Thursday, March 08, 2007

An Exposition on Inevitability

Recently I was asked a series of questions by a man who was as intellectually inquisitive as I. Though the questions were childish and awkwardly put, they illuminated to me a facet of life that some frequently take for granted.

I have come to believe that it is impossible to be absolutely sure about certain things. Indeed, it may be impossible to be sure of anything at all. The only thing that is sure is experience - theory has no value unless supported by experiential data. Suppose someone were to propose to you that they could add an additional one-hundred years to your lifespan. Naturally you would be curious but skeptical, unless you already knew how they planned to accomplish this feat. In this case this could be accomplished through light-speed travel and relativity, but that is not something I will go into depth about; it is more important that you see this connection between the experience (knowledge acquired prior) and the theory (knowledge speculated about). A good example of an exquisite blend of the two can be found in young children.

The main difference between children and adults is not just immaturity, it is the acceptance of the fantastic. How easy is it for us as adults to say that something is not real, simply because we have not the experience to back that something up. We know that unicorns do not exist: why? Because no-one has ever found any unicorns! Anyone skilled in logic will immediately notice that this is faulty reasoning. Therefore, although many philosophers and scientists would disagree, it is logical to be open to a great many things regardless of experience.

The problem with knowledge prior (experience) is that it frequently interferes with knowledge speculative (theory). The more we experience, the more we "know," therefore our focus tends to diverge into two extremes. In all instances we will show one of two characteristics: either we are extremely stubborn about our knowledge prior, or we will accept that there is a great deal of knowledge speculative of which we are unaware. Therefore, while part of wisdom is accepting that we know nothing, there is also the hardened "adult" side of wisdom which clings stubbornly to knowledge prior. I know not of any balance between the two, it seems to come naturally with age.

Children will accept anything and everything that they hear as fact. Obviously this has its negative aspects - children are easily fooled, indoctrinated, and led astray. However, I believe that childishness should be present in all of our thought processes; the consideration of our own wrongness regarding our knowledge prior is frequently the key to understanding knowledge speculative. Therefore, in sum:

*Consider yourself right in your own experience.
*Allow speculation to cause you to doubt, because with doubt comes enlightenment.
*Reconsider your experience always, that in your reconsideration you might become more firm in your belief.

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

Probably mostly due to the talk of Unicorns and experiences I was reminded of a quote from Tom Stoppard's play: Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead.

"A man breaking his journey between one place and another at a third place of no name, character, population or significance, sees a unicorn cross his path and disappear. That in itself is startling, but there are precedents for mystical encounters of various kinds, or to be less extreme, a choice of persuasions to put it down to fancy; until--'My God,' says a second man, 'I must be dreaming, I thought I saw a unicorn.' At which point, a dimension is added that makes the experience as alarming as it will ever be. A third witness, you understand, adds no further dimension but only spreads it thinner, and a fourth thinner still, and the more witnesses there are the thinner it gets and the more reasonable it becomes until it is as thin as reality, the name we give to the common experience...'Look, look!' recites the crowd. 'A horse with an arrow in its forehead! It must have been mistaken for a deer.'...I'm sorry it wasn't a unicorn. It would have been nice to have unicorns."

At either rate its a good fun quote and somewhat thought ensuing. I'd highly recommend picking up the play if you haven't read it before as its largely an existentialist work which a lot of your philosophical writings seem to touch on (here and their at least). And I promise it doesn't play with the absurd like Camus' The Stranger.