Podcast: Play in new window | Download (Duration: 55:10 — 63.1MB)
The idea that we create our own reality is very popular, especially among truth seekers, and the thought leaders of the truth/freedom movement. Its an idea that has truth and falsity woven together in a perfect mix so as to potentially mislead and deceive.
The idea that we create our own reality is known in philosophical terms as subjectivism. It holds that human consciousness creates reality in the metaphysical sense, that consciousness comes first, that consciousness is the metaphysical primary, observing things into being. Subjectivism comes in two forms, one that reality is created by the individual consciousness, the other that it is a construct of the group consciousness. On the premise of either of these two forms, reality is not regarded as objective, not a fixed, stable, absolute, but rather as fluid, flexible, and changeable by human consciousness.
My message is one of caution to those who hold this idea to be true, or who may have heard of it, and be considering it. It’s what I call a high consequence idea. Meaning, that it has a huge knock-on effect in our consciousness because it is so fundamental to our thinking. The very first question in philosophy is whether or not reality is an objective absolute, independent of consciousness, or a construct of human consciousness.
In this podcast, I shall first illustrate how we do create our experience of reality, and that we rely exclusively on the pre-supposition of objectivity in doing so, and in all human functionality.
Then I shall outline the consequences of holding the idea of subjectivism to be true. The epistemological consequences on our ability to discern truth and acquire knowledge, the psychological consequences, in terms of the subsequent ideas and behaviours it apparently justifies, and the political consequences with respect to our freedom.
Lastly, I shall examine the reasons why people hold this idea to be true.
How we create our reality
It’s true, using our human consciousness, we have an enormous ability to create. We have the capacity to produce material things, and to create circumstances, to create suffering, to create harmony, to create disruption and disorder, or to create peace and cooperation. Most importantly, we have the ability to create the reality of our own life experience, from the smallest detail, such as what we do in any particular moment, to the broadest outcomes over the long term, such as creating our health and longevity, or creating a family dynasty. The truth is that we create our experience of the one reality, the one that we all live in.
First of all I’d like to share a famous quote by the American theologian, Reinhold Niebuhr (1892–1971). In the form of a prayer, he wrote…
“God grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, the courage to change the things I can, and the wisdom to know the difference.”
It was Ayn Rand who pointed out that this quote illustrates a profoundly important distinction—that of the man made, versus the metaphysically given—although the author probably didn’t intend it that way.
The metaphysically given includes the natural world as we find it, with the identity of things, as we find them: the continents and oceans and volcanoes, along with all the principles of causality that we refer to as the laws of nature, Things like fire, electricity, magnetism, etc. This is objective reality. And our consciousness cannot change it. Its what we must have the serenity to accept.
The man-made includes all the material things we can create, such as buildings, towns and cities, environments, cars, computers, etc. We have the ability to reshape matter into the form of our values, but not to create it out of nothing. And notably, it is by regarding reality objectively, by learning the facts, that we are then able to exercise this power.
It was Francis Bacon who said, “We can command nature, only by obeying her”. In this, obeying nature means first acquiring the requisite knowledge. We may then ‘command’ nature, by taking appropriate action.
The man made represents a vast category of things we can change, both individually and in cooperation with others, extending way beyond just material things. It includes all the human institutions, traditions, social norms, and all forms of social organisation and governance.
On the personal level, the man made includes the fact that we can create, and change, our lives, and what we experience, in a multitude of ways. These are the things that we must sometimes have the courage to change.
“The wisdom to know the difference”, means the wisdom to not fall for false ideas such as subjectivism, which destroys the distinction between the two.
Creating our experience of reality
Lets look in more detail at how we create the reality of our life experience.
Starting with the body we are born with, and the context we are born into, along with any limitations or opportunities these may afford, we have an enormous degree of control over what kind of life experience we create for ourselves. And the means of control is, our consciousness.
