Philosophy: Mind, Soul, Consciousness, Body - Part 9
When we practice physics, for example when we are trying to understand the subatomic world, we are also staying on the circumference of the Circle of Being. We look to the right and to the left. However, our gaze does not reach very far, because the circle is curved, so that we quickly reach a "knowledge-horizon" that reveals itself in the form of all sorts of contradictions and paradoxes modern physics has experienced since the late 19th century, and in particular when it comes to quantum mechanics. We simply cannot know let alone understand what is beyond this horizon.
In order to further refine our understanding of ourselves and the world, we are looking at ever smaller units, that is, our way of working and exploring is reductionistic. This is reflected in physics in the attempt to understand the atoms as being composed of smaller subatomic components, which in turn are understood to be made up of even smaller particles, etc.
In medicine, this way of thinking has let to the fact that no longer man as a whole is considered but constantly new areas of expertise arise that deal only with a part of the body or even only with a single organ. Disease then is understood as a dysfunction of a particular organ.
I want to make clear that I do not say that science or modern medicine are fundamentally bad or that all their conclusions are wrong. All I'm saying is that this reductionistic approach does not lead to a complete understanding of the world and of the human being as a whole. As a consequence, the conclusions that are derived based on this approach are incomplete, at least as long as science is based on the supposed ideal of a hundred percent objectification and thus on the greatest possible separation of subject and object.
From a conventional scientific point of view, the world that we perceive as the outside, that is, as the external world of the objects, influences and shapes our consciousness which, in turn, we perceive as the interior, or as our inner world, that is, as the subject. This is done by means of our sensory perceptions (the five senses), which for us are the link, or if you will, the mediator between inner world and outer world.
Now, classical science assumes that there is a reality in the form of an "outer world", which is independent of whether it is somehow perceived or cogitated about by someone (whosoever) in any way. Of course, we could now ask what "there is" should mean in this context, or even what "reality" actually should mean. I do not want to wander from the intrinsic topic here; maybe I'll come back to these questions later.
This "outer world", so science assumes additionally, develops independently of the "inner world". The "outer world" is considered as the so-called "objective reality" which exists independently of the "subjective reality" of our "inner world".
In this view, consciousness and psychic phenomena, ego-feeling, etc., are merely epiphenomena of the electrochemical activity of our brains. Awareness and psyche arise from and are based on matter. And, in particular, it follows (shouldn't I better say, "it seems to follow"?) that consciousness and the psyche have no ability to affect matter. Consciousness, soul, and psyche are in this way only transliterations for processes of the objective "outer world" that we have not yet understood but are convinced that in the foreseeable future we will understand them as material phenomena.
This becomes particularly clear when we take a closer look at the classical scientific worldview. The classical scientific worldview and, as a consequence, the conventional scientific view of the mind-body dichotomy are based on the so-called Newtonian mechanics.
To be continued
In order to further refine our understanding of ourselves and the world, we are looking at ever smaller units, that is, our way of working and exploring is reductionistic. This is reflected in physics in the attempt to understand the atoms as being composed of smaller subatomic components, which in turn are understood to be made up of even smaller particles, etc.
In medicine, this way of thinking has let to the fact that no longer man as a whole is considered but constantly new areas of expertise arise that deal only with a part of the body or even only with a single organ. Disease then is understood as a dysfunction of a particular organ.
I want to make clear that I do not say that science or modern medicine are fundamentally bad or that all their conclusions are wrong. All I'm saying is that this reductionistic approach does not lead to a complete understanding of the world and of the human being as a whole. As a consequence, the conclusions that are derived based on this approach are incomplete, at least as long as science is based on the supposed ideal of a hundred percent objectification and thus on the greatest possible separation of subject and object.
From a conventional scientific point of view, the world that we perceive as the outside, that is, as the external world of the objects, influences and shapes our consciousness which, in turn, we perceive as the interior, or as our inner world, that is, as the subject. This is done by means of our sensory perceptions (the five senses), which for us are the link, or if you will, the mediator between inner world and outer world.
Now, classical science assumes that there is a reality in the form of an "outer world", which is independent of whether it is somehow perceived or cogitated about by someone (whosoever) in any way. Of course, we could now ask what "there is" should mean in this context, or even what "reality" actually should mean. I do not want to wander from the intrinsic topic here; maybe I'll come back to these questions later.
This "outer world", so science assumes additionally, develops independently of the "inner world". The "outer world" is considered as the so-called "objective reality" which exists independently of the "subjective reality" of our "inner world".
In this view, consciousness and psychic phenomena, ego-feeling, etc., are merely epiphenomena of the electrochemical activity of our brains. Awareness and psyche arise from and are based on matter. And, in particular, it follows (shouldn't I better say, "it seems to follow"?) that consciousness and the psyche have no ability to affect matter. Consciousness, soul, and psyche are in this way only transliterations for processes of the objective "outer world" that we have not yet understood but are convinced that in the foreseeable future we will understand them as material phenomena.
This becomes particularly clear when we take a closer look at the classical scientific worldview. The classical scientific worldview and, as a consequence, the conventional scientific view of the mind-body dichotomy are based on the so-called Newtonian mechanics.
To be continued
