Allegory of the Cave, Existentialism, and the Placebo Effect
-
Upload
raphael-pangalangan -
Category
Documents
-
view
181 -
download
0
description
Transcript of Allegory of the Cave, Existentialism, and the Placebo Effect
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
A. Background of the Study
The Allegory of the Cavemen, a symbolism used by Plato through his Republic
to illustrate his Theory of Forms, is a unique approach illustrating genuine
knowledge and the misconception of obtaining it.
In his dialogue with Glaucon, Socrates describes a group of people who have
lived their entire lives chained in such a way that they have had no choice but to
face the wall in front of them. Socrates describes how behind these men is a
pathway passed through by all sorts of objects and structures, and further beyond,
a fire that lit passed the pathway, casting the shadows of the passersby unto the
wall faced by the cavemen. With no other choice, the cavemen face this wall of
shadows and misconceive it to be reality per se rather than recognize it to be
merely the silhouette of it.
The Allegory of the Cavemen reflects Plato’s World of Forms, as it presents a
tangible example of the error in perception. Contrary to empirical belief, Plato
explains through his dialogue that despite the fact that sensation may indeed be a
medium of attaining information through our many experiences, to be able to
grasp genuine knowledge, one must do so through knowledge of the World of
Forms.
2
Our perceptions of the material world around us, is based on appearance
alone, which may lead us astray from the truth. In the case of the cavemen, they
had no choice but to see the shadows on the wall, and from this perception was
lead to think that this was already all that there was to know. This goes to show
that what is observed and absorbed through the senses is not, or at least, may not,
be the truth, and it is only when we break out of the shackles of ignorance that we
would be able to look towards the fire, step out of the shadows and into the light,
and be able to genuinely understand the world in all its truth- which is exactly
what happened in the latter part of the Allegory.
Once the freed caveman had seen the light, he considered himself lucky, and
pitied the still imprisoned cavemen that had been left behind. He then decides to
return to the cave to “enlighten” them of his discovery, but is rejected by them out
of fear and misunderstanding of this new, seemingly unconventional, perspective.
In his attempt to show them the truth, and due to the disdain they have towards
such radical thinking, the enlightened one is eventually killed, together with his
ideas of looking into the light.
This part of the analogy represents the Philosopher’s role in society- to
enlighten the prisoners among us, who are tethered by the chain of ignorance that
stops them from looking into the light- the World of Forms- and seeing the truth. It
parallels as well the caveman’s going up to our journey to the intelligible,
reflecting the relevance of education and in consequence- knowledge.
3
Plato discusses thoroughly his standards for knowledge, distinguishing it from
the standpoints of validity and truth-value. The standard for knowledge is
represented through the satisfaction of three criterion, namely, as a Justified True
Belief; and plays a vital role in the Analogy of the Cavemen working on the
premise that the more one would know, the more he would be able to act on or
understand better the World of Forms.
The cavemen who are chained share a common view, a false “knowledge” if
you will, of the truth. They believed that the shadows moving in front of them
were already a true image of the world rather than merely its shadow. Though they
did have basis, their ignorance stopped them from seeing the truth. Their belief
may have been justified, but nonetheless un-true, which given the standard of the
Justified True Belief mentioned earlier, would entail that it is not knowledge.
In summary, Plato assumes that those chained, facing the shadows know
nothing, and from their lack of knowledge, he concludes that anything that sprouts
from their false beliefs should not be considered genuine as well. From the
knowledge they may conceive to know to the happiness they may claim to have,
given all that has been said, both are considered to be illegitimate due to the false
premise that they are argued on.
Indeed, the assumption to how anything that sprouts from a false premise-as the
fruit of the poisonous tree- must somehow be tainted in its own respect may have
basis. However, if one were to take this to mean that he who is ignorant may no
4
longer be happy, that one presupposes genuine happiness is bound by truth rather
than there reality the object of his observation faces.
Returning to where we had begun, The Allegory of the Cavemen concludes that
the chained men to be incapable of happiness, owing to the fact that whatever
basis they may misconceive to have that would have brought them to whatever the
conclusion would be false. Throughout his other works, Plato reveals the value to
be given to truth, however, in spite of its normative standard, perhaps the
possibility of attaining things genuinely, particularly genuine happiness, would
still be feasible. Venturing through Plato’s Allegory of the Cavemen with the
application of such a notion may open new doors, especially in terms of one’s
understanding of knowledge and happiness.
5
B. Statement of the Problem
The purpose of this study is to analyze the capability of cavemen of attaining
happiness despite the absence of truth in order to show whether it is the absolute
truth or the subjective reality that serves as its basis.
For the purpose of discussing the problem the following general questions are to
be addressed:
1. What is Happiness?
2. What are Rationalism and Empiricism, their relationship to each other, and the
role they play in this discussion?
3. Considering the difference between Truth and Reality, what could be the new
notion for cavemen and happiness?
6
C. Significance of the Study
The significance of this study is to discover the rightful value of truth in the
acquisition of happiness. Undoubtedly, as discussed by Plato through his various
works, truth has a vital role the achieving of genuine happiness.
From the normative standard alone, the recognition of truth is apparently
necessary. However, considering as well the regulative aspects each individual
faces day by day and its subjectivity, would an absolute truth undeniably be
necessary for one to achieve genuine happiness?
This research will be done in review of the factors to be considered in our
analysis of happiness. Through a step-by-step breakdown of these conditions, we
will define each one of these factors in our aim to have a better-rounded
understanding of cavemen and their capability of achieving happiness.
D. Scope and Delimitation of the Study
In this study, the researcher aims to provide an analysis of Plato’s Allegory of
the Cave. By adopting other philosophies and theories, and applying them to the
Allegory, the researcher works to supply evidence to how indeed cavemen, despite
the lack of truth, would still be able to achieve genuine happiness based on their
perception of truth, alone. The study will be considering multiple factors in the
acquisition of happiness aside from truth alone, including concepts and ideas taken
7
from other philosophies and the sciences, to be able to have a better understanding
of the caveman’s competence.
This study is not made to disprove Plato’s theory per se. Rather, it is made
merely to point out alternative results that may come about with the consideration
of other factors outside those that were mentioned through the Republic.
E. Review of Related Literature and Related Studies
Evans, Dylan. Placebo: The Belief Effect. London: Harper Collins. (2003)
The book in gist is an analysis of the power of belief, independent of truth-value. It is thoroughly discussed through empirical evidence how, despite the used of placebos, or “dummy-drugs”, the healing process would still take effect. This explains this phenomenon by emphasizing how one’s belief, irrelevant whether it be true or not, would be enough to achieve a genuine outcome.
Research of the Placebo Effect proves that despite the lack of actual medication, the healing process is triggered 30% of the time. This goes to show that, in spite of the ignorance that one may have that would lead him to mistake a placebo to be actual medicine, an authentic reaction could still be achieved.
Markie, Peter. "Rationalism vs. Empiricism." Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/rationalism-empiricism/ (accessed 2012)
This webpage offers a thorough discussion of Rationalism and Empiricism, their respective premises and the common ground they share. Rationalism is defined to believe the primary source of knowledge to be reason, and recognizes experience only as a stimulant that prompts innate knowledge to be recognized. Empiricism claims the senses and one’s experiences to be the primary mean of achieving knowledge, and is only applied with reason only after the initial sensation.
By first explaining these two schools of thought, we aim to understand more wholly the Allegory of the Cave, by identifying the premise that it is founded on, and the
8
arguments against it. Ultimately as well, one will be able to better anchor him through this epistemological journey.
Plato. "Book VII-VIII." In Plato: the Republic, 531d-534e. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.(1982)
Book VII and VIII of the Republic is where the Allegory of the Cavemen is first introduced. The two books mainly illustrate Plato’s argument to how the ignorant cannot say they attain knowledge nor happiness granted that the premise to such claims is false. The shadows and echoes, that were respectively viewed and heard by the cavemen, served as their only reference of the external world. Plato argues how these echoes and shadows cannot be considered knowledge of the world because they are merely an outline of it, rather than the world per se. Ultimately, Plato concludes that, rather than the world we experiences through our senses, it is our recognition and understanding of the World of Forms that will lead us to the attainment of knowledge, and genuine happiness.
Sartre, Jean-Paul . "Existentialism is a Humanism." Lecture, Public Lecture from Mariet, Marie. (1946)
The work of Jean-Paul Sartre emphasizes the human being as an “existence before essence” being, rather than the “essence before existence”. As a being for himself, Sartre argues against pre-determinists claims, such as that of Christianity and their notion of man as the “likeness and image of God”, and that of Atheism and their claim of a “human nature”, and asserts absolute agent of our own actions, one’s fate and identity is up to his own doing and responsibility.
In consequence of Sartre’s claim of the autonomy of one being, he also theorizes how reality is subject to one’s own perception of it. It is through what a man does that he will be defined, and it is through his experiences that he would shape his reality.
Sartre, Jean. Sketch for a Theory of the Emotions. London: Methuen & Co., 1962.
In Sartre’s Philosophy of Emotions, he claims that emotion is misunderstood to be a hindrance in the path of reason. Through his philosophy, Sartre describes the emotion and the one with the emotion through the subject-object relationship.
9
As we attempt to comprehend the external world, we as the subject objectify these things. Emotion is no different.
