Philosophy
By Frans Faase
Existence and awareness
There is not much I know for sure. At least I am sure that something exists,
and that I am aware of it. I am not even sure that anything else is aware of that
something exists. I think it is possible for something to exist without anything
being aware of it. I have no explaination for what awareness is, and how it is
even possible that something is aware at all.
These are really the two big questions.
Abstract concepts
Besides being aware of my existence, I am also aware that I know a number
of abstract concepts. Some of these concepts are: Boolean logic, natural numbers,
(three dimensional) space, change and time. I am aware of an ability to reason about
abstract concepts, to manipulate sequences of symbols, a sense of mathematics.
And also the use of language to represent thoughts. I am also aware of the concept
of model, as a symplification of something else with a certain purpose in mind,
and the ability to reason with such models.
Change and time
I am aware of constant changes. Because changes can only be observed if you can
compare a state with another (previous) state, I conclude with certainty that I
must have some kind of memory. Although the changes appear to be continuous, it
is possible that they are discrete. They appear to happen at a constant rate
and in a linear fasion. I am aware of an abstract concept of time
to measure intervals. The best conclusion I can arive at is that my awareness
seems to be moving at constant speed and in a single dimension of time. I do
not know whether this dimension is open or closed. Because I am not sure of
the extend and reliability of my memory, it is possible that I am looping
through time, and that I have experienced "now" an indefinite number of times
before, without having any memory of it.
Change and external world
Not only am I aware of constant changes, I am also having the impression that
the states are new. From this I conclude that although I do have a memory, it
is limited. I conclude with certainty that my awareness is not all-knowing at
the moment. (I do not exclude the possibility that it could become all-knowing
in the future, and not even that I was in the past.) From this I conclude that
from the point of view of my awareness there is an external world. Of course,
it is possible that that which I experience as "external world" simply is produced
by something from within myself, of which I am not aware.
It seems that this "problem of awareness" is independent of whether an external
world really exists or not, and, in case it does exist, the nature and origin of
this external world.
Physical world
(Coming soon...)
Unfinished thoughts...
what follows is very far from the above...
Ethics
Many people use the argument that we are moral beings as an argument for the
existence of God. I think that argument is flawed. It seems that ethics and moral
law can be defined by economics. The traditional definition of economics centers around goods and services. But what
holds for goods, also holds for social priviledges. We live in a complex world where
we for the access to scarce resources are dependent on the people around us.
When we are young we are strongly dependent on what our parents give us. We
quickly discover that our parents are special, and in our minds we build up
a model of social relationships and obligations and we discover that proper
conduct is needed to keep those relationships in order. Shame is basically
the (real or imaginary) fear to be rejected by people around us. All our life
we are busy to build up a model of our personal value, and use this in our
relationship with the people around us to get those resources that we need
for living.
Killing is wrong, except in a war
We have this ethical notion that killing is wrong. If killing would be okay,
it would mean that it would be okay for others to killed us, or kill the people
around us who we depend on. Yet when we are confronted with an evil power,
killing is acceptable. When killing an evil power is acceptable, is greatly
determined by economic arguments. The police is allowed to shoot to stop
a person from causing excessive damage to others, for example, when this
person is killing random people. In case of fight between two countries,
solders in the armies are allowed to use voilence to prevent the population
of the country to be killed or harmed.
Aestestics
home