|
|
|
|
A Journal for Western Man |
|
|
----------------------------------- ----------------------------------- ----------------------------------- ----------------------------------- ----------------------------------- ----------------------------------- ----------------------------------- ----------------------------------- ----------------------------------- ----------------------------------- ----------------------------------- ----------------------------------- ----------------------------------- ----------------------------------- ----------------------------------- ----------------------------------- Mr. Stolyarov's Articles on Helium.com ----------------------------------- ----------------------------------- -----------------------------------
|
|
|
“The theory is dead, my friend, but the tree of life is everlasting green” ~ Goethe
The problem of mind, seemingly, presents a contradiction to Objectivist philosophy. If the mind is physical, as Stolyarov claims, then all its functions are the result of physical processes and therefore are inherently determined. These premises abnegate the notions of free will, choice, reasoning, and, in short, the very essence of the human mind. If the mind is spiritual, as Firehammer holds, then it spells a mind-body dichotomy and eventually primacy of consciousness.
I consider this dichotomy as false, and propose to resolve this contradiction by using a teleological approach. My ideas are based on the book of Harry Binswanger, The Biological Basis of Teleological Concepts (ARI press 1990).
Life
It would be futile to discuss consciousness and mind without full understanding of the concept of life, unless one is an idealist and believes that mind can exist without body.
Life is a self-generated and self-sustained process, but it is not the only process of its kind. For example, thermo-nuclear reactions in stars also represent this kind of process and can go on for billions of years. However, stars are not living entities. The only difference is that, to stars, it doesn’t matter if they shine or not. They can change their form and become cosmic dust, but they cannot die. This difference was not always obvious. For example, Aristotle thought that stars were living, conscious beings. Today we know better. Today we know that life is conditional and any living thing is constantly facing the choice - to live or to die - and in order to stay alive it has to act to this end. Therefore life is not only self-generated and self-sustained but is primarily a goal-driven, teleological process whose goal is to sustain and benefit the life. By “goal” I don’t mean consciously chosen object but rather Aristotelian “final cause”. Despite this process being purely physical by nature, it has created a new form of causality-- it causes the being to stay alive as long as possible and to live its life as well as possible. In other words, in living organisms, causality causes goal-driven action. The law of causality is the law of identity applied to action. (Ayn Rand) The very requirement of teleological action to sustain life indicates that living beings evidently possess a different kind of identity than unanimated matter. In Aristotelian terms, life becomes its own efficient cause when the final cause is self-preservation, development and well-being. Therefore the law of causality which rules the “mineral kingdom” is not always applicable to the world of living beings. For example, living beings seemingly “refute” laws of thermodynamics, they can transform kinetic energy to potential energy (no boulder can climb to the top of the hill on its own), they can repair themselves, and eventually they can choose. When we understand how a conglomerate of organic molecules started to act toward their self-preservation and self-improvement, we’ll understand the origin of life. (Please note that no living organism can act toward self-sacrifice as its ultimate goal; that is why altruism is an anti-life philosophy). Consciousness Every living
entity is an open thermodynamic system (laws of
thermodynamics are obviously applicable to it) and
in order to live, it has to actively interact with
its environment. Pre-sensory interaction of
primitive organisms is a well known fact: the
amoeba, which is a single-celled organism, escapes
from light, plants turn their leaves toward light,
etc… This process is obviously not conscious, since
these organisms don’t possess any organs of
consciousness, but nevertheless they have built-in
mechanisms of reaction to their environment, which
enable them to act for their own benefit These
mechanisms are no doubt of physical nature (there is
no such a thing as entelechy), but their physics
have a different kind of causality – that of the
living, goal-driven entity. With development of
multi-cellular organisms, certain cells became
specialized in receiving and processing sensory
data. Reason Reason is consciousness on a
conceptual level, the faculty of abstract thinking,
and the ability to make choices. Reason presupposes
volition. So how could a deterministic physical
process provide us with free will? Physical and
biochemical processes inside the human brain are not
different from those of unanimated matter or low
animals, and the most careful examination has so far
failed to demonstrate the brain’s volitional center.
And even if such a center were to be found, it would
leave open the question: what causes to this center
to operate? In conclusion: 1. Life differs
from unanimated matter by the fact that it generates
its own agent of action (efficient cause), and the
final cause is self-benefit. Leonid Fainberg is a contributor to The Rational Argumentator. This TRA feature has been edited in accordance with TRA’s Statement of Policy. Click here to return to TRA's Issue LXXXVI Index. Learn about Mr. Stolyarov's novel, Eden against the Colossus, here. Read Mr. Stolyarov's new comprehensive treatise, A Rational Cosmology, explicating such terms as the universe, matter, space, time, sound, light, life, consciousness, and volition, at http://www.geocities.com/rational_argumentator/rc.html.
|
|
|
|
|