Sartre argues how when we fear, we fear “something”, and through this formula one may argue that these is still an object to out comprehension through emotion. Rather than it, emotion, being different from reason, these feelings are nothing more than one’s way of conceiving an object. Sartre claims that in one’s desperation of describing the rush he may feel, he is forced to apply the title of emotion to it to be able to, one way or another, find comfort in knowing.
F. Conceptual Framework
The philosophical framework we will be adopting in this study are
epistemological concepts such as Sartre’s Existentialist theories and his theory on
Happiness. A general discussion of the philosophies on happiness will be explored
through the first chapter to be able to consider both sides of the argument in our
analysis. Through the second chapter we will further define the foundations of
these philosophies by analyzing the Empiricist vs. Rationalist dilemma.
The Existentialist theory will be used to address the problem that is revealed
through the first two chapter- a dilemma to what happiness may truly be.
10
Schematic Presentation of the Conceptual Framework
Philosophy of Happiness
The Empiricist and Rationalist Approach
Implications to Plato’s notion on Happiness in the Allegory of the Cavemen
11
G. Operative Definition of Terms
Happiness- The point of discussion; this term will be recognized as the emotion
one feels at the point of satisfaction, pleasure, or contentment.
Empiricism- The approach that theorizes that all knowledge is obtained from the
sense-experiences. Coming off the premise of the Tabula Rasa or the “clean slate”
principle, it is through the five senses that one would be able acquire knowledge of
the external world.
Rationalism- Contrasting the Empiricist approach, this theorizes how it is through
Reason that knowledge is acquired. Through the acquisition of a priori
knowledge, ne would be able to find footing, and undoubtedly find a justified true
belief.
Truth- This term is used to refer to a priori and absolute truths that exist despite
human perception. Truth refers to “what is” rather than “what is perceived”
through the senses.
Reality- We make use of this term as the acknowledgment of external world
through one’s subjective perception. Reality is utilized to reflect how one
recognizes the world he finds himself in, whether or not his understanding would
be considered right or wrong.
Placebo Effect- The medical phenomena where beneficial symptoms that cannot
be attributed to the dummy drug used are exhibited due to the patient’s mere belief
12
in the treatment. The ethical concerns of its use will not be considered in our
search to define happiness.
H. Methodology
The study will analyze Plato’s claim to how happiness is unachievable to those
who are ignorant, or those who do not grasp the truth. By factoring in the
conditions he places on the cavemen through his Allegory, and through
experimentation including other factors, such as Existential and Empiricist
philosophies, the study will aim to see how the understanding of acquiring
happiness, in terms of the cavemen, would be affected.
In our aim to prove how happiness is not bound to the world of Forms, we will
be gathering and comparing both scientific and philosophical articles.
I. Division of the Thesis:
Each chapter in this thesis is made to address problem deductively. Through
Chapter I, by first addressing the general dilemma of defining happiness, the
chapter will discuss various philosophies on it, to be able to paint a well rounded
understanding of it. The problem of which of these theories should be adopted
would reveal itself, and be addressed in Chapter II. Through the second chapter of
this thesis the discussion on happiness will be taken further by analyzing the
foundations of the philosophies discussed in the previous chapter.
13
In Chapter III, the researcher will factor in other philosophies and findings to be
able to find the affect on the initial philosophy of Plato. Here, the case of the
cavemen of the Allegory will be applied with Sartre’s Existential philosophy, to be
able to understand this scenario through an Empiricist-esque perspective.
Through Chapter IV, after analyzing Happiness and its implications, the
researcher will provide alternative understandings of the Allegory of the Cavemen
that may be adopted through the study of philosophy.
14
CHAPTER II
HAPPINESS AND FALLIBILLITY
In the world of Philosophy, the word Happiness is used to refer to more than
just one’s personal feelings of enjoyment, cheer, or gayety. Perhaps initially, the
term would seem nothing more than the physical attributes we associate to being
happy. Though once we take a step closer, it is then we will we realize how it
carries much more value in its role in various philosophical concerns, particularly,
Ethics.
The concept of happiness is anything but simple, and as mentioned earlier,
when it comes to its ethical aspects, there is no exemption. Through this principle,
Happiness is questioned further from multiple perspectives. From the questioning
of its authenticity, basis, motive, all the way to the value of its effect; what seemed
to be nothing more than a banal, trivial part of one’s everyday life reveals a much
more complex side.
Adding to its complexity is the consideration as well of an interminable number
of philosophies on happiness that do share their own points as well but notably
contradict the points of contemporary notions on happiness. When all is said and
done, the philosopher-to-be is then faced with the dilemma that is painted with
ceaseless approaches to the subject at hand. And it is in this light that this chapter
is given birth to; to somewhat address the issue. Not in such a way to sway the
reader to agree with the belief of the researcher, but rather to acknowledge the fact
15
that there is more than just one side to the philosophy of happiness, and to take
into consideration these other approaches.
We will be approaching happiness, first off, as an emotion, which according to
Sartre is not an opposing force to reason, but rather a form of it. Emotion after all
reflects a form consciousness of our world. After all, given Sartre’s notion of the
subject-object relationship of things, when we emote, we do so toward something.
When we fear, we fear something, and in relationship to this study, when one is
happy, he feels so toward something.
Emotion then, in general, is understood to be a manner of apprehending the
world, yet in a different fashion. It is given rise when one is incapable of fully
comprehending the object of his interest, so he then substitutes the action of fully
comprehending it by coming to a compromise wherein the unintelligible is put
under a different category which may be understood. This new category is what
we recognize to be emotion.
To be able to have a well-rounded understanding of emotion in general, and
happiness in particular, we are somewhat obliged to at least factor in other
philosophies other than that we have already found ourselves to practice, in our
attempt of being impartial. Though, in the face of it being close to impossible to
discuss each individual philosophy down to the last dot, the researcher instead has
chosen to adopt only a few from the many that he feels would best illustrate the
16
vast spectrum of the philosophies in general, and that would best reflect
respectively the Rationalist and Empiricist1 approaches.
A. Platonic Happiness
Plato defines Happiness, referring to it through the Greek term Eudaimonia in
terms of internal benefits, unlike the consequentialist approach and the
philosophies similar to it that base happiness off the reaping of external rewards.
Eudaimonia to him does not refer to the feeling of euphoria per se, or to the
spontaneous moments of glee, but rather does it do so toward a notion that is
founded on the premise happiness is rooted to is much more than the physical
characteristics it is expressed through. That in order to be genuinely happy, one
would need to be in accord through a balanced heart- one whose parts are expert to
his own distinct function. It is the harmonious individual and it is he who is
contented within himself who is genuinely happy for it is only through such self-
reliance that one would be truly, securely happy.2
If one were to be happy based on external goods, then his happiness would be
bound to change in view of the ever-changing material world. Expounded on
through The Republic, those who thrive off materials (Material-Lovers, Money-
Lovers, etc.…) are described as people who receive their love from the physical
1 "Empiricism vs. Rationalism." CogWeb: Cognitive Cultural Studies. http://cogweb.ucla.edu/CogSci/Empiricism.html (accessed January 16, 2012). 2 "Book VII-VIII." In Plato: the Republic, 531d-534e. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 1982.
17
world, which from a Utilitarianistic perspective, pertains to the avoidance of pain
and the gain of pleasure. Pain and pleasure however come in degrees, and are
therefore matters of opinion, and cannot be considered knowledge. It must also be
considered how happiness that is based on the external world, which is an ever
changing one, is solely contingent on it. Taking this into consideration then, the
type of happiness established off it may one day change into something
unsatisfying.3
B. Aristotelian Happiness
Through Aristotle’s own words, “[i]t is for the sake of happiness that we all do
everything else we do.” Here, happiness is recognized to be more than just the
physical experience of feeling such, but as the ultimate goal of human action.4 He
establishes two conditions, namely, first, how happiness must be an end in itself,
and not a mere mean to a higher calling; and secondly, it must be intrinsically
good.
Eudaimonia5, the Greek term used to refer to happiness, may be achieved
through a life of virtue. It is reason after all that separates humanity from plants
and animals, and it is therefore our function as human beings to be reasonable. Our
desire to acquire happiness then is not an excuse to commit nor omit certain
3 Ibid. 4 Anthony Kenny, and Charles Kenny. "The Philosophy of Happiness." In Life, liberty and the pursuit of utility: happiness in philosophical and economic thought, Aristotle on Happiness, 13-17. Exeter: Imprint Academic, 2006. 5 Rosalind Hursthouse."Virtue Ethics (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)." Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/ethics-virtue/ (accessed January 21, 2012).
18
actions, for all actions must be done through virtue. This reflects as well that it is
not enough to merely think virtuously or whatever to that effect, we must act
virtuously as well, for it is when we do that we reflect reason, and it is through
reason that we are virtuous, and in consequence, are pleasured.6
Aristotle stresses however that this pleasure is not the same as the physical
pleasures we may experience through the senses. In the latter mentioned however,
Aristotle comes to their defense as to argue how sensual pleasures are not all that
evil, for like all things, as long as they too are handled through virtue, particularly,
the virtue of Temperance7, it would then too be good.8
C. Happiness through Sensual Pleasures
a. Epicurus Hedonism
Rooted from the Greek word hedone9, which means “delight”, the hedonists
argue how Happiness is the search for external pleasures. Here, all forms of
pleasure, no matter what the cause, whether it may be good or evil, is good.
