Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!
|
 michael_lifshitz
Student
 
Registered: 12/27/05
Posts: 436
Loc: here
Last seen: 4 years, 4 months
|
 The Fallacy of an Egocentric View of Reality, Interdependence. 
#6551263 - 02/10/07 03:25 PM (5 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Hi guys, I don't post that much around here, but I do read threads and enjoy the discussion.
I just finished reading a philosophy summative essay I wrote for my last semester's philosophy class, and thought it might spark some interesting discussion or ideas, so I figured I'd post it here.
The topic was metaphysics, so I decided to talk about what I felt to be a very poignant and interesting facet of philosophy. That is the illusion of the self, interdependence and the fallacy of our egocentric view of our world.
Let me know what you think. I didn't include the references.
In any effective pursuit of wisdom, one must strive to be aware of any existing biases in the premises upon which one’s conclusions are founded. Since motivation to discover truth implies a conscious motivated being, any philosophical investigation must be undertaken from one specific point of reference. This perspective can be simple or complex, as in the case of two or more minds working together in search of truth. In order to achieve accuracy in one’s conclusions, one must be aware of the above in order to ensure that the position from which one inquires and deduces is not distorting the results of the inquiry. As a consequence of certain biological and social factors, consciousness – particularly human perception - tends to hold a skewed and egocentric worldview. This subjective assessment lies at the very root of our human experience and fundamentally affects the way in which we perceive our own existence and that of the entire universe. In examining the fallacious views that we hold, we can attempt to transcend these notions and better understand the metaphysical truths of reality. The overcoming of our deep-seated tendencies towards egotistic and therefore mistaken beliefs would allow the universe to be manifested impartially through our conscious perception, allowing for a more accurate and satisfactory experience.
Without consciousness, reality would not be measured, quantified, labeled or perceived, as all these processes imply someone who is performing these actions. It is the quantifying and labeling of perceived relationships of matter, the awareness of these perceptions and labels, as well as the emotional responses which occur as a result of these thoughts that give reality meaning to consciousness. Every philosophical inquiry, since the very concept of inquiry implies an inquirer, must exist as one or more conscious beings attempting to find the truth about a given relationship within reality. Since the person or people who are inquiring are necessarily doing so from their own perspectives, they must ensure that they are drawing conclusions that are based on truths which apply universally, and not mistakenly base their conclusions on premises which are only sound from their limited perspective. The current general human paradigm often applies certain fundamental egocentric premises in order to infer many conclusions, which in turn disrupts the validity of these conclusions. Many of these egocentric premises play an important role in determining our values, beliefs and even language, many of the ideas seeming unquestionable and obvious. In order to transcend the common egocentric view and come to an understanding of the truth of our situation, we must re-examine our basic common sense.
Investigation into the reasons for our current human paradigm would allow for a better understanding of why we think the way we do, in turn providing new insight concerning whether this is an accurate way to go about viewing the world, and if not, then how best to go about changing the way we think in order to draw more accurate conclusions. Every idea and view that we hold is caused by electric impulses traveling down specific pathways through a complex net of neurons within our brain. This neural net develops within a fetus, and can be modified based on external input throughout one’s life. This implies that there are two primary factors dictating the way we think, one being our genetic code and the other being our socialization.
From a biological and social perspective, our genetic code can be said to be determined by Charles Darwin’s principles of evolution, namely his theory of natural selection. This theory states that individual organisms that possess favourable traits are more likely to survive and reproduce than those with less favourable traits. This process results, over time and many generations, in a tendency towards a population with traits better suited to survival and reproduction. In regards to our brain, organisms which feel a sense of individuality and consider all things in reference to themselves are more likely to survive and reproduce than those individuals that do not identify with the idea of their self. This is because without a sense of self, there would be no point of reference from which to believe in ideas such as death being a negative thing, nor would there be possibility for desire, as there would be no self to whom actions could profit or good and bad things could happen to. This implies that very early on in the evolution of consciousness, there would have been a strong inclination for populations of individual organisms possessing a sense of personal identity as separate from everything else, and of good and bad in relation to this personal identity.
Through socialization from various agents including our parents, peers, school and the media, our sense of self is inflated as we are taught from a very early age that we are a definite being existing separately from the rest of reality, as defined by the chemical patterns that make up our skin and our stream of thoughts and memories that make up our consciousness. We are taught to experience events as happening to us, to feel that we are doing things or causing events to happen, to believe that we are destroyed in death, and thus to consider ourselves as distinctly separate from everything else. We are taught a worldview which is based on arbitrary ways of labeling and defining things, without being made aware of the fact that this is only one way of experiencing and categorizing the world and that these definitions are not absolute.
