Thank You Non-Philosophy Fan
Jeanie FarmerDescartes was a highly influential French Philosopher. He lived from 1596 to 1650. Now I\'m not going to go into detail about Descartes himself, not only because I hardly know anything about him (which would of course make it difficult) but because I want to focus on one area of his philosophy. I'm going to use Descartes (ruthlessly!) as a way in to one very well known Philosophical area of questioning; Scepticism.
So I'm told that Descartes filled his early life with training to be a lawyer in accordance with his father's wishes. He abandoned the idea of practising law after finishing his training and instead he focused his attention on seeing the world and discovering truth,
"I entirely abandoned the study of letters. Resolving to seek no knowledge other than that which could be found in myself or else in the great book of the world, I spent the rest of my youth travelling, visiting courts and armies, mixing with people of diverse temperaments and ranks, gathering various experiences, testing myself in the situations which fortune offered me, and at all times reflecting upon whatever came my way so as to derive some profit from it."
--Descartes, Discourse on the Method
This fills me with some comfort. I often feel that if I can't learn from just wandering and looking around me then why should I learn anything from sitting still? Just a thought, and perhaps a lazy one at that, but one that provides me with a personal link to Descartes' ideas and purpose. The two things that I find most interesting about Descartes are that his philosophy (and mathematics) were greatly influenced by his dreams and that he aimed to start his philosophical thinking 'from scratch'.
'From Scratch'- for Descartes this meant that in his goal for the truth about the nature of the world and existence he had to reject any assumptions that could possibly be doubted. Anything that he was even slightly unsure about he chose not to assume as true. This in itself is admirable I think. This is because it is both thorough and original. So many philosophical arguments break down because of unstated inherent assumptions that can be questioned. The best philosophical argument (in my humble opinion) stands tall because it can explicitly name the components of its argument and makes no use of assumption.
However starting from scratch is as difficult as it sounds. I meant that Descartes had to make his own foundations for his philosophy about the world (or whatever else he chose to focus on). Laying foundations for what is true is much harder than building truth upon something that is already there. For example if Descartes wanted to say that ' this boy has brown hair' he would not just have to qualify how he knows that the boy's hair is brown he would also have to qualify what a boy is, the boy's existence and what it means to 'have' something. So you can see what a tricky task it is to start from nowhere. It's like building a path before you can walk on it.
I think the value of all this thought is that it shows just how many assumptions we rest our everyday life, actions and speech upon. Furthermore all of these assumptions were kindly made by other people, sometime, in the distant past. Think about whoever was responsible for deciding the names of the colours, or the names of numbers, or the idea of numbers at all; we use that language and interact with these notions and assumptions, daily, without a thought.
Now I'm not suggesting that you should act like Descartes and question the wealth of assumptions that we are built upon. Perhaps it might be valuable though to let a little of his scepticism rub off on you when it comes to thoughtlessly following the crowd or accepting what you are dealt.
So where did he actually get to if he chose never to accept anything that he could question in the least way? (Well he has been dubbed 'The Father of Modern Philosophy and Mathematics' so he got pretty far) However that seems to be a sensible question since it seems that you can pretty much question anything if you put your mind to it. Simply put, this is the predicament Descartes found himself in: he could question the truth of anything. Therefore he had no reason to believe anything. This would sound like trouble; if you can't believe or assume anything then how can you speak? -since this takes belief in the meaning of the words that your mouth creates. How do you know you're alive? How can you function at all? These are the questions that Descartes chose to create. There is value in asking such strange questions.
I mentioned that Descartes was influenced by his dreams. Famously Descartes in his 'Meditations on First Philosophy' talks about a dream he has that he is sitting in his armchair, in front of his fire, as he does so many evenings when he is awake. In his dream he does not believe that he is asleep. Upon awakening he is surprised to find that he has been dreaming. He asks himself how can I trust my senses or my experience when they constantly tell me other than the truth? He cites the many (now proven) wrong- beliefs that he had as a child which serve to support his evidence for further wrongly believing falsities. This provokes his choice to work 'from scratch', to develop his natural philosophy. Only by discarding questionable information will he be able to develop an accurate account of the world and existence.
Now the non- philosophy fan (who believes that a philosophy degree is three years of smoking weed and that the only way to get by is to become a paper pusher and buy a big car) may be inclined to say, 'rubbish'.
Thank you non- philosophy fan.
For once this response may be useful for dealing with Descartes peculiar predicament. It seems to be true that there is something inherently unreasonable about Descartes methods. I call them admirable and I dig his style but it seems to me that if you cannot accept anything that is even slightly questionable then you cannot accept anything at all and as I said before this would seem to hinder any interaction with the world. I'm sure that Descartes who reflected on whatever he saw to get profit from it would not be best pleased about refraining from interacting with the world or believing anything at all. So I'll leave Descartes scepticism with you and see whether you are interested enough to have a go at solving it.
Personally I believe that it is valuable that Descartes raised the notion of the vast number of beliefs that we just accept and then build upon. It is valuable because it provokes us to question them more readily, which I believe can only create more understanding, perspective and originality. However, it is necessary to throw caution to the wind, accept some falsities (albeit reluctantly) along the way in order to have some beliefs and make the great steps in philosophy and everyday life that you and I and Descartes himself have been able to make. It seems to me that in his enthusiasm for a rigorous process of truth-screening Descartes forgot to screen the validity of his own methods.
Sometimes, even in the world of a philosopher, a little acceptance can go a long way.
Close Up
Olivia MadinToo much hatred
Why is it that you're looking for a fight?
You have no authority over 'mere mortals'
Our own manifestation and destruction is insight
Is it really that the world must bully itself
That humans have to damage to prove a point
A point too often buried through fear
The concept that we all think differently
Appears to be lost in some cases
Yet do we not see similarities
When we look into each others faces?
Sharrow Festival
Jeanie FarmerA July day. The crazy weather let up for one whole day to shine its approval down on to Sharrow and its festival.
I walked around under glorious sunshine and fast moving brilliant white clouds to see what the crack was. Well we were first greeted with that typical festival scene– a crowd, sitting on the floor nodding and tapping to the reggae- dub spilling out in front of them. 'Good music eh'?! A little bit of foot tapping was had and some hellos made to other people clearly pleased to be there... at something that felt like a real summer festival (none of that Glasto mud bath rubbish) Good start...
Then my nose was drawn to the smell of food stalls. Caribbean food, Mexican food, Asian food, English food, veggie or otherwise... It all smelt good. I tried to ignore them for the time being along with tempting jewellery stalls... always difficult... and wandered up to the second field, again tightly packed with stalls and people and music.
Inevitably I didn't hold out long and got myself a vegetable frittata. Spicy! I missed out on the free Indian head– massage and moved onto the basketball courts. Here I found some freshly sprayed graffiti– the walls of the double court had been covered. A lad at the far side did some MCing whilst the artists added their final touches. It looked great... Some big spaces for the artists to get their teeth into.
I spent a while wandering the length of the festival again. I listened to a girl with a beautiful voice singing in the second field. I revelled in the mix of people and ages there.
The festival did a good job of reflecting the mixed and vibrant community of Sharrow.
I reluctantly drew myself away... only to find myself at another jam packed event courtesy of the enthusiasm of (this time bizarre) Sheffield folk (see next issue for details of Sheffield Story-Telling).
Hooray for Sharrow Festival! I'll be there next year and this time I'm getting there early for the tapping and nodding and not leaving until I get a head massage!