6 Nichomachean ethics. Indianapolis, N.Y.: Bobbs-Merrill, 1962. 7 Ibid. 8 Anthony Kenny, and Charles Kenny. "The Philosophy of Happiness." In Life, liberty and the pursuit of utility: happiness in philosophical and economic thought, Aristotle on Happiness, 13-17. Exeter: Imprint Academic, 2006. 9 Andrew Moore. "Hedonism", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2011 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = <http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2011/entries/hedonism/>.
19
We maintain that pleasure is the beginning and end of a blessed life. We recognize it as our primary and natural good. Pleasure is our starting point whenever we choose or avoid anything and it is this we make our aim, using feeling as the criterion by which we judge of every good thing.10
However, this is far from saying that Epicurus is purely pleasure driven and
blinded, for one way or another, he agrees with Aristotle that reason is still a vital
factor in one’s pursuit of happiness. His adoption of Hedonism is different from an
absolute voluptuary practice where one is absolutely devoted to pleasure, and is in
fact one that still reflects virtue; which is rooted to the avoidance of the opposite of
pleasure- pain.
In the pursuit of ataraxia, pleasure and the evasion from aporia, pain, the main
principle behind the Hedonist practice; reason is still observable as it takes into
consideration of the consequences of one’s actions. So if passing on an
opportunity to experience pleasure in order to avoid a great pain, then it would
only be good to not accept the said opportunity. Reversely, if some pain must be
sacrificed in order to acquire greater pleasure, then that too would be considered a
good act.11
Initially, Hedonism may be frowned on for it seems to be no more than a
pleasure seeking way of life; much confused with a voluptuous, pleasure devotee.
However it must be pointed out that in their pursuit of happiness, virtue still plays
10 Anthony Kenny, and Charles Kenny. "The Philosophy of Happiness." In Life, liberty and the pursuit of utility: happiness in philosophical and economic thought, Aristotle on Happiness, 13-17. Exeter: Imprint Academic, 2006.. 11 Ibid.
20
its role in the controlling of the satisfaction of one’s desires. There is also its role in
the consideration of some pleasures and pains over others.
b. Carvaka
The Carvaka is an Indian philosophy that greatly reflects that of the previously
discussed Hedonist approach. This Naturalist worldview however differs from it as
it works off the premise that there is no afterlife, which would therefore entail that
it is the happiness of the moment that matters most. That being the case, pleasure,
without limit or qualification, is recognized as the principle aim of living.12
D. Utilitarianistic Happiness
Utilitarianism prioritizes what will provide the Greatest Happiness for the
Greatest Number. Like Aristotle, this Philosophy identifies happiness as well as
our ultimate goal, however, it differs however for it is not the happiness of the
individual per se that is taken into consideration but the happiness of the general
community.13
Nature has placed mankind under the governance of two sovereign masters, pain and pleasure. It is for them alone to point out what we ought to do, as well as to determine what we shall do. On the one hand, the standard of right and wrong, on the other the chain of causes and effects, are fastened to their throne. They govern us in all we do, in all we say, in all we think: every effort we can make to
12 Abigail Turner-Lauck Wernicki. " Lokāyata/Cārvāka – Indian Materialism [Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy]." Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. http://www.iep.utm.edu/indmat/ (accessed January 18, 2012). 13 Anthony Kenny, and Charles Kenny. "The Philosophy of Happiness." In Life, liberty and the pursuit of utility: happiness in philosophical and economic thought, Aristotle on Happiness, 13-17. Exeter: Imprint Academic, 2006..
21
throw off our subjection, will serve but to demonstrate and confirm it.14
The Utilitarian approach to happiness however should not be dismissed as a
mere barbaric understanding of justice for it must be pointed out that it is not only
sensual pleasures that is prioritized. As mentioned in the quote above, and through
the general principle behind this philosophy, it is the “Greatest Happiness” that it
advocates, and this happiness, and in effect the pleasures that are involved, may
indeed be physically sensual, but may as well be so many other things such as
kindness, and faith. Whatever that act or mean may be, as long as it serves to
acquire the greatest happiness for the greatest number, then that act or mean may
be deemed to be good.15
E. Happiness as a Gift of God
Through the eyes of the religiously faithful, everything is obtained as a divine
grace, from God. And just as Aristotle did, through this perspective it is recognized
how happiness is as well the supreme good.
A dilemma presents itself however given how one is taught to look forward to
death in order to be able to enter the gates of heaven. Given this premise this
would entail that one is taught to accept and in fact be thankful for his mortality,
14 Ibid 15 Anthony Kenny, and Charles Kenny. "The Philosophy of Happiness." In Life, liberty and the pursuit of utility: happiness in philosophical and economic thought, The Greatest Happiness of the Greatest Number, 25-32. Exeter: Imprint Academic, 2006.
22
and in effect, be willing to leave his life behind, and in consequence, at least in
theory, leave the happiness he finds within it as well. St. Thomas Aquinas
addresses this conundrum, explaining how pleasure will be found in God, after
death. We look forward then as mortals, not because we are happy with death, but
rather because we are happy in hope to reunite in God’s Kingdom. 16
F. Consensus
The survey of philosophies, from Hedonist to Virtue Ethics, illustrates properly
the vast spectrum of the philosophy of happiness. There was hardly a time that two
philosophers would completely agree with the belief of another, but in spite of this
visible difference, it should be noted that at one point, they did agree on one
particular note; namely on how achieving happiness is the motive to all actions.
Again, this chapter is not written to sway the reader to decide to reject the
Platonic beliefs reflected through the Republic, rather it is a mere collection of
philosophies that aims to aid in our attempt to be fair and impartial throughout the
course of the discussion. In spite of this intention however, the question remains;
which theory of happiness should be adopted? And more importantly, why?
16 Anthony Kenny, and Charles Kenny. "The Philosophy of Happiness." In Life, liberty and the pursuit of utility: happiness in philosophical and economic thought, Happiness as a Gift of God, 21-24. Exeter: Imprint Academic, 2006.
23
CHAPTER III
EPISTEMOLOGICAL DILEMMA
Philosophy has discussed in so many ways, so many things in its pursuit of
attaining the wisdom that recognizes through its very name; “love for wisdom”.
From the very beginning, with the Pre-Socratic philosophers, such as
Anaximenes, for example, who theorized air as the primary substance of which
all things are made17, or Thales who opinioned how it was rather water than
air18; one can observe how members of humanity had attempted to define its
essence.
A list as long as one’s arm can be made for the number of theories made in an
attempt to define the world around us, and the components we find within it.
Through the Philosophy of Law and Justice, one attempts to understand how to
know how to live by the principle of jurisprudence19; Ethics as one aims to
identify the values one’s actions hold, and the considerations to be made in the
making of it20, to be able to define best whether it be good or bad; and even the
17 Daniel W. Graham." Anaximenes [Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy]." Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. http://www.iep.utm.edu/anaximen/ (accessed January 21, 2012). 18 Patricia O’Grady. " Thales of Miletus [Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy]." Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. http://www.iep.utm.edu/thales/ (accessed January 21, 2012). 19 Kenneth Einar Himma. "Law, Philosophy of [Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy]." Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. http://www.iep.utm.edu/law-phil/ (accessed January 21, 2012). 20 Daniel W. Graham. " Ethics [Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy]." Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. http://www.iep.utm.edu/ethics/ (accessed January 21, 2012).
24
Philosophy of Beauty or Art, better known as Aesthetics, as one strived to
understand the meaning of beauty21.
In spite of the consideration of the characteristics that effectually make each
of the previously mentioned philosophies distinct from each other, one must
recognize the common ground they share, just as they do with so many others.
Despite their visible differences, at its core one will recognize that philosophies
in general have a shared essence, namely, their nature to attain knowledge on a
given subject, or put simply, their purpose to simply know. However, one cannot
voyage unto the journey for knowledge without knowing what it is one is exactly
looking for. After all, how is one to attain knowledge without truly knowing how
to know that he knows?22
In this light, questions such as “What is Knowledge?”, “How is knowledge
acquired?”, “To what extent is it possible for a given subject to
be known?”, and of course “How do we know what we know?” surface; and it is
at this point that Epistemology, the Philosophy of Knowledge, comes into play.
It is not to be mistaken however, that Epistemology is limited to only the four
question stated, though it is contestable to argue that they capture the gist of the
philosophy in general. And in our argument in defense of cavemen and
happiness, we will be putting our focus particularly on the second question-the
acquisition of knowledge.
21 Barry Hartley Slater. " Aesthetics [Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy]." Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. http://www.iep.utm.edu/aestheti/ (accessed February 21, 2012). 22 Edward Stein. "Introduction." In Without good reason: the rationality debate in philosophy and cognitive science,14-15. Oxford: Clarendon Press ;, 1996.
25
What the primary source of knowledge is has long been on dispute, with
mainly two opposing schools of thought leading the controversy- the
Rationalists and the Empiricists.23 Essentially, the former claims that it is
through Reason that knowledge is acquired, for it is through it and it alone that
one is able to find footing, and certainly say that one undoubtedly knows; a
notion that is reflected through philosophies such as Descartes’ Meditations24.
The latter, the Empiricists, on the other hand, work on the premise that it is
through the senses- one’s experiences- that he acquires knowledge.