This way of separating and labeling objects and events leads to certain philosophical problems. From a strictly objective perspective, there is no way to determine where one thing ends and another begins. When examining the concept of identity, it is apparent that the only way in which one can identify an object is by its properties. In attempting to define any object by its properties, however, we find that every object exists only in relation to everything else in existence, and that all possible properties are fundamentally interdependent. In considering the hypothetical scenario of a single round ball floating in endless empty space, we see that there is no possibility for motion, because there is nothing else that the ball can move in relation to, unless it changes shape or breaks apart. If we introduce a second ball into the picture and the two balls either move closer or farther away from each other, we can see that there is motion, but there is no way to validly determine which ball is moving. If we add a third ball and one of the balls begins to move in relation to the other two while the other two remain the same distance from each other, we see once again that there is no way of determining whether the one ball is moving or whether the group of two is moving. We can see that motion and events are fundamentally forms of relationship. This implies that energy or existence is also basically a form of relationship, so you can think of reality as the movement of energy patterns through empty space. The only accurate way of identifying any object, event, or thing, is in relation to every property it possesses or relationship that it is a part of. Since everything that makes up the universe is part of the same complex interdependent system, and since all events and objects can be defined in relation to anything and everything else in existence, any label that we can apply to any given thing is a strictly arbitrary dissection of reality. There is truly no objective existence of separate things or events; it is only a way of talking or thinking about reality.
In our current paradigm we tend to subjectively select which properties are important enough to include in defining a thing. That is to say that when, for example, we attempt to define a chair, we describe it by a select few properties of its legs, its back, and the platform on which one sits. The chair, however, also possesses the properties of being in position in relation to the floor or ground upon which it rests, as well as in relation to the oxygen and carbon dioxide in the air surrounding it, as well as in relation to the entire planet, and so on. Similarly, we view ourselves as separate objects with absolute and distinct identities, defining ourselves by the things that we believe we do, and the events that we feel we cause. In reality, we are all interdependent systems, relying on the entirety of reality that is our environment, as well as each other, to define our existence. Therefore, our view of self as separate and distinct from the rest of reality is a mistaken and distorted perception.
Taoist and Zen philosophies are based primarily on the concept of viewing reality without labeling, of being aware of the eternal way of things, or the Tao. The notion that all existence is inherently relative and interdependent is a central tenet of Taoist teachings. Taoists and Zen philosophers explain that the words with which they express their philosophies, as well as every possible thought that might arise from these words or ideas, are in essence still a skewed view of the world. This is because there is still labeling and associating going on in the mind when listening to, reading about, or thinking about these ideas. That is to say that you can not state anything specific when attempting to accurately explain the entire process of the universe. Zen describes itself as a finger pointing at the moon, cautioning not to mistake the finger for the moon, where the moon is true perception of the Tao and the finger is the linguistic and conceptual attempt to describe it. The true experience of Tao, or awakening to the truth of the way things are, is ineffable and can only be experienced by a mind without thought or judgment. When it is experienced however, it is said to be an experience of deep peace and tranquility, beyond all conception and labeling, where things are simply as they are, for no sake other than the sake of being. When it is realized that all labels and concepts are subjective and inaccurate, when one’s mind quiets and stays still, then there is nothing left to do but submit to the moment and relax into the eternal, essential, unnamable process of the universe.
Tao can be talked about, but not the Eternal Tao.
Names can be named, but not the Eternal Name.
As the origin of heaven-and-earth, it is nameless:
As “the Mother” of all things, it is nameable.
So, as ever hidden, we should look at its inner essence:
As always manifest, we should look at its outer aspects.
These two flow from the same source, though differently named;
And both are called mysteries.
The Mystery of mysteries is the Door of all essence.
Part 1, Tao Teh Ching – Lao Tzu, translated by John C.H. Wu
|
Orbus
The Liberator
Registered: 02/14/06
Posts: 85
Last seen: 1 year, 6 months
|
Re: The Fallacy of an Egocentric View of Reality, Interdependence. [Re: michael_lifshitz]
#6555925 - 02/11/07 08:13 PM (5 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
A very sarterian and eastern point of view, I like. Like Sarte said there is no other universe beside the human universe. There really is no such thing as an objective one. By the same reasoning, there is no difference between the idea of a mountain and an actual mountain. So I guess the question is what really exists? Just Ideas or consciousness?
--------------------
------------------------------------------------------
Really, the fundamental, ultimate mystery -- the only thing you need to know to understand the deepest metaphysical secrets -- is this: that for every outside there is an inside and for every inside there is an outside, and although they are different, they go together. - Alan Watts
|
 redgreenvines
irregular verb
Registered: 04/08/04
Posts: 13,625
|
Re: The Fallacy of an Egocentric View of Reality, Interdependence. [Re: michael_lifshitz]
#6557154 - 02/12/07 03:06 AM (5 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
it has the stylistic or cadence of philosophical writing.