The standard dictionary definition of consciousness says that it’s “the state of being aware of, and responsive to, one’s surroundings”. This is a broad definition that refers to all the different forms of consciousness possessed by various living organisms. Our particular kind of consciousness (that we call mind) is very sophisticated, with many attributes not enjoyed by other organisms. But the purpose of consciousness is common to all creatures that possess it. Its the faculty of awareness that makes possible responsiveness to the organisms surroundings. In other words, it serves as the means of guidance. For lower animals, their consciousness guides them around objects, towards food, away from predators, etc. For us humans, our consciousness is our means of guidance. We must use it to identify the reality of our circumstances, to identify our purpose, our values and goals, and to acquire knowledge. We must then use it to choose appropriate actions to achieve those goals and create those values, and to succeed in our purpose—thus shaping our life experience.
Our most basic choice is whether or not to think, and experience teaches us that we reap the consequences of both our thinking, or our lack of thinking. Thus, we have the power to create the extent of our knowledge. And by the same token, we reap the consequences of our knowledge, as well as our lack of knowledge.
The power of our consciousness to create our life experience is vast. We can choose our values and goals, our attitude, or mindset; We can choose our profession, our partner, whether or not to raise a family. We can choose or change, our surroundings; we can choose or change, the people with whom we associate. Significantly, we can choose or change the way we interact with others, and thus effect how they behave towards us in return. We have power over all these things, and more, by using our consciousness in its creative capacity. This is what it means when people say ‘you create your own reality’.
In effect, your mind is the manager of your life, and the quality of the life management we bring to bear using our mind, is the number one factor in determining our experience. Is the manager switched on and paying attention, or not? Does the manager proactively seek understanding, or not?
In the same way that the manager of a business can steer it towards success or failure, your mind creates your particular life experience in the sense that every decision you make, and every action you take, has a bearing on your life experience. The business manager can exercise control over his products or services, his marketing strategy, but he cannot create market conditions, he cannot create demand or alter objective facts. Neither can your mind alter the objective facts of reality as you ‘manage’ your life.
The power of the mind
Our human form of consciousness (the mind) is a powerful force in the process of creation, and the ideas contained within our personal world view are perhaps the most fundamental component of this power. This is why subjectivism is such a high consequence idea. Because ideas are extremely powerful drivers of thought and behaviour. They speak directly to our mental operating system, including the subconscious.
The fundamental ideas we hold to be true, determine our view of what’s possible and what’s not, what acceptable and what is not, what’s good and what’s bad. Without even conscious awareness of the ideas themselves, two totally different lives could be lived depending on which of two opposing ideas that an individual held to be true. For example, imagine someone who believes the world is set against them, and everything they did was doomed to failure, compared to a person who believed they could achieve anything they wanted. Or, imagine a life lived on the premise of necessary duty and suffering, versus the premise that your life is yours with which to achieve your personal happiness. The ideas we believe in shape our lives, and thus create our life experience. In this respect, again, our thoughts create our experience of reality.
The power of our consciousness should be fully aligned with, and committed to, any goal we set out to achieve. To ensure success, the individual mind must have confidence in its ability (mental and physical) to achieve the desired outcome. This is why we say that we must believe in our success for it to happen. This is why the mental game is such an important component of any sport, and it explains why even people of great skill can sometimes fail to achieve their goals. In effect, your consciousness can be the obstacle, or problem, that blocks your professed desired outcome. We can thwart, our own success for a number of psychological reasons.
Along with physical performance, our consciousness can also affect our physiology. The concept of psychosomatic illness is a well known example. Very often when people report conclusive proof of how thought creates reality in the context of health, they are reporting an incidence of a mind simply ‘getting out of the way’ of the body’s own healing mechanisms. We see this in the placebo effect, with belief in a medicine pill.
Our consciousness can also create or block our success in a wide variety of life pursuits. Limiting false ideas of unworthiness, or guilt, can sabotage that commitment and alignment with a desired outcome. In such cases we must ‘get out of the way’, and allow that successful relationship or career to be ours, without unconsciously blocking it by believing we are undeserving. But, at the same time, we cannot create competence by our thoughts alone; we cannot be good at something just because we want to be, without action, in acquiring knowledge and learning how to perform the required skills. Action, is the all important component of our creative process. Mental action, followed by external action, out there, in the real world. Where success, and failure, are real.
All of these abilities to exert influence over our experience through our choices and actions, represent the power of the mind to create our experience. But they do not amount to a validation of subjectivism. Rather than creating the identity of things by observing them into being, our consciousness is our faculty of awareness through which we must identify that which objectively exists, and through which we must choose how to conduct ourselves, in the light of what we identify as true. This is how we create our own experience of reality.