The following sections are devoted to the defining of both respective theories
to be able to have a clearer understanding of the Allegory of the Cave, and the
arguments against it.25 Through the course of the discussion, we will be able to
form a better idea of their individual points by identifying their respective
premises, and in effect, be able to form our own as well, by anchoring ourselves
to either of the two schools of thought, through the epistemological journey we
embark on.
23 Markie Peter, "Rationalism vs. Empiricism", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2008 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = <http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2008/entries/rationalism-empiricism/>. 24 David Banach. "An Outline of Descartes's Meditations on First Philosophy." Saint Anselm College : Saint Anselm College. http://www.anselm.edu/homepage/dbanach/medol.htm (accessed January 18, 2012). 25 “Book VII-VIII.” In Plato: the Republic, 531d-534e. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 1982.
26
A. Rationalism
Through Plato’s Allegory of the Cave, shared through the Republic, we are
introduced to a scenario where cavemen are restricted in such a way that they
have no choice but to face a wall polluted with shadows, which they eventually
acknowledge to be “reality”. It is illustrated through this analogy how behind
these cavemen is a pathway where various bodies and structures, such as people,
animals, and objects; pass through. Further beyond is a fire that shines past
through these bodies, inevitably casting their shadows unto the wall that the
cavemen face. The cavemen, as they had no other choice but face the wall in
front of them, mistook these shadows for reality rather than merely the silhouette
or outline of it.
As the parable continues, we are told of how one of these men was able to
break free from his chains, and when faced with the real world, realized what
reality truly is, and how what he had perceived as reality in the past was merely,
quite literally and figuratively, a mere trace of it.26
It is through this allegory that Plato explains the Rationalist World of Forms.
From this perspective, the notion to how knowledge is primarily acquired
through reason, rather than sensual experience, serves as premise. 27 What
initially differentiates this theory of thought from the other is its method wherein
the only criterion in the pursuit of truth is not based on the senses but rather on
intuition and deductive reasoning. 26 Ibid. 27 Marc Cohen. "Theory of Forms." UW Faculty Web Server. http://faculty.washington.edu/smcohen/320/thforms.htm (accessed January 13, 2012).
27
Given the senses visible and timid flaws, they are considered to be
misleading, and are therefore rejected as a reliable source for knowledge. In its
place, the Rationalists identify knowledge as a priori, or prior to experience. It is
not bound by what one feels, hears, sees, smells, nor tastes, but is an
independent, innate part of each individual.
At the outset, it may be difficult to fathom such a practice where experiences
are taken halfheartedly. The expression “Seeing is Believing” alone illustrates
the value we entrust to the senses, and to disregard them completely may seem
close to be, not only unreasonable, but impossible as well. Despite the initial
indifference one may have towards this notion, one must eventually admit that
the rejection of the senses does have basis. After all, the fruit of the poisonous
tree bears no fruit28, and, following this principle, to invest one’s confidence on
an unstable source may in fact be just as, or even more so, unreasonable.
However, through cases such as Descartes’ Cogito Ergo Sum, he is able to prove
that it is indeed possible to acquire knowledge in spite of the neglect of the
senses. It is through his Meditations that one is able to legitimately and
undoubtedly acquire knowledge, particularly of his own existence, most
commonly known through the maxim “I think therefore I am”.
Consequently, we must acknowledge the validity of the Rationalist way of
thinking. The rejection of the senses is in truth legitimate, and through the
Meditations it is proven as well that knowledge is still obtainable. In spite of this
admission though, we must recognize as well that the acknowledgement of its 28 Nolo's Plain-English Law Dictionary. "Fruit of the Poisonous Tree | LII / Legal Information Institute." LII | LII / Legal Information Institute. http://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/fruit_of_the_poisonous_tree (accessed February 21, 2012).
28
validity is completely different from our understanding of principle as a whole,
and in this light, we must briefly continue further on through this discourse.
According to the Rationalists, there are three types of truths, namely Logical
Necessity, Empirical Necessity and Metaphysical Necessity. The first, Logical
Necessity refers to things or ideas that are true by definition. The statement “To
have three, you have to have more than two.” for example cannot be false, and
would not take any experience to prove it to be so. Next, Empirical Necessity,
refers to truths cases that are contingent or synthetic truths. It merely states what
is rather what must be, finding territory over those what could have happened.
The last of the three is the Metaphysical Necessity. This goes beyond logical
certainty, and cannot be experienced either. It is an ontological argument,
assuming the existence of something from the very beginning. This form usually
appears in arguments defending the existence of God; for under the assumption
that there is a God, and He is a perfect being, and as a perfect being is and never
was bound by time, He must then had, and always has existed.29
In spite of this apparent primacy given towards reason, it must be pointed out
how experience, though shunned as a primary source of knowledge, still does
play part through the Rationalistic perspective. Referred to as the Innate
Knowledge Thesis, experience is still recognized to be part of the intellectual
process, but only as a pawn in the bigger picture that is reason. Here, senses are
tantamount to nothing more than triggers that commence a process of
consciousness that, through intuition, one’s rational insight; and deduction, one’s
29 Peter Markie, "Rationalism vs. Empiricism", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2008 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = <http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2008/entries/rationalism-empiricism/>.
29
capability of deriving necessarily true conclusions through valid arguments
(Logical Necessities); one would be able to know the knowledge that is innate to
him but is yet to be recognized.30
The Rationalist, as seen throughout this section of the chapter, is blatant in its
stand that their basis, reason, is superior to experience. Anything gained through
intuition and deduction, or is innate to us, is superior to any form of information
that may be attained through experience. As proven by Descartes through his
Cogito, a priori knowledge is clearly, at least to the Rationalist, to be without a
doubt absolute and certain. Unlike the claims of “knowledge” obtained through
the senses; the fallibility of the source alone goes to show how frail such claimed
knowledge would be. The fruit of the poisonous tree31 certainly shares the same
venom from where it was bore, and it is from this that the Rationalists argue that
the tainted source will only provide tainted “knowledge”. A claim of knowledge
that one would never be able to know for certain if it were a case where his
senses had perceived correctly, or had succumbed to its natural, innate flaws.
Returning to where we had begun, the Allegory of the Cave presents Plato’s
World of Forms- a world where what we know is known through reason alone.
These Forms are described to be the unchanging, eternal, and absolute idea of
the ever changing, temporary, and contingent world of objects we sense around
30 Ibid. 31 Nolo's Plain-English Law Dictionary. "Fruit of the Poisonous Tree | LII / Legal Information Institute." LII | LII / Legal Information Institute. http://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/fruit_of_the_poisonous_tree (accessed February 21, 2012).
30
us. And it is only once we turn from the shadows and look to and through the
light, that one would be able to say for certain that he undoubtedly knows.32
B. Empiricism
Contrary to the previous theory discussed, Empiricism on the other hand
firmly believes that it is our senses- our sensual experiences-that should be
considered the primary source of knowledge. This theory rejects the idea of
innate knowledge, and instead adopts the notion of the Tabula Rasa33 or the
“clean slate” mind set.34
Through Aristotle’s words, “there is nothing in the intellect that was not first
in the senses”35 (or something to that effect). Unlike Plato who had believed that
the human mind had existed as an entity before it was given bodily form,
Aristotle supports the idea to how, what was first a blank sheet of paper is left
marked by our experiences. A view that directly reflects Locke’s “white paper”
description of a beings initial acquisition of knowledge, or lack thereof, arguing
how, at birth, one’s mind is vacant of knowledge of the external world.36
32 Matthias Steup. "Epistemology (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)." Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/epistemology/ (accessed February 21, 2012). 17 Francis F. Steen. "John Locke." CogWeb: Cognitive Cultural Studies. http://cogweb.ucla.edu/CogSci/Locke.html (accessed January 18, 2012). 33 Uzgalis William "John Locke", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2010 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = <http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2010/entries/locke/>. 35 "Empiricism." Rick Grush's Home Page http://mind.ucsd.edu/syllabi/99_00/Empiricism/Readings/Encyc_Phil/Empiricism.html (accessed January 21, 2012). 36 "Empiricism vs. Rationalism." CogWeb: Cognitive Cultural Studies. http://cogweb.ucla.edu/CogSci/Empiricism.html (accessed February 21, 2012).
31
Opposite the Rationalists a priori knowledge, Empiricists work off the
premise of a posteriori37- a knowledge that is gained proceeding experience and
observation. Indeed, there are some empiricist works that argue that the mind
must have innately at least the fundamental capacities for learning, but this stand
is refuted as nothing more than a result of confusing intellect and instinct. To
whichever side of the empiricist argument one would decide to side on, it would
still remain that, ultimately, whether an innate knowledge existed or not,
knowledge of the external world would rely solely on the senses alone.
Reason may indeed play a part in the digesting of sensation to information,
and eventually form relationships amongst the ideas we have already learned.
Initially, the external world is taken in through sensation, yet once broken down
to primary and secondary qualities, through reflection, would it become genuine
knowledge. Whatever the role reason may play in the thought process, what is
clarified here is how it is through our senses that these sensations per se are first
obtained.
This as well goes against the Rationalist notion that identifies experience as a
mere trigger that elicits the recognition of innate knowledge that had been buried
all along under a veil of ignorance or lack of recognition. Somewhat mocking
this Rationalistic perspective, John Locke writes how “[n]o proposition can be
said to be in the mind which never yet knew, which it was never yet conscious
37 Jason H. Baehr. " A Priori and A Posteriori [Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy]." Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. http://www.iep.utm.edu/apriori/ (accessed January 17, 2012).
