Ever since René Descartes redirected philosophy towards a rationalist, individualist view of life (basically kickstarting the Enlightenment), people’s belief in a higher being has steadily been waning. The centuries since have seen a rise in science and determining the world around us via the scientific method, and we have come to see ourselves as the top of the food chain, the all-powerful beings in our universe. But there are some things that cannot be measured and quantified, and Schumacher’s ultimate conclusion is that there must be something spiritually higher than humanity. For how else can you truly answer the existential questions?
What does it mean to be human? What is the purpose of life? Where did the initial spark of life come from? There is a distinct reason why there are so many different answers to these questions: there are a lot of people in the world, and every person has their own subjective life experiences that determine their answers. We can only do our best to share our ideas with others via communication, and while communication is good for understanding, it can never substitute for true knowing. “We ‘see’ not simply with our eyes but with a great part of our mental equipment as well,” Schumacher writes, “and since this mental equipment varies greatly from person to person, there are inevitably many things which some people can ‘see’ but which others cannot.” No two people know exactly the same things about anything.
Schumacher describes Four Fields of Knowledge loosely broken down as Inner-Personal, Inner-Other, Outer-Personal, and Outer-Other: 1) What is really going on in my own inner world? This we can always know. 2) What is really going on in the inner world of other beings? This we can never know, but can only make educated guesses about based on the clues we gather. 3) What do I look like in the eyes of other beings? This again we can only make educated guesses about. 4) What do I observe in the world around me? This we can know to the extent that we have knowledge about it, but our knowledge is not the same as anyone else’s.
Schumacher’s beef with Cartesian theory is based in his disbelief in rationalism. “Sense data alone do not produce insight or understanding of any kind. Ideas produce insight and understanding, and the world of ideas lies within us.” I find this to be a true statement, for two people can watch the same movie and one can love it and one can hate it. Is it a good movie or a bad movie? “The truth of ideas cannot be seen by the senses but only by that special instrument sometimes referred to as ‘the Eye of the Heart.’” Ideas, as our author alludes to, are the most powerful things we know of. When someone says that the pen is mightier than the sword, this is what they are talking about. Swords and the use of violence can force people to change, but that change is always against a tide of resistance. Ideas, on the other hand, (often demonstrated via the form of writing with pens and ink,) are fabulously more transformative and enduring. Ideas change the world.
It is dangerous to try and scientifically explain phenomena that cannot be observed and quantified. Some thing are better left to subjectivity, the differences between opinions celebrated instead of condemned for one all-purpose answer. This wonder is the essence of philosophy, for as Socrates once said: “Wonder is the feeling of a philosopher, and philosophy begins with wonder.” Perhaps the human need for certainty in our answers to existential questions isn’t even the right path to travel. Is there a God? Is there not a God? Certainty in either answer closes one off from wonder and further exploration and insight. Perhaps decidedly not knowing the answer is ultimately more enlightening.
Leave a Reply