Objectivity is always your friend
In a nut shell, objectivity is always our friend. Every time we interact with any thing, or any one, to achieve any purpose, we assume three basic principles;
1. The law of identity, which is the self-evident truth that everything is what it is, and it’s something specific, with a specific nature. Everything has particular properties that make it what it is. Everything that exists has an identity. To be, is to be something—something specific.
The law of identity is the recognition that reality is independent of consciousness, that the existence and identity of a thing is not dependent on it being known, believed or recognised.
2. The law of non-contradiction. This states that contradictions cannot exist. If a thing is what it is, then it cannot be what it is and NOT what it is at the same time, and in the same respect.
3. The law of causality. A thing of a specific nature—with a particular identity—can only act in accordance with its nature. So, in any given context what a thing will do, is determined by what it is.
Lets look at how we act on the assumption of these three principles in one simple example in daily life.
Any time you enter a room and turn the lights on, you have grasped the identity of the door and adjacent walls, and assumed their functionality is in accordance with their identity. You have also implicitly conceded that without external action things will not change (not withstanding the effects of time and decay) and that the action of your consciousness alone is insufficient to open the door, and turn on the lights. You twist the door handle, and flick the light switch. Furthermore, you demonstrate the conviction that reality is stable and fixed, and that the identity of doors, walls, lights, and light switches cannot be changed by your wishes or feelings. You act on the presupposition of the law of identity in all your expectations of how to achieve the ‘opening of the door’ and the ‘turning on of the the lights’, based on your past experience of doing so. And also in your confident predictions of future use of these things, and also in your confidence that the internal layout of your home will not suddenly change from one day to the next, at the whim of some one you live with, or your neighbours, or the local community. You rightly assume that the doors and walls will remain in the same objective positions. Lastly, you demonstrate that you are operating on the presupposition that contradictions cannot exist. You grasp that if you wish to be in the kitchen you cannot stay in the bathroom, you must move from the one, to the other, because you cannot be in the kitchen and not in the kitchen at the same time.
Objectivity is assumed in all speech and communication, because the definitions of the words we use in common day to day use, are objective, (more or less). If they were not, communication would be impossible. And, in any statement you make, you intend it to mean what it means, and not the opposite. Each sentence you utter has an identity.
When you drive to the shops, you demonstrate your operating assumption of an objective reality by controlling the vehicle to conform to the road, and not expecting the road to conform to your wishes and desires. If you were out walking along the cliffs at Beachy Head, you would demonstrate your respect for the objective danger, by keeping a safe distance from the edge of the cliff.
All trade and commerce along with all negotiations and peace settlements assume the law of identity and an objective reality, as do all sports and team games. Even music is enjoyed on the basis of objective relationships between different frequencies.
All of these points demonstrate that objectivity is the necessary presupposition of any purposeful human action. They do not constitute proof. I will talk about why you cannot prove that reality is objective in a moment, but for now the point is that you can consistently demonstrate both that reality is indeed independent of consciousness, and that this presupposition is the only possible basis of all human functionality.
Now, let’ consider that we can also test the idea of subjectivism, to see if it describes the way things are, to see if it is true or false.
Try and change the identity of anything by your thoughts alone, say the internal layout of your home, reconfiguring doors, walls and light switches. Its safe to say you wont be able to. Try altering causality with just your thoughts, wishes or belief, and making the light switch open the door, or the door handle turn on the light. We can’t do these things, because reality is objective, facts are facts, things are what they are irrespective of our thoughts and beliefs. Our own personal direct experience shows us that subjectivism is false. But I suspect that this wont convince diehard subjectivists.
The fact is that objectivity is always our friend. Not only in daily functioning, but also in terms of truth seeking, the acquisition of knowledge, and the careful explanation of complex conceptual ideas, such as freedom and rights.
The point here is, that however many gurus have told you that you can create your own reality (in the metaphysical sense), whatever alleged occurrence challenges your understanding of what is possible, whatever you’ve heard about the double slit experiments, however tempting it is to jump to a conclusion, hold your horses! Check for logical fallacies, and remain conscious of your intellectual footing. As thinkers and truth seekers we must maintain awareness that an objective reality, independent of consciousness, is the essential pre-supposition of all human functionality.
