Sunday, February 27, 2005

The Fundamental Epistemic Dilemma

The fundamental dilemma that anyone studying philosophy encounters is what we can truly know for certain. Philosophers throughout history have tried to address this issue, and for the most part, there is no definitive answer because you cannot answer a problem when you suffer from the problem. Basically, we can't fully solve a problem about knowledge because it casts doubts on anything we know, and since we would use anything we know to solve the problem, a paradox of sorts is achieved. This does not mean, however, that we cannot settle the issue enough for us to be able to accomplish certain things.

H. L. Mencken said, "We are here and it is now. Further than that all human knowledge is moonshine." To a large extent, this is sadly, the case. We cannot know with absolute, universal certainty much of anything. We can understand certain things for ourselves though, and thus achieve some kind of peace of mind for us. Basically, our foundations for everything originate over 3000 years ago from religion and math, math being a patterned reasoning that draws its basis from the real world. Math does not hold an actual existence; it is just the description of certain universal patterns. This, however, makes math far more indisputable in my opinion because it doesn't actually exist and therefore cannot be disputed to exist. No one will argue that the Golden Rule can't be found in nature, or other such examples. It's indisputable. It is a general observation of a pattern in nature, rather than an assumption about how something works. This does not mean that math can be used to understand the universe with absolute certainty, but the patterns it can teach us give us a place to start.

It is hard to know too much for certain. The important thing is that what we think we understand is A) useful for us or for somebody, and B) not considered the 100% absolute truth. Though I believe 100% in eternity and God and the eternality of the human mind, I am still only an effervescent being who does not have an omniscient mind, and therefore, I could be wrong. I don't believe I am though, and so for me, I am relatively content. As long as I permit other people to hold their views just as much as I hold mine, then it is all right. In truth, it is the acknowledgment of our limitations that brings us closer to true intelligence. Benjamin Disraeli said, "To be conscious that you are ignorant is a great step to knowledge." A huge part of knowledge is knowing that you cannot know everything. Unless you are omnipotent (and therefore omniscient), chances are that you don't know everything. Thinking that one can know everything effectively distances you from perfection by assuming that you are anything more than effervescent, and therefore greater than the universal rule which defines our reality.

Ultimately, we can only try and ascertain knowledge for ourselves. It is good to share it with others, if they are willing to listen, but futile and wrong to try and force them on other people. I do not agree with the forced evangelization of people who stand on street corners swearing that their views are the only correct views. They may be correct for them, but that does not make them correct for everyone. We must always realize that everything we know is the sum of our life experiences plus what we have observed and been taught. It is not the universal panacea to stupidity, ignorance, or uncertainty about the universe. Our knowledge is our understanding of things, and since we are not gods or deities or omnipotent/omniscient beings, our understanding does not possess universal credence or holding. As soon as we understand these limitations, the closer we can get to some kind of truth. In line with what Disraeli said, Frank Herbert said, "The beginning of knowledge is the discovery of something we do not understand."

We do not have to be able to understand something for certain to be able to understand certain important things in life. If we were absolutely certain of anything, it's intrigue would be gone. Our curiosity in life is always derived from not knowing something, and if we could know everything, then life would be boring. Uncertainty is not a limitation, as much as it is a motivation. It inspires us to always strive to achieve more, to always keep changing. Change is at the heart of the road to eternal perfection, and by always striving to change, we get as close to perfection in this world as we possibly can (though we cannot become 100% perfect until we are no longer effervescent).

If anything, it is our uncertainty that allows imagination. There can be no imagination on a definitively answered or ended debate or idea. Likewise with creativity. The greatest stories ever told do not come from mathematical equations, which are without dispute, but come from ideas about people, nature, life, the cosmos, reality, everything and anything we do not fully understand. I believe that I can say with almost absolute certainty that everything follows this rule. Creativity and imagination are derived from that which we do not understand, and that is why humans have such a fascination with fiction and movies and stories and mythology and etc. Imagination is our greatest gift because it always keeps us motivated to keep trying to discover, while our limitations simultaneously keep us from running out of things to discover. At its fundamental essence, it is our imperfections that make life interesting.

The great Albert Einstein once said, "Imagination is more important than knowledge..." We don't have to be absolutely certain of something to reap the benefits of it. We don't and won't ever fully understand the universe, but we still reap the benefits of being in it. Our imaginations keep us captivated, until that day when we become eternal, and become everything and anything. The epistemic dilemma is more viewed as a roadblock to achievement, but in actuality it prevents us from destroying the human dream. If the human dream is discovery and understanding, then fully achieving those goals is the abolition of those dreams because they can no longer be pursued. Our uncertainty is what makes everything interesting, and what makes the greatest of stories great.

I cannot know anything for certain, but I don't need to. I feel like I understand well enough those things which are crucially important for me to be able to survive and cope with life, but I cannot know them 100% for sure. When I think about it, I don't care to either. Let eternity surprise me when I die. Curiosity may have killed the cat, but all that did was make the cat eternal (that was a lame statement). Curiosity and intrigue keep us satisfied here, and imagination represents the greatest of human abilities - the ability to create from what we know - manifesting one's curiosity with everything. When I study philosophy, I find myself captivated, and the end result is that I am motivated to do certain things, which is often to work on my book series. To be honest, I don't actually study philosophy much, I just think about it. Most of everything that I think I understand about reality comes from my observations of things, not from what people tell me. And in the end, it is observations that often hold the most truth, or at least with math that is the case.

Forget the epistemic dilemma - it is a load of crap. We don't need to understand everything to understand something, and we don't have understand anything in order to understand things. Certainty does not make something correct (b/c certainty is derived the feeling of confidence of an individual, rather than an actual or universal correctness), reality makes it correct. Screw certainty, I'll enjoy my flaws. In the end, they're what makes life worth living. I don't want to stop learning and therefore I don't want to understand everything. With that in mind, I bid you all a good day.

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home