32
of.”38, pointing out how it is truly unreasonable to argue how one obtains
knowledge despite the fact, in Rationalist terms, that such knowledge is innate
but is yet to be realized. Opposite the Rationalist belief that they are innately
superior to the Empiricists, the latter takes pride with the fact that their
understanding of knowledge is founded not only on logical necessities, but also
rather on empirical evidence. Through this school of thought, it is through the
testing of hypotheses, and the observation of the external world that conclusions
are made, beliefs are verified, and it is only then that knowledge is obtained.39
C. Transcendental Idealism
Given the previous comparison between Rationalism and Empiricism, it may
be difficult for one to decide which of the two perspectives to adopt. Though the
previous sections were made only to clarify the Platonic perspective used as
premise for his allegory, rather than to persuade one to choose one and leave the
other, it is inevitable for one to feel the need to. After all, Rationalism does have
its valid points as it emphasizes the relevance of reason and the fallibility of the
senses, however on the other hand, Empiricism too points out the apparent, to
how throughout one’s life, knowledge of the external world is taken in, at least
initially, through what is experienced. Both perspectives have their respective
points, and it is in this light that the perceiver faces a beautiful dilemma wherein 38 Francis F. Steen. "John Locke." CogWeb: Cognitive Cultural Studies. http://cogweb.ucla.edu/CogSci/Locke.html (accessed January 18, 2012). 39 Ibid.
33
he has to choose between two rights. Amidst two considerations that are both
sound and unsound in their own respect, dismissing the possibility of personal
bias, how else may one decide? Or even more importantly, must one decide?
In all candor, the Empiricist approach seems to be more reasonable, for an
absolute rejection of the senses, as learned through, for a lack of a better term,
experience, would not go hand in hand with the practical value we give to them.
After all, no matter what the idea, the realization of it, as stated through the
discussion on Rationalism, is contingent on the external world around us.
Perhaps senses were merely treated as triggers that would dig out the buried a
priori knowledge we obtain innately, but the fact that the senses, one way or
another, do hold value is clear as day. On the other hand, we cannot dismiss as
well concepts that the Rationalists forward, for experience is indeed liable to err
and is not enough to provide knowledge alone. It would still require one way or
another a track where it would be digested and taken into our system, reflecting
the significance of reason.
It is in light of this dilemma that Transcendental Idealism40 comes in, where
the realities of the Phenomenal, knowledge as appeared through the sense, and
the Noumenal, knowledge in itself, are recognized. Kant discusses through his
Critique41 the significance of Empiricism “since objects can only be experienced
spatio-temporally, the only application of concepts that yields knowledge is to
40 "Idealism, German  [Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy]." Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. http://www.iep.utm.edu/germidea/#H3 (accessed January 21, 2012 ) 41 "Critique of Pure Reason." Center for Digital Discourse and Culture | @ Virginia Tech. http://www2.cddc.vt.edu/marxists/reference/subject/ethics/kant/reason/ch01.htm (accessed January 18, 2012)
34
the empirical… world”42, but acknowledges as well Rationalism and how “the
mind of the knower makes an active contribution to experience of objects before
us”43.44
His proposed Science of Metaphysics 45 argues how objects that are
experienced are structured in accordance with the minds categories of
understanding. That the a priori concepts and intuitions are indeed a priori
knowledge that consequently creates a framework for the a posteriori knowledge
we learn from our experiences46. For the case of this study, we will choose to
adopt this notion for at this point it is clear how both reason and experience play
their respective roles in the acquisition of knowledge, and in effect, and in
connection with the following chapter, the forming of one’s reality.
42 Matt McCormick. " Kant, Immanuel: Metaphysics [Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy]." Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. http://www.iep.utm.edu/kantmeta/ (accessed January 21, 2012). 43 Ibid. 44 "Transcendental Idealism." Queensborough Community College. http://www.qcc.cuny.edu/socialsciences/ppecorino/INTRO_TEXT/Chapter%205%20Epistemology/Transcendental_Idealism.htm (accessed February 21, 2012). 45 Ibid. 46 Ibid.
35
CHAPTER IV
TRUTH, REALITY, AND PLACEBO
When we began the discussion, we first tackled the cavemen of the Allegory of
the Cave. To reiterate, here they were described by the author to be ignorant, and
in consequence and summary, incapable of feeling, let alone knowing, anything
genuinely. This notion was founded on the premise that the “knowledge” they
believed they had was attained through an ungrounded source- the senses. The
senses were disregarded to be less than just a has been turned obsolete source, but
even worse; as a never was. And were acknowledged through a misunderstood,
ungrounded notion that it could obtain knowledge through the five senses despite
its essential fallibility47.
In effect, the cavemen then, with the exception of the enlightened escapee; who
had perceived the shadows of the real world casted on the wall before them as the
real world per se rather than just an outline of it, were all unenlightened. Given
this, the author, Plato, therefore concludes by accusing them of knowing nothing at
all, and in relation to our discussion, being incapable of feeling genuine happiness
given that the foundation of the said happiness was not genuine, or was bogus, to
begin with. Following logic, and perhaps to aid us even further, through the help
47 Plato. "Book VII and VIII (531d–534e)." Trans. Paul Shorey. The Republic. Cambridge (Mass.): Harvard UP, 1982. Print.
36
of the legal metaphor of the fruit of the poisonous tree48, indeed it is only right for
one to assume such. That indeed, the knowledge obtained through tainted means
would as well be in themselves tainted, just as the stream of water from a
contaminated lake, pond, or river, would be, one way or another, contaminated as
well.
Through the discussion of The Republic, truth, among many other virtues, is
given value to the point that it is a requisite to all knowledge. That there is an a
priori truth before the external world, or perhaps even better stated, a truth that
defines everything that there is in this world. I wouldn’t be one to argue with the
mentality that truth should be recognized to acquire some sort of value, for I
myself see the legitimacy of doing so, yet I must question nonetheless the notion
to how truth in relation to reality is addressed.
Truth and reality are inseparable through the eyes of the Rationalist. Through
the World of Forms49 alone, it is easily seen how despite what the perceiver’s
senses may take as reality, there is an a priori truth that will define whether it be
genuine in the first place50. What we may grasp to be reality- the sounds we hear,
the pains we feel, the shadows on the wall that we see- may be a false
understanding of what is actually there; all based on the previously stated notion to
48 "Fruit of the Poisonous Tree | LII / Legal Information Institute." LII | LII / Legal Information Institute. Cornell University Law School, 19 Aug. 2010. Web. 16 Jan. 2012. <http://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/fruit_of_the_poisonous_tree> 49 Plato. "Book VII and VIII (531d–534e)." Trans. Paul Shorey. The Republic. Cambridge (Mass.): Harvard UP, 1982. Print. 50 S. M. Cohen"A Priori and A Posteriori [Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy]." Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. S. Marc Cohen. Web. 11 Aug. 2006. <http://www.iep.utm.edu/apriori/>.
37
how experiences are no more reliable in obtaining knowledge than Paul the
Octopus51 was in predicting the results in last year’s World Cup.
Granted, this argument may hold its valid points, especially in the case of
something as farfetched as a prophet marine animal, yet if one were to adopt a
different standpoint, an empirical, or perhaps even more particular, an existential
one, he would then realize that there is a lot more to truth and reality that meets the
eye. Are they really one of the same thing? If ever they were, in what way would
they be united? Does truth dictate the essence of reality, or vice-versa?
In the allegory, we are presented with the situation where cavemen saw nothing
but shadows and heard nothing but echoes, and perceived that to be the real world.
Well, perhaps from a third party perspective, we may indeed mock their beliefs
and consequential actions as we, from a relatively omniscient viewpoint referred
to by Plato as the World of Forms, “know” what the real world truly is.52 Yet if
one were to consider that to these less enlightened souls, the echoes and shadows
were all that there was, especially factoring in the particular to how they were
chained down, having no choice of running away, or in other words, having no
chance of knowing any better; the possibility then of seeing the truth to be either
different, or perhaps even irrelevant to the analysis of reality, could be born53.
51 Mark Tran. "Sucker for Soccer: Octopus Predicts World Cup Finalist | Football | The Guardian." Latest News, Sport and Comment from the Guardian | The Guardian. theguardian, 8 July 2010. Web. 16 Jan. 2012. <http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2010/jul/08/soccer-octopus-world-cup-final>. 52 Plato. "Book VII and VIII (531d–534e)." Trans. Paul Shorey. The Republic. Cambridge (Mass.): Harvard UP, 1982. Print. 53 Jean-Paul Sartre. Sketch for a Theory of the Emotions. "Introduction: Psychology, Phenomenology, and phenomenological psychology)."Trans. Philip Mairet. Ed. Mary Warnock. New York: Routledge Classics, 2004. Print.
38
Who are we after all, to require something that is unattainable to those who fall
victim to its incomprehensibility. Wouldn’t such a requirement just be as
unrealistic, and even worse, unfair in the situation- in the reality- that the cavemen
find themselves in?
In the analysis of these questions, the latter part of this chapter will be dedicated
in defining truth and reality through the Existential perspective, with the addition
of a psychological, empirical study of a false reality, and its undoubtedly genuine
effects on the external world despite its fallacious basis. For the purpose of the
discussion, we will be focusing on the Existentialist philosophy of Jean-Paul
Sartre, through his works Being and Nothingness54 and Sketch for a Theory of the
Emotions55.