I read the first paragraph and then realized I did not understand it and was not equipped to proceed.
My opinion is that it will be a good paper if it finds the right eyes to read it.
eg, a teacher who has been working in this style will probably receive it well and mark it high.
so
I guess you should do well, you certainly have the philosopher cadence down pat.
--------------------
~~~~~
|
michael_lifshitz
Student
Registered: 12/27/05
Posts: 436
Loc: here
Last seen: 4 years, 4 months
|
Re: The Fallacy of an Egocentric View of Reality, Interdependence. [Re: redgreenvines]
#6558930 - 02/12/07 03:24 PM (5 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Yeah I realize it's a little nuts, and a little complicated as far as the way I say things. I definitely was writing it for a specific audience, and it's not really written the way I would if I were writing outside of a classroom setting.
But yeah, I guess I am sort of an existentialist as far as my views, or a taoist...
Anyways, thanks for reading 
|
aelephant
Stranger
Registered: 09/04/06
Posts: 311
Last seen: 4 years, 1 month
|
Re: The Fallacy of an Egocentric View of Reality, Interdependence. [Re: michael_lifshitz]
#6560782 - 02/12/07 09:28 PM (5 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Very good essay! I agree with it all.
Strange how each of us comes to the same conclusions in our own way and in our own time, isn't it?
|
vigilant_mind
unfazed
Registered: 01/19/07
Posts: 1,717
Loc: boco
Last seen: 2 years, 10 months
|
Re: The Fallacy of an Egocentric View of Reality, Interdependence. [Re: michael_lifshitz]
#6560829 - 02/12/07 09:36 PM (5 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
In any effective pursuit of wisdom, one must strive to be aware of any existing biases in the premises upon which one’s conclusions are founded. Since motivation to discover truth implies a conscious motivated being, any philosophical investigation must be undertaken from one specific point of reference. This perspective can be simple or complex, as in the case of two or more minds working together in search of truth. In order to achieve accuracy in one’s conclusions, one must be aware of the above in order to ensure that the position from which one inquires and deduces is not distorting the results of the inquiry. As a consequence of certain biological and social factors, consciousness – particularly human perception - tends to hold a skewed and egocentric worldview. This subjective assessment lies at the very root of our human experience and fundamentally affects the way in which we perceive our own existence and that of the entire universe. In examining the fallacious views that we hold, we can attempt to transcend these notions and better understand the metaphysical truths of reality. The overcoming of our deep-seated tendencies towards egotistic and therefore mistaken beliefs would allow the universe to be manifested impartially through our conscious perception, allowing for a more accurate and satisfactory experience.
Awesome stuff.
This really makes me look forward to studying philosophy next year in college.
|
aelephant
Stranger
Registered: 09/04/06
Posts: 311
Last seen: 4 years, 1 month
|
Re: The Fallacy of an Egocentric View of Reality, Interdependence. [Re: vigilant_mind]
#6561060 - 02/12/07 10:21 PM (5 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
This seemed relevant to me, you may wish to check it out:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=63wwUOPZb50
|
tools_n_corpses
why did i choosethis name
Registered: 09/27/06
Posts: 172
Last seen: 4 years, 6 months
|
Re: The Fallacy of an Egocentric View of Reality, Interdependence. [Re: michael_lifshitz]
#6561343 - 02/12/07 11:18 PM (5 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Excellent. This is pretty much what I think on the subject, but very well articulated. Very clear. 
Quote:
aelephant said:
Very good essay! I agree with it all.
Strange how each of us comes to the same conclusions in our own way and in our own time, isn't it?
haha... I was actually remarking at how spot on it was with my own ideas as I was reading it. Not that these ideas are on their own 'new' ideas, but that the way its articulated shows a certain understanding that is peculiarly alike to my own understanding.
--------------------
"Misery only doth exist, none miserable,
No doer is there; naught save the deed is found.
Nirvana is, but not the man who seeks it.
The Path exists, but not the traveler on it."
Edited by tools_n_corpses (02/12/07 11:24 PM)
|
michael_lifshitz
Student
Registered: 12/27/05
Posts: 436
Loc: here
Last seen: 4 years, 4 months
|
Re: The Fallacy of an Egocentric View of Reality, Interdependence. [Re: tools_n_corpses]
#6562681 - 02/13/07 11:10 AM (5 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Thanks for the comments, I'm glad you guys liked it.
And yeah, Alan Watts has really affected my philosophy, and he is referenced a lot in this essay actually.
| |
|
|
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Mr. Middle, Diploid
1,257 topic views. 2 members, 4 guests and 0 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Toggle Favorite | Print Topic ]
| | |
|
|
|
Previous
Index
Next
Threaded
Edit 
Reply 
