My neighbour's garage door and wall after sanding it down before he paints it.
9th July 2021
Saint Augustine and Decartes ask a question: Suppose I discover that everything is an illusion, including my own existence, can I then truly say 'I do not exist'? Is this not a contradiction? Augustine pushes this to a stronger form when he asks if it is possible someone could deceive you into believing you exist? If you are deceived then you exist. 'For if I am deceived, I am.'
How can I deny my own existence, given it is me who is being deceived? A person cannot say 'I do not exist' in the literal sense. No matter how much you are filled with uncertainty, there is a you that is experiencing it. The existence of the doubter cannot be doubted. Out of doubt arises its negation, a form of certainty. I exist.
If we accept this line of reasoning (and many don't), then doubt affirms the certainty that the 'I' exists. Maybe humans could be defined as 'clumps of doubt'. Maybe the famous axiom 'I think, therefore I am' should have been 'I doubt, therefore I am'. The doubting 'I' affirms the certainty that I exist. Certainty, therefore, arises from the fire of doubt. It is produced from its opposite.
For Augustine and Decartes the 'I' has a solidity to it, a unity that is complete and, indeed, eternal. It is self-sufficient and self-identifying. It exists before everything else. But what if the statement 'I do not exist' is not as contradictory as it appears? What if the clump-of-doubt is the truly first condition of thought? It is not self-sufficient, but an ungraspable and incomplete thing, unthinkable and unnamable, and too fluid to have any identity? It is a thing that seeks identity. It is formless and seeks form. It is a kind of chaos that seeks order. The Cartesian 'I' is a construct from it. It needs the 'otherness' of the world to begin to find itself. It finds identity in the objects ideas that surround it. The Cartesian 'I' is a construct of the Age of Enlightenment. It is an individuated, culturally specific thing.
The Enlightenment 'I' has a concrete objectivity to it. It re-affirms the objective nature of reality. If the solid 'I' exists then all the things I see around me are probably also solid. Furthermore, they exist in the way that I see them (i.e. the way a man of Decartes' time and place would see them). Put simply, I can affirm that things exist as I perceive them because of the type of 'l' that I believe exists (though this 'I' is blind to its cultural specificity and believes it - as with both Augustine and Decartes - to have an eternal p1reality).
We are back in the objective world where our doubt began. Should we not begin again to doubt our new found certainty? I believe that we should. Otherwise there is a stale evangelism. There must be a recognition that our certainty is a shaky, temporary construct. That is not to deny the importance of temporary certainty. Doubt is a kind of non-existence. We couldn't take permanent residence in it. How would we communicate with each other? How would this blog piece about doubt have the concrete qualities necessary for you to read it?
Let us push this a little further and make the claim that the objective world, which is characterised by 'limits' and individuation, arises from an infinite subjectivity that, unlike its opposite number, is unlimited by any constraints or definitions. The doubting 'I' is born in this formless place. Indeed the word 'born' is wrong; the 'I' is identical to this formless place. (By definition there is no subject/predicate dualism. There is no X that exists in a place Y. There is no 'I' in this formless place.)
If this fomless place has a reality, then the doubting 'I' is 'born' in a place where you are not a woman or a man. (Because by definition, everything is formless.) You are not a black person or a white person. You are not intelligent or stupid. You have infinite freedom. Every random event is possible - the way it is in dreams or poetry. Until, of course, you meet the cold tidal waves of reality where there are battles to be fought and lost, where you can be swept under without the help of others.
If this formless place is the fire that keeps the atoms moving, then it is always with us. If it is switched off, everything is switched off. Maybe it is a place of sympathy, questioning and imagination. It can push for the good. It ensures that some of the battles in the concrete world can be won.
How can I deny my own existence, given it is me who is being deceived? A person cannot say 'I do not exist' in the literal sense. No matter how much you are filled with uncertainty, there is a you that is experiencing it. The existence of the doubter cannot be doubted. Out of doubt arises its negation, a form of certainty. I exist.
If we accept this line of reasoning (and many don't), then doubt affirms the certainty that the 'I' exists. Maybe humans could be defined as 'clumps of doubt'. Maybe the famous axiom 'I think, therefore I am' should have been 'I doubt, therefore I am'. The doubting 'I' affirms the certainty that I exist. Certainty, therefore, arises from the fire of doubt. It is produced from its opposite.
For Augustine and Decartes the 'I' has a solidity to it, a unity that is complete and, indeed, eternal. It is self-sufficient and self-identifying. It exists before everything else. But what if the statement 'I do not exist' is not as contradictory as it appears? What if the clump-of-doubt is the truly first condition of thought? It is not self-sufficient, but an ungraspable and incomplete thing, unthinkable and unnamable, and too fluid to have any identity? It is a thing that seeks identity. It is formless and seeks form. It is a kind of chaos that seeks order. The Cartesian 'I' is a construct from it. It needs the 'otherness' of the world to begin to find itself. It finds identity in the objects ideas that surround it. The Cartesian 'I' is a construct of the Age of Enlightenment. It is an individuated, culturally specific thing.
The Enlightenment 'I' has a concrete objectivity to it. It re-affirms the objective nature of reality. If the solid 'I' exists then all the things I see around me are probably also solid. Furthermore, they exist in the way that I see them (i.e. the way a man of Decartes' time and place would see them). Put simply, I can affirm that things exist as I perceive them because of the type of 'l' that I believe exists (though this 'I' is blind to its cultural specificity and believes it - as with both Augustine and Decartes - to have an eternal p1reality).
We are back in the objective world where our doubt began. Should we not begin again to doubt our new found certainty? I believe that we should. Otherwise there is a stale evangelism. There must be a recognition that our certainty is a shaky, temporary construct. That is not to deny the importance of temporary certainty. Doubt is a kind of non-existence. We couldn't take permanent residence in it. How would we communicate with each other? How would this blog piece about doubt have the concrete qualities necessary for you to read it?
Let us push this a little further and make the claim that the objective world, which is characterised by 'limits' and individuation, arises from an infinite subjectivity that, unlike its opposite number, is unlimited by any constraints or definitions. The doubting 'I' is born in this formless place. Indeed the word 'born' is wrong; the 'I' is identical to this formless place. (By definition there is no subject/predicate dualism. There is no X that exists in a place Y. There is no 'I' in this formless place.)
If this fomless place has a reality, then the doubting 'I' is 'born' in a place where you are not a woman or a man. (Because by definition, everything is formless.) You are not a black person or a white person. You are not intelligent or stupid. You have infinite freedom. Every random event is possible - the way it is in dreams or poetry. Until, of course, you meet the cold tidal waves of reality where there are battles to be fought and lost, where you can be swept under without the help of others.
If this formless place is the fire that keeps the atoms moving, then it is always with us. If it is switched off, everything is switched off. Maybe it is a place of sympathy, questioning and imagination. It can push for the good. It ensures that some of the battles in the concrete world can be won.
RSS Feed