The devastating consequences of subjectivism
Subjectivism, the idea that we create our reality in the metaphysical sense, destroys any distinction between the man made, and the metaphysically given. It divorces outcomes from action, implying total control through consciousness alone. It offers the believer a comforting illusion that if you don’t want nasty things in your world, you have the power to not create them by avoiding thinking particular thoughts. It tempts the believer with a magic wand to both create desirable circumstances, and to ‘disappear’ undesirable circumstances, all with the power of one’s consciousness alone. According to subjectivism, you can ignore things you don’t like on the implicit assumption that they will go away. It sounds appealing. until you stop and think, and realise that you are being offered a fantasy. It should be obvious that you cannot guarantee than only good stuff will ever happen; no one can ever make sure to end all suffering. Yet this is the illusion that subjectivism offers. It’s seductive because it appeals to fantasies of both omnipotence and ultimate safety.
The point to bear in mind is that subjectivism over turns the three basic principles assumed in all purposeful action and all human functionality, and in doing so leads to 4 disastrous epistemological consequences.
On the premise of subjectivism…
1) The concept of truth becomes meaningless.
2) The concept of knowledge becomes meaningless.
3) Reality becomes unknowable.
4) There is no need to validate any ideas, since ideas from our consciousness are what comes first. And there could be no method to validate ideas, since logic presupposes the law of non-contradiction.
Ideas are powerful, and fundamental ideas are the most powerful. They have consequences in our minds just as actions do outside of us. Every conclusion we draw can serve as a premise for the next syllogism, or next bit of reasoning. The premise of subjectivism has inescapable logical consequences. If it were to be fully adopted and consistently acted upon, that individual would not be able to function. This is why it is something of part time idea, that is only discussed in particular philosophical contexts. It cannot be held consistently because it contradicts the presupposition of human functionality. To the extent that it is held as true, it exerts a negative influence on the psychology of the believer without the conscious awareness of the individual.
Now lets turn our attention to a discussion of these psychological consequences. Bear in mind that the extent to which the subjectivist does NOT experience these (or consider them a problem), is the extent to which that individual operates on the presupposition of an objective reality. Remember that the idea of subjectivism contradicts the basic presupposition of human functionality, so to believe in subjectivism means you are necessarily dividing your mind against itself. The part that you function with must, by necessity, presuppose an objective reality.
Personal/psychological consequences of subjectivism
1. The incentive to think and discern truth is destroyed. If consciousness creates reality, there is nothing objective to identify and no need to think. Thinking is the identification of reality. On the premise of subjectivism, you only need to introspect, to look inside your consciousness to find the truth. Therefore the predisposition to critical thinking will inevitably be compromised and eroded over time. This leaves the subjectivist vulnerable to all of the logical fallacies.
2. Emotions become the prime means of guidance. Due to the disincentive to think, and the invalidity of critical thinking, the only apparent means of guidance becomes emotions. This leaves the subjectivist vulnerable to emotional manipulation and fear based propaganda, especially, of course, the logical fallacy of appealing to emotions. Admittedly some hard core subjectivists may simply ignore any threat on the grounds that it will disappear if it is not given attention.
3. Since logic, truth, facts, and knowledge, are meaningless, and since there’s no such thing as objective evidence, certainty is impossible. This can only lead to anxiety, the natural and inevitable consequence of not knowing what to do, or how to act, with any degree of certainty.
3. License to act irrationally. If acting rationally means acting logically in accordance with the objective circumstances, then we can see that to act contrary to reality is to demonstrate irrationality. If a consciousness holds the idea that it is in creative control of reality, then why would it feel constrained by what it observes? On the premise of subjectivism, its function is to create, not accept what is there. Thus, belief in subjectivism is always potentially license to evade things, avoid responsibility, ignore awkward facts on the premise that they will go away,
4. Clarity of thought and clarity of communication are both lost, since both rest on the precision of our definitions. Accurate definitions are what links our concepts to reality. Without regarding reality as objective, there is nothing objective to connect one’s concepts to. The result is loss of clarity of understanding of the more abstract conceptual ideas. This leads to the false conclusion that some things are just impossible to explain with words. “I know it, but I cant explain it!” What is really happening here is that the mind (on the premise of subjectivism) doesn’t bother to accurately connect its concepts to reality (the only possible source of their meaning) because it has rejected reality as being fixed and objective, and as being the source of conceptual ideas. This same mental disconnection from reality also effectively gives the mind permission to entertain ideas such as “energy, matter, and consciousness, are all the same thing!”
