|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
....
....
The key question
[Shunryu Suzuki]
As Descartes had first recognised, the most important question may well be "who am I?". All other questions pale to insignificance compared with this ultimate question, a question we all ask ourselves at least once in our lifetimes. From this question we may extend our enquiries even farther, and ask "what is the meaning of life?", and moreover, "does God really exist?". Yet to reason objectively, it must first begin with this questioning of ourselves - for to know and understand ourselves, is a clue to our origins, and even to our purpose in life?
Descartes is most famously quoted for his conclusion, "I am, I exist", or "I think, therefore I am". Yet his thinking and reasoning covered a much deeper level than this simple quote would suggest. He tackled this most difficult question head on, literally, attempting to use his mind to examine the mind - not an easy thing by no measure. He attempted to find the self within the mind, and separate this psyche from his thoughts, and his mind, and his ego.
But what then am I? A thinking thing. And what is that? Something that doubts, understands, affirms, denies, wills, refuses, and also sense and has mental images. (Descartes, Meditation II: On the Nature of the Human Mind, Which Is Better Known Than the Body).
For more about the conclusions of Descartes, and a discussion on his treatises; "Meditations on first philosophy", please see the section > Mind and Body - Descartes.
However, here we will attempt to re-examine this same question concerning the psyche, and attempt to find the self, by approaching the question from a slightly different angle. There can be no guarantee of success, or a conclusive and definitive answer. Yet by opening this "can of worms" once more, we may make more progress than we would at first expect. For the mind to examine the mind, is the most perplexing problem, and only by embarking on the journey, can we find out exactly where it may lead us, and what conclusions we may encounter on the way.
To begin, perhaps we should start by asking some basic questions first, and try to build a grounding so we can then go on to pursue the more difficult aspects of the problem.
For example we can attempt to make some basic assumptions to lay the foundation for further investigation, by asking;
1. My mind is within my brain, my brain is within my body?
Even this deduction is open to interpretation and different beliefs, yet we have to make a start somewhere? So if we answer this first question in the affirmative, and as true, then we can make some further progress. Even if the mind does not exist within the brain, and thus neither the body, it makes no real difference to the outcome of our questioning.
2. The self or psyche is within my mind?
Again, shaky ground already? Yet the mind itself is phenomena, and the self is most certainly a contingent part of the mind. Remember the reason for this exploration is to find the true self, within the mind. This is the deeper question.
3. The self is separate and different from my ego?
Some would have it that the psyche and ego are one and the same thing. Yet here, if we draw the conclusion that the ego is but a masque we use to project our mood or persona in different situations - then we can separate these characteristics.
Psyche:
Ego:
1. That which is responsible for one's thoughts and feelings; the seat of the faculty of reason.
2. The immaterial part of a person; the actuating cause of an individual life
1. An inflated feeling of pride in your superiority to others
2. Your consciousness of your own identity
3. (Psychoanalysis) the conscious mind
For example, we can learn to recognise and control the moods and the ego by being "mindful" of our thoughts and actions. We can recognise that we act differently in different circumstances, and with different people. We may be friendly and open in good company, yet obstructive and cautious with strangers or people we do not like. We may feel fear, or project anger, or be relaxed and comfortable, and even peaceful. These are moods, and are a result of the ego? and also the reason for it?
4. The self is the heart of my being, the true spirit?
Again, remember we are attempting to go much deeper than mere feelings, and thoughts. We are attempting to find the "core of being", the "Kernel" of existence, beyond mere projected persona, and beyond the ego. Some feel that this awareness or conscious existence is the real self, the spirit mind, or the "Soul". I will not dispute that I think this way also, but we must try to be objective about the questioning, just as Descartes had been. We must try to cast out any prejudiced notions of the soul at first instance, [although we may be returning here later in the discussion].
5. This self that I relate to being, has been with me since birth?
Well, I think we would all agree this is the case. The reason for life itself is perhaps precisely this awareness, this consciousness. However, we must remember that again, we must be clear to separate this deeper self, from the character, and ego, which may have evolved over time. For example, the character may change through experience, wisdom and circumstance. We may see or perceive ourselves as a totally different person now, compared to that as a child - this is character, an important part of persona, our identity, our destiny even?
Yet if we can truly see the part of us that is beyond any change, this may be the beginning of the quest. Is there any part of you, any part of me, which feels it has not changed over time? A fundamental or elemental part, which has been the foundation and seat for all learning and knowledge?
In fact, if we reason further, this self must have originated before birth, at the beginning of conscious awareness itself, within the mother’s womb.
If we reason logically that the centre of consciousness, the self, is present at birth, and even before this time, at pre-birth - is it possible to ascertain this point of origin of conscious awareness? Can we attempt to discover the actual point of creation of this faculty of mind, and thought?
As the unborn child within the womb begins to develop a brain, and organs of sense, and thus develop the connections between the brain and these senses; there must be some moment where sensory information begins to filter into the brain. This may at first be, the sounds of the womb itself, through the development of the child’s inner ear, and convey the sounds and feelings of the mother’s heartbeat. Further development of hearing would lead to the awareness of other, more distant sounds, external to the womb - of the outside world.
The sense of touch will begin to convey the experience of contact, of pressure, and as the child develops further, and grows, and it’s space in the womb becomes smaller, it begins to move, and shuffle it’s position, and even kick and jerk inside it’s mother.
We can reason that since the eyes of the unborn child are known to be closed, that sight would most likely be a secondary experience for the child. It has no real need to see with eyes within the womb, and thus it’s eyes are closed, eyelids may even protect the eyes from exactly this sensory input whilst still unborn. Indeed, there may be a perfect reason for everything.
The sense of smell would also be of little or no importance to the child, and thus have no real meaning until birth. This is the same with taste. What need would an unborn child have for a sense of taste? It does not take nutrition through it’s mouth as yet, so the sense of taste is irrelevant.
So to surmise, the senses of hearing and touch, must be the foremost important sensory information that enters the mind of the unborn child. All the while, the brain is developing, complex connections and synapses are forming, energies are crossing these connections within the brain, and sensory information is beginning to flood the brain. What would happen next?
Back to contents..
