Saturday, January 25, 2020

Why the concept of OBJECTIVITY, in every sense of the word, may not be there in the scheme of existence?


What we are going to discuss here might be a very odd subject, as such a subject was not at all discussed by any section of existing philosophic thought. The subject will touch the very nature of existence, the nature of human perception, the nature of our existing OBJECTIVE realities etc.

We know, our science is obsessed with OBJECTIVE realities. Concept of OBJECTIVITY basically means 'good for everybody'. It presupposes that subjectivity is irrational, dream like, good for only the one who experience it. It also presupposes that 'existence' is a physical, strictly objective phenomenon, that human intelligence could study and pass good for all scientific judgments/conclusions/theories. Why such a view may be very wrong? Why it is NOT exclusively hinting at the validity of 'subjectivity' in a tussle between the two? This discussion perhaps aimed at widely BROADENING the scope of objectivity. Principle of 'objectivity' covering much broader an area so that it attains a new meaning and scope.

What are the rules of existence covering our realities? Such rules, as we can easily understand, might cover the laws that define questions like 'why humans and their science tend to be obsessed for OBJECTIVE laws that cover very narrow realms of our realities', restricted to what appears before our external sense organs?.  There could be laws of existence covering how we tend to view existence with our pre-designed sense organs? We have no control over the way how our sense organs are  designed to give us knowledge, with their peculiar, particular range, particular category ( sight,taste, smell, touch,hearing) each handle etc. We are simply passive receivers of the way our sense organs give us such categories of knowledge; sight, taste, touch, smell etc. Even we are passive carriers of a 'sense of self' system that nature has designed, though science believes there is no such sense of self system, except as a brain provided illusion.

Why certain laws on how we should observe own life, self and external objects and events might exist and they are the real OBJECTIVE laws? 


Above proposition might seriously oppose the view of science that life and existence are simply physical, mindless phenomenon. How can we decide correctly on such matters? About matters of
existence? Our methods of science are fit only for experimenting on the physical aspects of whatever that exists. But what about the very laws of existence that might be controlling who we had been constituted as observers? Cant there be any law deciding and controlling this aspect? If we believe, that it was the factor of physical or energy necessities that caused all changes and events in the physical world, it is difficult to counter such argument, as the very method of such inferences are based on a particular epistemology that we follow. There is no method discovered or recognized yet that could give us insight into the laws that might be controlling our sense of self. There is no method yet discovered that could question the belief that nature was self born and it sustains itself by the laws of thermodynamics.

Stephen Hawking seemed thought about this problem a bit.In his book, 'A brief history of time, he states;

"If everything in the universe depends on everything else in a fundamental way, it might be impossible to get close to a full solution by investigating parts of the problem in isolation".(Page 12)

Our existing epistemology has no method to undertake a study on the Hawking mentioned 'theory of everything', a theory beyond the belief that human intelligence is equipped to study whatever there in existence, including her laws and schemes that control our very intelligence itself. What is that intelligence?

Our way of inferring theories and hypotheses doesn't come under scientific method. What we have discussed was a very complex issue. It demands our going outside of the scientific method for a while.

Love to share with all inquiring minds, a study on our sense organs:
http://thesparkleofhumanreason.blogspot.com/2016/07/sense-organs-of-man-are-they-natures.html

Above discussed dilemma might demand a serious fresh study of our faculty of Reason. Is it possible that it is a mystery sense faculty provided to man to have insight into such laws of existence that control our sense of self and other mechanisms that control our intelligence and way of acquiring knowledge of a different category?


Abraham J.Palakudy

He is an ardent seeker and researcher in philosophical and metaphysical subjects.

His Twitter sphere: voice of philosophy@jopan1

His other bogs: https://www.blogger.com/profile/14249415589712707293