5. The subjectivist cannot demand or offer proof without self-contradiction. I have already mentioned that certainty is impossible. This is another contributing factor, since no proof can be evaluated. But the point here is that no credible arguments can be offered, or countered. It results in people becoming both intellectually impotent, and defenceless.
6. A predisposition to confirmation bias. If thoughts create reality, I can ignore what I don’t want to see and look for what I do want to see. Confirmation bias is the loss of objectivity in thinking.
7. The premise of subjectivism is an implicit call to inaction. If consciousness is primary, creating what is real, then action is not necessary.
8. Because subjectivism destroys the distinction between the metaphysically given and the man made, it means that the believer in this idea can waste a lifetime pointlessly trying to change that which cannot be changed, and tragically forgoing opportunities to change that which they could change.
Again I want to stress that I am not accusing subjectivists of adopting these behaviours. I am pointing out the logical consequences of where the idea inevitably leads. The extent to which these effects are resisted, avoided, or not experienced, is the extent to which the divided mind remains on the presupposition of an objective reality, independent from consciousness. If subjectivism were acted upon fully and consistently, that individual would not be able to function.
The political consequences of subjectivism
Now lets imagine that the idea of subjectivism dominated our culture. What would that mean for our political future?
1. On the premise of subjectivism, both people’s ability and incentive to discern truth are compromised, and they will be increasingly susceptible to logical fallacies within the mainstream narrative.
2. When people are tuned into their emotions as their primary means of knowing what to do, rather than using their capacity for critical thinking, they can easily be frightened into taking action that they may not, in truth, need to take. Thus, fear based propaganda can be used very effectively as a means to manipulate people to act against their own self-interest, and steered towards the desired political outcome of a globally controlled collectivist society.
3. Hard core subjectivists will experience a disincentive to see the impending tyranny of a collectivist society as a ‘real’ threat, and will not be moved take any meaningful political action.
4. No credible argument can be made for freedom, or against collectivism. This means there can be no intellectual base for the ‘freedom movement’ on the premise of subjectivism. As a result of the epistemological consequences already mentioned, the ability to meaningfully discuss facts or evidence is compromised, and because the reasoned approach has been undermined, because the heart has assumed superiority over the head, there is no means with which to even understand the complex abstract ideas of rights, freedom and sovereignty, let alone explain them to others—which is what the achievement of freedom requires! Consequently, the freedom movement as a whole, is left intellectually impotent, and intellectually defenceless against the march towards political collectivism (or any other atrocity).
5. On the premise of subjectivism, victims of political tyranny are left responsible for creating their own suffering! With no intellectual argument against the injustice.
So, why do people believe in subjectivism
I spent most of my adult life as a subjectivist, so I understand people holding this idea to be true. And while my subsequent interest in philosophy and epistemology has helped me to fully grasp its devastating consequences, it’s also given me insight as to why this idea is so widely believed.
1. It appeals to wishful thinking. It looks appealing. It offers the illusion of total empowerment and safety from any threats, all with the power of thought alone. Thus, subjectivism makes it look possible to create a desired reality of whatever one wants, without effort, but perhaps more significantly, without any understanding of why the world is the way it is, without identifying causes, and therefore, without real hope of changing anything. In other words, subjectivism appeals to wishful thinking. A lack of knowledge and understanding are not seen as a barrier to the achievement of freedom. This is an exact inversion of the truth. Freedom is a complex abstract concept, and so the achievement of full political freedom (if it should ever happen) will represent a culture wide intellectual achievement.
2. It’s popular. It has been championed by the New Age movement for decades. Scores of influential gurus have been advocating it, and even connecting it to spiritual enlightenment. There have been hundreds of books promoting the idea that we create our own reality, including Rhonda Byrne’s 2005 book ‘The Secret’. Maybe this is why some people think that those at the top of the power pyramid have been keeping it from us, as part of our enslavement—as if the idea were actually useful to the achievement of freedom. Its not a secret, its a false idea.