A. Existentialism
According to the traditional philosophies that preceded the contemporary
philosophies that now dominate the present day way of thinking, man was treated
as an agent of his own action, who aimed to fulfill a certain purpose in life.
Through Plato’s Republic and more significantly through Aristotle’s
Nichomachean Ethics, this said purpose was defined to be one that was
predetermined before the existence of the said being. In summary, both
54 Jean-Paul Sartre. Being and Nothingness; an Essay on Phenomenological Ontology.New York: Philosophical Library, 1956. Print. 55 Jean-Paul Sartre. Sketch for a Theory of the Emotions. Trans. Philip Mairet. Ed. Mary Warnock. New York: Routledge Classics, 2004. Print.
39
philosophers wrote on the essence of man that was to achieve happiness through
virtue. It was only through doing so, through acts in accordance to this quality, that
one would be able to live a happy life. Even the relatively modern Kantian Ethics,
one way or another, shared this mindset in saying that it is through our acts of duty
that one’s actions would be considered good, and in consequence, help one be a
good person56.
Atheism and Catholicism breed their followers and believers as well to adopt
such a mind set, and are actually put by Jean-Paul Sartre, despite their
irreconcilable and obvious differences, on the same plane, as they both build off a
common ground. What both beliefs have in common is to how they both root from
the same bole of thought, resigning to the idea that man’s essence comes before
his existence.
Catholicism, just as philosophers such as Leibniz, Kant, and so many other pre-
determinist believers, recognize a supernatural artisan57 to be at hand behind all
that there is- God. That in some sense, man’s role throughout his life is to fulfill
his predetermined role.
Thus, the conception of man in the mind of God is comparable to that of the paper-knife in the mind of the artisan: God makes man according to a procedure and a conception, exactly as the artisan manufactures a paper-knife, following a definition and a formula. Thus each individual man is the realization of a certain conception that dwells in the divine understanding. 58
56 Jean-Paul Sartre. "Man Makes Himself." “p.4” Reading For Philosophical Inquiry: A Brief Introduction. P.L.E. Philosophy Lander. Web. <http://philosophy.lander.edu/intro/articles/sartre-a.pdf>. 57 Ibid 58 Jean-Paul Sartre. Existentialism Is A Humanism. Trans. by Philip Mairet. Public Lecture, 1946.
40
Catholicism works off the premise that it is their divine God’s hand at work
behind all that there is in this world and out, including man. That man is, granted,
many things, but mainly a mean in fulfilling the conception of what he was meant
to be through the eyes of the creator.
Atheism as well does not exempt itself from this impression. Though they may
visibly contrast Catholicism through their rejection of God, the discipline still
recognizes that each man has an essence that is prior his existence.59
In the philosophic atheism of the eighteenth century, the notion of God is suppressed, but not, for all that, the idea that essence is prior to existence; something of that idea we still find everywhere, in Diderot, in Voltaire and even in Kant. Man possesses a human nature; that “human nature,” which is the conception of human being, is found in every man; which means that each man is a particular example of a universal conception, the conception of Man. 60
Both of the mentioned belief systems define man as a sum of qualities
predetermined before his existence. That he is but a quantified total of factors that
made his very existence possible, which therefore defines his essence for
existing.61 Sartre compares this, as mentioned earlier through the first quote, to the
paper-knife, or any object for that matter, which is made by the artisan to serve a
certain purpose, such as cutting, and serves for the rest of its “existence” in doing
so. The object had its purpose, its roll, its essence, even before it had been made,
prior to its creation, a priori to its existence.
60 Jean-Paul Sartre. Existentialism Is A Humanism. Trans. by Philip Mairet. Public Lecture, 1946. 61 Ibid.
41
Sartre, however, counters this perspective of man as an “essence before
existence” being, which he refers to as a “Being-in-itself”, with the mentality of
“existence before essence”, or a “Being-for-itself”. Needless to say, here man is
recognized to first exist and defines his essence through the course of his life.
Unlike the previously mentioned philosophies that describe man to be one on a
journey in performing certain things through certain ways to be able to fulfill his
essence (that, to be clear, is predetermined), through Sartre Existential philosophy,
it is the experiences of man that defines him, that it is his actions that determine
what man he is and is known to be, and how, through his own words, “[h]e will be
what he makes himself”. In summary, man attains existence when he is able to be
what he himself, and no other, purposed him to be.
Man simply is. Not that he is simply what he conceives himself to be, but he is what he wills, and as he conceives himself after already existing—as he wills to be after that leap towards existence. Man is nothing else but that which he makes of himself. That is the first principle of existentialism.62
Rather than as an object made to pursue or fulfill the interests of a creator,
wherein the creator is the subject who is objectifying man as puppets carrying out
His will, man here refuses to wear the veil of objectivity and recognizes himself as
subject instead. In doing so, every man is put in his own possession, where his
existence is put in his own hands, or through Sartre’s words, it is through
“existentialism is [that it puts] every man in possession of himself as he is, and
62 Ibid.
42
places the entire responsibility for his existence squarely upon his own
shoulders.”63
Sartre refers to our role as an absolute agent of our own actions as Subjectivity.
The definition of oneself is determined through his very actions. However, he also
introduces the notion of Inter-Subjectivity, explaining how our responsibility as a
subject is a duty for our individual selves, and for all other men as well, because in
our actions, whether it be a decision to make a difference or one to not make a
decision at all, which ultimately is a decision in itself; in the end the action of one
man plays a part in the creation of the image of man, and in effect, defines what
men in general ought to be. In summary, by choosing for ourselves, we choose for
all men.
Or if, to take a more personal case, I decide to marry and to have children, even though this decision proceeds simply from my situation, from my passion or my desire, I am thereby committing not only myself, but humanity as a whole, to the practice of monogamy. I am thus responsible for myself and for all men, and I am creating a certain image of man as I would have him to be. In fashioning myself I fashion man.64
One other relevant theory of Sartre, among the many, is his concept of facticity.
As mentioned, through the Existentialist belief, each individual is responsible for
himself, and it is, for the lack of a better term, a grave “sin” for the subject to
excuse his actions to be ones forced upon him by others, or by nature, or by any
63 Ibid. 64 Ibid.
43
external factor aside from his own will. The thinking that one acted not according
to his own decision-making is said to be an act out of bad faith. Facticity then
comes into the picture for it is undeniable that there are times that man cannot
control the situation he finds himself in- the unpredictable weather, and the
“spontaneous” actions of others may attest to this happening. This then is the
“throwing”65 of a subject into a certain situation.
This however does not excuse the subject from being an agent of his own
actions, for the decisions he may decide to make then are still all up to him. The
situation he finds himself in is merely a set of conditions that shape the
possibilities, that either adds or lessens the choices that he may make in the said
scenario. For one may indeed be unwillingly thrown into a situation, however,
what he makes of it is still arguably still all up to him. Ultimately then, facticity
shapes our freedom, and in effect, the freedom we have will lead us to a path that
will shape the facticity, the situation, we will inevitably find ourselves in.
Sartre goes on further through his discussion in Being and Nothingness, such as
through his theories of Anguish, Despair, Bad faith, etc.… however, we shall only
set our attention on those that play a significant role, and remain within the realm
of our topic of happiness.
In summary, Existentialism addresses our thesis topic through the principle of
how “[m]an is defined by what he can know.” Here, it is what we do that
determines us and defines what we know; and in consequence, our reality. That
our reality is an a posteriori accumulation of our experiences, which consequently
65 David Banach. "Existentialism." Saint Anselm College : Saint Anselm College . http://www.anselm.edu/homepage/dbanach/sartreol.htm (accessed February 21, 2012).
44
defines it (our reality), rather than the traditional a priori belief of an essence or
truth set before our very existence. In Sartre’s own words, “[a]nd since ‘the human
reality’ is essentially its own possibility, this existent can itself “choose” what it
will be, achieve itself—or lose itself.”
B. Placebo Effect
Through the emerging field of Psychoneuroimmunology a clear correlation
between the internal mind and the external body has been shown, especially, with
respect to this particular field, in terms of health and healing. Here, the ability of
the immune system to naturally fight off detrimental bodies off the mind’s belief is
studied. 66 This phenomenon is visible through many various instances whose
conclusion is most commonly referred to as the Placebo Effect.
It has been documented in many cases that positive attitudes and emotions can affect the biochemistry of the body to enable personal healing. This is, in essence, the nature of the placebo affect, such that "The placebo is the doctor who resides within" . The placebo affect has been shown to be a healing factor in hypertension, cardiac pain, headaches (implicating the autonomic nervous system); diabetes, menstrual pain, adrenal gland secretion (implication the endocrine system); colds, fever, asthma, and cancer (implicating the immune system). This demonstrates a corollary interaction between the mind and the body in terms of health and healing.67
66 Mercurio, Mary Gail, James Walton, Deborra James, David Fiorentino, Alexa Kimball, Michael Davis, and Valerie Ojha Ojha. "Study Redefines Placebo Effect as Part of Effective Treatment - News Room - University of Rochester Medical Center."University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester NY. URMC, 22 Dec. 2009. Web. 17 Jan. 2012. <http://www.urmc.rochester.edu/news/story/index.cfm?id=2718>. 67 Kinser, Patricia. "Psychoneuroimmunology and Natural Healing by the Brain."Psychology of Immunity (1999). Serendip. Web. 17 Jan. 2012. <http://serendip.brynmawr.edu/bb/neuro/neuro99/web2/Kinser.html>.
