful that everything is of mind, unless of course I am simply a construct of another mind (along with everything else). We will look into this later.
For now I am content with holding that my mind has not created, nor is it in control of other bodies. I am also content that my mind does control my own body. It is possible then that I have still created my body with my mind and it is thus an immaterial thing. But, if that were true I think I may have created a better one.
In all seriousness I do not feel that my mind is capable of creating my body as a thought. It is this option or that I just do not have control over my mind. But the fact that I can pause and clap my hands if I think about it and choose to act on that thought leads me to believe I have sufficient control of my mind. It is true that I do not have full control of my mind at all times. Dreams and irrational fears are two examples of when one does not have full control of one's own mind (save for lucid dreams). But however many instances anyone can point out that one does not have control over one's own mind, the fact that he or she is consciously doing so proves he has sufficient over his or her own mind enough to state that he or she does not. (This does not disprove any form of determinism though. A mind could be controlled by another and we all could be pawns in a strange cosmic chess game).
So if a body is not an extension of a correlating mind, what is it?
1) It is not-mind or matter (mind is immaterial thus not immaterial is matter).
2) It is mind, but not one's own mind's construct
Either way it is a thing that has physical qualities and I am content to call anything with physical qualities at this point material. Thus for now we shall regard a body as matter.
However I have merely proved that the world consists of me, who is mind and matter and other bodies that are material. How can we assume that these other bodies are anything but matter?
Currently in this room there are a number of bodies. There is this pad and this pen and a whole bunch of tables, glass cases, a soda machine, food and my fiancé. All of these bodies are free from the control of my mind. I cannot enact any change in these material objects without using my own material body. I cannot levitate anything by focusing my mind really hard. I cannot cause my fiancé to strip or do jumping jacks despite by best mental efforts.
Thus here we have to revise the mind/matter argument.
1. My mind creates my matter - true
2. My mind creates my mind - true
3. My matter creates my mind - false
4. My matter creates my matter - true
5. My mind creates other matter - false
6. My mind creates other mind - false
7. My matter creates other mind - false
8. My matter creates other matter - true
9. Other mind creates my matter - false
10. Other mind creates my mind - false
11. Other matter creates my mind - false
12. Other matter creates my matter - true
Other mind here is an equal or lesser or greater mind then my own, but it is not a supreme mind.
I can state that I see no reason to believe that the pen, the pad, the tables, the glass cases, the soda machine and the food contain any mind. They do not move or otherwise create on their own. While mind is not an empirically observable property we can infer from the fact that they do not show any outwardly usual signs of possessing mind that they do not have mind and must be then only matter.
So what exists? So far:
1. I exist
a. I exist as mind
b. I exist as not-mind (matter)
2. Mind exists
a. I am not certain that other minds exist, but I can infer they do in other things
b. mind exists in thoughts
3. Not-mind exists
a. This could be matter
b. This could be a construct of a Supreme Mind
c. Either way, it is not the construct of my mind or any mind similar to my mind if they exist
4. Bodies of matter exists
a. My body exists
b. other bodies exist
Basically at this point I can state that I undeniably exist (or when you read this that you undeniably exist). I can also state that since I can state that I exist, thoughts (which precede statements) exist. Since thoughts exists it follows that mind must exist. While it is self-evident that I exist and undeniable that a thought or many thoughts exist and thus mind is necessary if and only if thoughts exist. Obviously, thoughts exist and thus mind. But I can also state that bodies exist.
My body is not a product or creation of my own mind. This I can state with certainty (though not as certainly as I exist or thoughts exist or mind exists). Nonetheless, I am sure enough to demand that either my body is a product of a mind far greater then my own or not-mind in nature. For the time being I am willing to deny that my body is a product of a greater mind and also designate it as a plausible theory to be dealt with later. Thus, I am willing to state that my body is of physical characteristics and thus, material. My mind is in sufficient enough control of my body to make me believe that I have mind control over my body.
There also is in existence other bodies. I cannot control other bodies as I control my own and thus believe that while they are similar in that they are possessing of physical characteristics like my own body, they are dissimilar in that I have no conscious control over them. I am willing to concede that a small theoretical possibility exists that I do have some sort of mind control over other physical bodies in a subconscious manner. I feel that this improbable because I have sufficient mind control over my body and would expect that if other bodies were subject to my mind that I would exact the same or similar command of those bodies.
I believe strongly that these other bodies defer in matter set-up because they appear differently. I also feel strongly that everything in this room is purely material and not mind (in the same sense that my body is not-mind). There is one exception. My fiancé is not mind in that she is of physical characteristics in differing from the other material objects. Here she moves in a similar way to me. I have mind and considering that her matter is composed and moves in similar ways to my own and owing to the fact that it is not subject to the control of my mind, I can infer with a good conscience that she posses a mind that is similar to my own.
Thus so far we can safely say that the World consists of both mind and non-mind components. This does not entail that nothing possesses both mind and non-mind parts, but that mind and non-mind (conveniently called matter) exist but what of spiritual things? A thing can exist in mind, matter and spirit; mind and matter; mind only; spirit and matter; matter only; or, spirit only. Thus there are six ways a thing could exist:
1) Mind, matter and spirit
2) Mind and matter
3) Mind only
4) Matter only
5) Matter and spirit
6) spirit only.
So far all are still possible. In this room we have a number of things:
1. Me - at least mind and matter
2. Pad - matter, no mind (possibly spirit)
3. Pen (same as 2)
4. Tables (same as 2)
5. Glass cases (same as 2)
6. Soda Machine (same as 2)
7. Food - (same as 2)
8. My fiancé - matter, probably mind, and possibly spirit
It is time to define what characteristics are of mind, of matter and of spirit. But, not now.
No comments:
Post a Comment