Subjectivism lies at the root of ‘The law of Attraction’ and the teachings of channellers like Ester Hicks, and it has also been almost universally voiced by countless quantum theorists from Schroedinger, to the Michio Kaku.
The idea that consciousness creates reality may not be explicitly endorsed across the board, but it is very widespread in current western culture. Particularly in the truth seeking, or what could be described as alternative, culture.
3. Another major reason that so many accept the idea of subjectivism is because they hear anecdotal stories about mysterious phenomena that apparently can’t be explained. In the absence of logical and methodical thinking, these are hastily taken as proof that we create our reality in a metaphysical sense. Leaving aside the issue of proof on the premise of subjectivism for a moment, the key point here is that any apparently mysterious phenomena that cannot be explained, and apparently shouldn’t be possible, are either real and a part of reality, or they are not. Only investigation can determine which. But whether or not they are real, we shouldn’t make the mistake of taking ‘unexplained’ phenomena as proof of anything—least of all, for an idea that contradicts the fundamental presupposition of all human functionality, and undermines our ability to think. In other words, we shouldn’t rush to defend subjectivism without awareness of the epistemological consequences.
4. But perhaps the most powerful apparent justification of the idea that consciousness is primary and that consciousness creates reality is the famous double slit experiments. Originally performed by Thomas Young in the early eighteen hundreds, the double slit experiment confirmed the wave theory of light. However, in the early nineteen hundreds so-called refinements of the experiment, in which individual photons of light were claimed to be fired one at a time, it was said that the photons exhibited wave-particle duality. The experiment was also performed firing individual electrons, and the same claim of wave-particle duality was made with respect to electrons. The Copenhagen Interpretation says that a quantum system is described by a wave function that encodes all possible states of the system, when a measurement is made the wave function collapses into a single definite outcome. Although it doesn’t explicitly state that human consciousness is responsible, it leaves the door wide open for those wanting to interpret the double slit experiment as proof that consciousness creates reality, and people do.
The question of whether or not the measuring equipment itself influences the path of the electrons or photons is ignored. This sounds very similar to John Enders experiments proving the existence of viruses also not controlling his experiments to make sure that the experiment itself is not producing the results. This is not legitimate scientific investigation. I also find questionable the claim of firing single photons, one at a time.
Furthermore, rather than questioning the motives and claims of these theoretical physicists and their pay masters, in the same way that we should question todays climate alarmists, and vaccination advocates, many truth seekers instead rush to agree that this is proof that consciousness creates reality. I would hope to see more consistency in questioning the authority figures of the day who orchestrate the mainstream narrative? All truth seekers should be aware that the dissemination of false ideas to mislead the public did not begin last year, last decade, or even last century. If it’s truth we seek, we must extend our suspicions back across time, to whenever such potentially significant claims are made with respect to high consequence ideas.
Error in thinking
5. Ultimately, holding the idea of subjectivism as true is an error in thinking, that amounts to falling for either one, or several, possible logical fallacies. The most significant one catches out even those who are thinking for themselves to a reasonable degree. I was also ignorant of this until I learned about the hierarchical structure of knowledge, and the necessary logical connection between ideas within that hierarchy. So it is an understandable mistake. It was Ayn Rand who spoke of the hierarchical structure of knowledge, and identified the fallacy of failing to respect this hierarchy in one’s thinking. She named it the fallacy of the stolen concept. Lets examine this fallacy, because not only is it rampant in todays world, but its also key to understanding why subjectivism is a false idea.
Lets begin by noting that all human knowledge can be divided into two categories; on the one hand the directly perceivable, experiential knowledge, or the self-evident; and on the other hand, derived knowledge that is conceptual, and that is inferred from previous knowledge. This previous knowledge can either be conceptual knowledge lower down in the hierarchy, or the directly perceived. The important thing to grasp here is that all of the second category is ultimately derived from the first. So to deny the validity of the self-evident is to deny the only possible base of all of your conceptual knowledge. Because without an objective reality there can be no self-evident knowledge.
