There is a question in philosophy that is supremely important, but which, as yet, no one has asked, let alone tried to answer.
Perhaps this is because it is considered to be too hard. Yet without it, philosophy can do little more than flounder in a semantic quagmire. For it is as fundamental to philosophy as the fact that the Earth goes around the Sun is fundamental to astronomy.
The question I am referring to is: How is it possible for an idea to be created in a world without ideas?
We know that ideas have been created, because they exist now; for we all have them. We also know that there was a time early in the Earth's history where there were no ideas, at a time before animal life, when only plant life existed, perhaps around 600 million years ago.
So how could this transition have come about? It cannot be explained solely in terms of the evolution of the material bodies of animals because while there is no doubt that ideas reside within the brain, one can examine the chemical and electrical composition of a brain to the utmost degree but one is not going to find an idea anywhere within it.
So how can it begin to be explained? One could naïvely suppose that a primitive brain with senses at the dawn of animal life would be able to see something, a 'tree' for example, and identify it as a 'tree'. But this presupposes the existence of the concept of a tree and hence this supposition is invalid as we are exploring a time before any concepts of trees or anything else existed.
To put the question another way: What is the logical process by which an idea can be created out of something that is not an idea?
It would seem to be safe to presume that some logical process must be part of the answer, for without logic there is no rigorous structure, only chaos.
It would also be safe to presume that at the start of animal life, evolution had created body parts that alter their chemical or electrical form in some way in response to light, sound, odours or physical contact; in other words that evolution had created senses; senses that could respond in some way to data from an exterior world.
It is also safe to presume that along with senses, evolution had generated some form of logical processor in the form of a proto-brain that could be sensitive to the information from its senses and also perhaps send signals to its limbs.
This describes the possible hardware of the system, but what about the software?
Normally in the modern world of computing, a programmer writes some software which is then applied to the hardware of the computer to produce the required data output. But we need to do the inverse process. We can determine how the physical primitive animal can take data from its senses and generate outputs that assist in its ability to survive, but then we have to infer or make guesses as to the logic of the software it is using.
So to reword the question in another way: What is the logical process by which a primaeval animal with senses and some form of logical processor can create something which could be considered to be the start of the formation of an 'idea'?
This is an important question, for without a good answer to it, all philosophical theories are without a firm foundation.
So what do you think? What logical process might create an idea where there were none before?
My answer, having considered various alternatives, is that the only logical process by which this can be achieved is through the logical process of pattern identification. One in which a logical processor takes data from its senses and searches for patterns in the data. In this way, the beginning of an idea can be created from nothing more than sense-data and a logical processor. And this beginning of an idea can be built upon and expanded to create fully fledged ideas.
I have discussed the details of this logical process in a previous video: 'PP9 Patterns, Time and Space'. And subsequently in the video: 'PP10 Pyramids, Patterns and Why we Sleep', I discuss how this process can be used in a recursive way to create a comprehensive model of the world. (I will put links to these videos in the description below and also links to my website for transcripts of these videos.)
Ultimately philosophy is all about the logic and art of thinking, so it is crucially important to understand the logic of the foundation of ideas.
So what do you think? Do you agree with my answer to this question? If not what do you suggest? Do you also agree that without a sensible answer to this question, philosophy can do no more than flounder? Let me know in the comments.
Kommentare