45
Through a study made by the University of Rochester Medical Center, it was
found that though patients would be given only a half or even a quarter of the
required dosage, the expected results from a full dosage were still acquired.
Psoriasis patients were treated as such, and through a comparison between the
group who received a full dosage, and the other that had taken in only a portion of
the drug, or at times, nothing but a dummy-drug (a combination of anything from
sugar to wheat), it was proven that the placebo given would be just as successful.68
The Psychomatic Medicine journal recognizes placebo for its effective and
beneficial results. Through their study, it was shown that drug benefits were
maximized in the sense that those who took in placebos were able to reduce side
effects, extend their use of the drug because it was neither as addictive nor
intoxicating as a full dose would be, and were less costly.69
Placebos are inactive, or dummy-drugs, given to patients who are undergoing
certain symptoms of a number of illnesses. Utilized either through dummy-pills,
sham surgeries, and other treatments, it has been found that, though the pills may
not contain any medication whatsoever, their results prove to be successful thirty
percent (30%) of the time. The theory behind this phenomenon is how the power
of the mind is enough to make real, tangible effects in reality. Our hopes, beliefs,
or the very reality that we may assume to be in, is enough to trigger off the release
of hormones, such as endorphins, that would cause the healing process to occur.70
69 Psychosomatic Medicine. Web. 17 Jan. 2012. <http://www.psychosomaticmedicine.org/>. 70 Laura Bishop. "Case 8 Placebos and Placebo Effects: Placebo Effects." High School Bioethics Curriculum Project. Kennedy Institute of Ethics, 22 Dec. 2009. Web. 17 Jan. 2012. <http://highschoolbioethics.georgetown.edu/units/cases/unit3_8.html>.
46
Our study provides evidence that the placebo effect can make possible the treatment of psoriasis with an amount of drug that should be too small to work… While these results are preliminary, we believe the medical establishment needs to recognize the mind’s reaction to medication as a powerful part of many drug effects, and start taking advantage of it.71
Through the study of the Placebo, we are able to recognize the power of the
conception. Inactive drugs are still able to produce a healing process, clearly not
because of a direct effect of the medication and the substances it may contain, but
because of one’s belief that what he had just taken in was indeed a genuine
treatment. To hit closer to home, one may recall traditional beliefs on how
Chicken Soup is treatment for the common cold, or how hot lemon would be
enough to rid a headache72, and especially to the common Filipino, to how
gargling a mix of water and salt would foster the loss of sore throat.
All these mentioned cases serve as an example to how, though something may
not contain any “healing” powers, as long as one would believe them to be, one
way or another, associated to be so, the expected results may be developed.
In other words, the effect of the drug that was replaced with placebo would
ensue just because the patient believes it to be the actual thing. This phenomenon
71 Mary Gail Mercurio, James Walton Deborra, David Fiorentino James, Alexa Kimball, Michael Davis Kimball, and Valerie Ojha. "Study Redefines Placebo Effect as Part of Effective Treatment - News Room - University of Rochester Medical Center."University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester NY. URMC, 22 Dec. 2009. Web. 17 Jan. 2012. <http://www.urmc.rochester.edu/news/story/index.cfm?id=2718>. 72 Ruth C. Engs "Information About Drugs: Psychological Effects of Drugs,” Alcohol and Other Drugs: Self Responsibility . Bloomington, IN:Tichenor Publishing Co. 1987. Used by permission of the author. Available on: http://www.indiana.edu/~engs/rbook
47
goes to show how reality, whether it be true or not, may bring about something
genuine.
C. Conclusion
In the dilemma between truth and reality, through the Existentialist perspective,
reality is what we make of it. It is the experiences we had, the actions that we
make, that define who we are, and in consequence define what reality is to us. The
power is clearly placed in the hands of the perceiver, rather than in the power of a
preordained higher power, which therefore invites the notion to how we, as
subjects rather than objects, define our own essence.
In the case of the cavemen from the Allegory, their belief in shadows and
echoes then may not seem so farfetched as described by Plato. Whether we
acknowledge the author of The Republic’s claim on a World of Forms, of an
actuality that’s essences are predetermined, or of an a priori truth for that matter, it
would not really matter through the existential punto de vista. Ultimately, whether
such things existed or not would be irrelevant, what would matter though is the
reality that is in reach of the being or subject at hand.
What is attainable to these prisoners of the cave, chained and shackled down
with no choice but to face the shadows and hear the echoes, is their reality, and
given all that has been said, theoretically speaking, that is all that matters. That is
why the portion on the Placebo Effect is given much relevance, because it is
through this point that we are able to jump from the realm of theory to something
48
as tangible as the sciences. And through their empirical study, it is shown and
proven how indeed, placebo, despite it being a faux to begin with, can reap very
real results, sometimes just as genuine as the actual medication.
With this said, one may therefore conclude that truth is in the eye of the
beholder, or perhaps even that an absolute truth may exist, but is separate from the
reality which is all that there is to the subject being. Either way, what would be
acknowledged through both points is how it is up to the subject, that it is in the
hands of the cavemen, whether one were to feel or know anything genuinely, all
based on the reality that they had formed through their respective experiences.
Adding this into the picture of the cavemen of Plato’s Allegory, it becomes
apparent to how even the ignorant cavemen may acquire happiness. Just like the
patients given placebos, the cavemen as well believe in something undoubtedly
untrue. Despite this fact however, the patients, in the case of placebo studies, are
still able to manifest healing symptoms given their belief that what they had taken
is indeed true; and on the other hand, the cavemen as well may indeed manifest
genuine happiness in spite of the fact that their belief is false.
The degree of truth then behind our beliefs, though ethically significant, is not a
mandatory factor in the production of genuine things- whether these things be
found in the realm of emotion or through our very bodies. Ultimately, what truly
matters is the reality that the perceiver sees and believes to be true, whether it be
so or otherwise.
49
CHAPTER V
CAVEMEN AND HAPPINESS
A. Summary and Findings
In the previous chapters, we have thoroughly broken down the factors that we
feel may play key in the deliberation on caveman and his acquisition of happiness.
In gist, through Chapter II: Happiness, we first defined what Happiness73 is per se
and compared it through the various theories of it. It was through the journey of
defining this key concept that we transitioned from discussing happiness in general
to the more particular debate on how one attains knowledge; shedding much light
on the Rationalist74 vs. Empiricist75 debate. And finally, in the preceding chapter,
we take an even closer look at the latter of the two, justifying how, despite the
claim of its infallibility, is it still possible to actually achieve genuine happiness,
through the consideration of one’s reality76.
As tackled throughout the previous chapters, the Allegory is firm in its
condemnation of the cavemen shackled to the floor to see nothing but shadows on
a wall, and hear only echoes- a description that exhibits in essence that their lives
73 Anthony Kenny, and Charles Kenny. "Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Utility: Happiness in Philosophical and Economic Thought." University of Notre Dame. St. Andrews Studies in Philosophy and Public Affairs, 1 Oct. 2006. Web. 74 The High Desert Christian Writers Guild. "Logic: Rationalism vs. Empiricism." QHST Home. Quartz Hill School of Theology. Web. 21 Jan. 2012. <http://www.theology.edu/logic/logic4.htm>. 75 Peter Markie "Rationalism vs. Empiricism", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2008 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = <http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2008/entries/rationalism-empiricism/> 76 Jean-Paul Sartre. Being and Nothingness; an Essay on Phenomenological Ontology.New York: Philosophical Library, 1956. Print.
50
would be one’s based on merely the outline of a truth, rather than of the truth in its
own, sincere, form .77 To reiterate, through the Cultural Relativist approach
however, it is seen how such an assumption is unfair for it is seen from a third
party perspective, which reflects how it is primarily focused on viewing,
distinguishing, and most apparently in this case, scrutinizing the culture or acts of
another rather than first trying to understand it78. Indeed, the philosopher and
anthropologist may be completely different animals, but with the application of
this approach, the significance of being able to see things from the perspective of
those committing the act does have its point.
If we were to look at the cavemen from our respective view point of life, truth,
etc… it is not only understandable but also rather foreseeable how feeling of
disdain could be held for their practices compared to one’s own. In order to
successfully and fairly compare the notion carried by the cavemen and that in the
World of Forms79, one must first have the proper approach. Cultural Relativism
then comes into the picture, at least to serve the philosophers purpose, as it
provides the standards how one should study the practices of others based on their
own ideals, and acknowledge these respective cultures autonomously and equally
in order to initially level out the plains80 before one would move on to judge
completely right from wrong, truth from falsity, reality from fantasy.
77 Plato. "Book VII and VIII (531d–534e)." Trans. Paul Shorey. The Republic. Cambridge (Mass.): Harvard UP, 1982. Print. 78. "Cultural Relativism." The University of Texas-Pan American. 16 Dec. 1994. Web. 21 Jan. 2012. <http://www.utpa.edu/faculty/mglazer/Theory/cultural_relativism.htm>. 79 Plato. "Book VII and VIII (531d–534e)." Trans. Paul Shorey. The Republic. Cambridge (Mass.): Harvard UP, 1982. Print. 80 Mark Glazer."Cultural Relativism." The University of Texas-Pan American. 16 Dec. 1994. Web. 21 Jan. 2012. <http://www.utpa.edu/faculty/mglazer/Theory/cultural_relativism.htm>.