When you hear someone pointing out that you cannot prove that the world ‘out there’ actually exists—meaning that you cannot prove that reality is independent of consciousness—you are hearing someone commit the fallacy of the stolen concept. Firstly, note that on the premise of subjectivism, proving things isn’t necessary, or possible. If truth is created by consciousness, there is no need for proof, consciousness simply makes it so. Secondly, the subjectivist is arguing against the fundamental presupposition of the concept of proof—objective reality.
The third point, that is not the same as the first, is that you don’t have to prove the self-evident, and it can’t be done, because the self-evident is the foundation of proof. It is what the concept of proof rests on. It’s therefore a perfect example of upside-down thinking to demand that the self-evident be proven. Technically, you cannot prove that a thing exists, you can only point to it and say there it is, appealing to the self-evident. You cannot prove that a table is a table. You can only point to it and say “There’s the table!” In other words, objective reality (what is self-evident) is the foundation (or reference point) for the concept of proof (and all knowledge). Imagine in a court of law, if the defence tried to say, “prove that that gun with the accused’s finger prints on it, actually exists.” They would be laughed at and immediately over ruled.
Lets remind ourselves that proof is a process of inferring a conclusion from previous knowledge according to the rules of logic. Both previous knowledge, and the rules of logic, presuppose an objective reality. To demand proof that reality is real, or to say “You can’t prove that ‘out there’ exists.” is therefore to demonstrate a lack of awareness of the hierarchical structure of knowledge, and that all derived knowledge necessarily rests on the self-evident. In such case, where the speaker is arguing against a premise of a concept he is using, he has no epistemological right to that concept. Hence the name, ‘fallacy of the stolen concept’.
The point here is that you can’t prove that reality is an objective absolute. All that can be done is to demonstrate it, and demonstrate that the assumption lies at the base of all thinking, communicating, knowledge and purposeful action. Similarly, you cannot prove that subjectivism is false, all you can do is demonstrate that it is false, and that it leads to disastrous epistemological consequences.
Subjective truth
Lastly, There is, of course, a valid distinction between subjective truth, and objective truth. Thoughts, emotions and any sensory feelings are experienced by individuals, and are real for the individual concerned. These are subjective ontological truths. They are happening for the individual. These only become objective truths when at least one other person is told that they are being experienced. Each individuals experience is personal and necessarily subjective, but the sum of all such experiences occurs within the wider context of an objective reality that is independent of each individual consciousness. Subjective truths do not validate the philosophical concept of subjectivism.
Conclusion
We all have a massive degree of control over our lives and our experience of reality, but you do not need subjectivism to explain the extent of that control.
It’s important to grasp that if you hold subjectivism to be true, if you believe that you create you own reality in a metaphysical sense, you are dividing your mind against itself. You are programming your consciousness with a false belief that contradicts the basis of its own mode of operation, and that contradicts the fundamental premise on which you function everyday. To believe in subjectivism is to inadvertently, disintegrate your mind, your consciousness, with one part thinking with an idea that contradicts the sum of its understanding.
Reality is demonstrably a firm, fixed, and objective, absolute. Presupposing this, makes it knowable. Whereas, subjectivism is a demonstrably false idea that empties the concepts of logic, truth, and knowledge, of meaning. Thus, rendering reality unknowable to the consciousness that consistently holds the premise. To believe subjectivism is true, is therefore to implicitly compromise critical thinking, if not reject it altogether, as some religions encourage us to do.
For those at the top of the current de-facto power pyramid, those who presume to control and exploit the majority by means of advancing a totalitarian collectivist state, the idea of subjectivism is a dream ticket (false) idea. Superficially, it looks true enough to fool people, and yet it renders them intellectually impotent, and defenceless, unable to reason for anything, including freedom.
From my perspective, with knowledge of philosophy, and specifically, epistemology. This idea has been disingenuously championed by mainstream philosophers Since Kant’s seminal work ‘A Critique of Pure Reason’ with the intent to undermine intellectual opposition and dumb down resistance to political enslavement.
Subjectivism turns up-side-down the fundamental presupposition of human functionality; it is anti-reason, anti-logic, anti-truth, anti-knowledge, anti-action. It short, its anti-life. Which means its evil.
Leave a Reply