51
In this sense then, we apply this approach of open mindedness81 by broadening
the borders of our own minds. Initially, how can one disagree with Plato after all if
he had no other theory of knowledge to refer to. Admittedly, the author’s argument
through the Republic82 is convincing and logical, however, as Sartre put it, one
“…cannot obtain any truth whatsoever [about myself], except through the
mediation of another.”83 This illustrates for us the significance of comparison, and
how it is key to understanding more the truth of the subject matter.
In this light, we expound on the philosophies of happiness84, and discuss not
only those that agree with Plato, namely the Rationalists85, but explore as well
those who give the utmost value to physical pleasure, mainly the Empiricists86. It
is through this portion of the discussion that one would realize that, on one hand
we have Plato, and on the other we have a number of sensual-based standards that
may as well be considered. The question however stands on which of the two
perspectives to adopt. It is at this point that we transition to our next chapter, and
debate not on the level of happiness per se, but rather based from its
epistemological roots- the means of obtaining and knowing knowledge87.
81 Mark Glazer. "Cultural Relativism." The University of Texas-Pan American. 16 Dec. 1994. Web. 21 Jan. 2012. <http://www.utpa.edu/faculty/mglazer/Theory/cultural_relativism.htm>. 82 Plato. Trans. Paul Shorey. The Republic. Cambridge (Mass.): Harvard UP, 1982. Print. 83 Jean-Paul Sartre. Being and Nothingness; an Essay on Phenomenological Ontology.New York: Philosophical Library, 1956. Print. 84 Anthony Kenny, and Charles Kenny. "Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Utility: Happiness in Philosophical and Economic Thought." University of Notre Dame. St. Andrews Studies in Philosophy and Public Affairs, 1 Oct. 2006. Web. 85 Peter Markie, "Rationalism vs. Empiricism", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2008 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = <http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2008/entries/rationalism-empiricism/> 86 Peter Markie, "Rationalism vs. Empiricism", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2008 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = <http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2008/entries/rationalism-empiricism/> 87 Peter Markie, "Rationalism vs. Empiricism", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2008 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = <http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2008/entries/rationalism-empiricism/>
52
In the debate between Empiricism and Rationalism, we define the former to be
one of an a posteriori nature, and the latter, that of an a priori. Through
empiricism, we argue how it is through the senses that we acquire knowledge,
including reflection, while rationalism does so by sighting that before our very
existence, we obtain innate ideas, regardless of the senses.88
Empiricism argues that ideas rely on the world to be realized. One cannot say
that one knows what is yet to be enlightened in one’s head. As John Locke had put
it “No proposition can be said to be in the mind which it never yet knew, which it
was never yet conscious of.”89 Experience is considered through the philosophy as
the only source of knowledge, which stains our Tabula Rasa90 minds through each
occurrence. Following off the premise that “[t]here is nothing in the intellect that
was not previously in the senses”91, Aristotle as well discusses how our senses are
key to the attainment of knowledge. Rationalism on the other hand, probably most
well known through Descartes’ “Cogito ergo sum” criticizes empiricism for its
fallibility, and its openness to subjectivity. Given this thesis, they therefore
conclude that any knowledge obtained through intuition or deductive reasoning is
superior to any knowledge gained through the flawed, error-prone experience that
basis knowledge on an ever-changing external world.92
88 Ibid. 89 Francis F. Steen "Empiricism vs Rationalism." CogWeb: Cognitive Cultural Studies. Communication Studies, University of California. Web. 24 Jan. 2012. <http://cogweb.ucla.edu/CogSci/Empiricism.html>. 90 William Uzgalis "John Locke", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2010 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = <http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2010/entries/locke/> 91 Aristotle, and D.W. Hamlyn. "Empiricism." Rick Grush's Home Page. Web. 24 Jan. 2012. <http://mind.ucsd.edu/syllabi/99_00/Empiricism/Readings/Encyc_Phil/Empiricism.html>. 92 Peter Markie"Rationalism vs. Empiricism", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2008 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL =
53
The debate between the two may be an interminable one, but for the purpose of
the study we choose to adopt Kant’s Transcendental Idealism , recognizing both
Phenomena and Nuomena as knowledge 93 ; acknowledging that there is a
foundational knowledge a priori, but the reliance on the senses nonetheless when
it comes to the knowledge of the external world, a posteriori. We do so for as
deduce in the following chapter, a truth to exist both a priori and a posteriori is
enough to show that the external world, and in respect to it, our internal reality of
it, does exist.
Through the last chapter prior to this, we bring in the existentialist perspective
of Jean-Paul Sartre94 into the picture to justify how cavemen, or the ignorant of
truth, can still be genuinely happy. Through this philosophy, it is the experiences
we had and the actions we make that define who we are. We are an “essence-
before-existence” being, who are absolutely autonomous and who are solely
responsible for one’s respective life; and most significant to this thesis, responsible
for one’s reality.95
We argue that the prisoners of the cave who see nothing but shadows and hear
only the echoes of the “true” world are legitimate in their inferring of knowledge
from what is implied through such experiences for the simple case that that is their
reality. For as mentioned earlier, how is it in any way realistic and moreover fair to
93 Jean-Paul Sartre. Being and Nothingness; an Essay on Phenomenological Ontology.New York: Philosophical Library, 1956. Print. 94 Jean-Paul Sartre. "Reading For Philosophical Inquiry: A Brief Introduction." P.L.E.Web. <http://philosophy.lander.edu/intro/introbook-links.html>. 95 Jean-Paul Sartre. Being and Nothingness; an Essay on Phenomenological Ontology.New York: Philosophical Library, 1956. Print.
54
require something that is unattainable to the situation- to the reality- that the
cavemen and all the ignorant, if they may be labeled so, find themselves in.
What is attainable to these cavemen96 is only what they can perceive from their
viewpoint. Adopting a Cultural Relativist97 perspective, can one truly blame these
men to think the way they do? Their reality is such, and as proven through the use
of Placebo98, the power of one’s reality despite the truth behind it is enough justice
for a genuine reaction of healing to occur.
From all that has been said, we can therefore conclude that cavemen are indeed
capable of being happy. Plato argues through his Allegory that genuine happiness,
or anything genuine at all even, is unattainable by the cavemen because they rely
on their fallible senses to obtain knowledge99 of a mere outline of the true world.
What we have proven through this paper however is that, despite their not being
any truth, genuine happiness is still achievable for such genuine manifestations are
based, not on what is real, but on one recognizes, through valid reasons to be real.
96 Plato. "Book VII and VIII (531d–534e)." Trans. Paul Shorey. The Republic. Cambridge (Mass.): Harvard UP, 1982. Print. 97 Mark Glazer. "Cultural Relativism." The University of Texas-Pan American. 16 Dec. 1994. Web. 21 Jan. 2012. <http://www.utpa.edu/faculty/mglazer/Theory/cultural_relativism.htm 98 Mary Gail Mercurio, James Walton, Deborra James, David Fiorentino, Alexa Kimball, Michael Davis, and Valerie Ojha."Study Redefines Placebo Effect as Part of Effective Treatment - News Room - University of Rochester Medical Center."University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester NY. URMC, 22 Dec. 2009. Web. 17 Jan. 2012. <http://www.urmc.rochester.edu/news/story/index.cfm?id=2718>. 99 Southwell, Gareth Southwell. "Rationalism - Empirical & Logical Necessity." Rescources, Reviews, Discussion, and Books for Students and General Readers Interested in Philosophy - Philosophy Online. Web. 21 Jan. 2012. <http://www.philosophyonline.co.uk/tok/rationalism4.htm>.
55
B. Recommendations
With the findings established through this study, the researcher would suggest
for the adoption of this notion of happiness through philosophical discussions and
even practice in everyday activities. Happiness is to be recognized as a form of
comprehension whose outcome is based on standards one makes for himself, and
through the measures one defines and recognizes through his own volition. It is
not an absolute form of spontaneity, but rather a factor in life that man and his will
has control over.
C. Trends and Prospects
The study may initiate a new mindset in terms of the approach to happiness, or
activities in general. Granted, the idea of man as an agent of his own action has
been an idea that has echoes through the histories for centuries now, but
nonetheless, this study may still change how that said notion is understood and
accepted. Through the theoretical arguments raised, and the empirical evidence
given through the brief discussion on the Placebo Effect, the study may open new
doors, or at the very least cast old one’s under new light.
D. Areas for further Research
The study has factored in many other philosophies and disciplines in its
research, however there is much more to be known regarding these mentioned
terms, and others unmentioned as well. This is a mere skim of the surface of the
56
Existential philosophy, and further research must be made to understand it better-
rounded, especially in terms of it’s regulative application.
The Placebo Effect especially should undergo special attention, as it is a
phenomenon whose limits are not yet well established. Indeed, invasive measures
cannot be replaced through the mind alone, however the very fact that an
intangible belief may conjure up such a physical and visible effect is already in
itself commendable.
Another aspect that should be taken further is the ethical facet of this
philosophy, and its implications to it. Indeed, normatively it’s categorical that one
should thrive off truth, however, in a world where truth may not be as accessible
as one may hope, or perhaps is not accessible at all, how then would that affect the
practice of the Existential standards of happiness.