A REFLECTION PAPER ON METAPHYSICS

A single idea cannot encapsulate the way the world is….

What is the true reality?

Can we find answer to the real sense of the world by finding the ultimate individual?

Or is it in the external world apart from us that could be brought by our sensations and addressed by a supreme mind?

Is it in the realization that we are in a continuous movement of time?

Or is it in the thesis that what is true to us could actually be false?

IIrwagen’s book presented some very intriguing points for someone who does not think like he does. I don’t think like he does. In fact, as I was reading his work, I was asking myself if there is actually a point of reading his book. His book, Metaphysics, talked about what ultimate reality is and if our world is actually the real world. So what then if the world we live in is not as real as most of the population deems it to be? Would it change the fact that our basic needs are food, water and shelter? Are we going to forego our ambitions and look for the true essence of the way the world is?

This is probably because I have a very different perception of reality. I use perception because it seems like the author dissects in detail every word used. Reality for me is anything that would affect me as a person. Whether it is a part of a modification or whether or not it is independent of anything else, if it affects me as a person it is real. The air I breathe, the people I encounter, the streets I walk on, for me, they are real. They are my reality.

Irwagen, in his introduction, presented what to expect from his book. According to him, unlike the other books that give theories and educate about facts where learning can be derived afterwards, his book on metaphysics will only present ideology of different men of relevance in the field of metaphysics. According to him, it does not aim to convince anyone and does not hope of changing anybody’s opinion; rather, he invites readers to keep an open mind and consider some of the ideologies he presents.  

And so an open mind I give. It would be interesting to look at the world in a different light. In fact, I find truth in the statement I read somewhere, what is apparently true may not be real. How many times have our senses deceived us? An architect’s plan may seem flat on one perspective, but round when you look at its three dimensions. This is an example of how we should look at things. Our judgment of an object or a person should not be based on what we see on the surface because we can be wrong. We dig deeper and see through what lies underneath the appearance.

Irwagen’s presentation is organized, yet the ideas presented become complicated as he discusses the different views on reality. He started off with individuality. Even such simple word was dissected in order to identify whether what the reader accepts as individual is truly individual. He compares the dictionary definition of individual and debunks it. As per the definition, individual is a separate thing. But separate per se is not the actual definition of individual, as he points out. In order to better understand it; he best described individuality by presenting what it is not. They are as follows:

·         An individual is not an individual if it is a mere modification of something.

·         An individual is not a mere collection of things.

·         A thing is not an individual thing if it is stuff.

·         A thing is not an individual if it is a universal.

·         An individual thing is not an event process.

He goes further by presenting the ideas of nihilism and monism. The first being the non-existence of an individual and the latter being the existence of one individual, referred to as the One.

As I read through the book and the arguments presented by Spinoza and Bradley, I cannot help but think of my understanding of the One, God. If there ever is an individual that exist without the need of the existence of anyone or anything else, that would be God, the Supreme Being, the source of everything else.

But Irwagen present again a different construct by Berkely, saying that everything is of internal world. This, I cannot comprehend, as there is obviously an external world. I see it, I feel it, and I live in it every day of my life. In his argument, Berkely states that our senses create all of what we see in what seems like an external world. For him, all this is a mere product of our senses, coordinated by a great mind so that we can have a supposed external world. I find Berkely’s argument absurd. Things external to us have been around long before we were born. Therefore, they cannot be products of our senses as they have existed even before human beings did. How can the sensations of the unborn be coordinated to those who are already born?

One of the arguments for the existence of an external world is the common object which has sensible properties. Two individuals may see something differently but they will surely see a property they can agree on, like its color. This suggests that there is a world that exists apart from ours. This is what I choose to believe in. Again, two different individuals can see one thing and agree on what the thing is, or if not, at least agree on certain property of the thing. This could not happen if the external world we see comes from our sensations and what we choose to see.

Arguments can be raised all day long for people who are not convinced that an external world exists. And although a conclusion can be reached, it will not change the fact that we will deal with it whether it is real or not. What are real are our responses and our responses should take into consideration the limitation of our existence brought about by time.

Irwagen’s presentation of time is probably my favorite of the book. It was straight and direct to the point. Time is continuous, a second spent is a second gone. It cannot be retrieved. That’s just how time is. It flows and it is something we cannot take back. As a result, people strive to finish something. The drive to complete a task or to achieve a goal is due to the fact that none of us has forever. Our journey in whatever world we live in will eventually end. And as it ends, we would want to say that we have served our purpose.

And since time is moving, there is no use dwelling on the time lapsed. It has to be foregone and focus should be given to the present, the current moment so that we can have the future that we want.

But I could be wrong. As what the next idea presented by Irwagen would suggest, the thesis suggesting that there is an objective truth. He further explained that it has two components; one, our beliefs and our assertions are either true or false and the other being the world exist and has the features it does in large part independently of our beliefs and assertion may affect other parts of the world.

This final thesis of Irwagen highlights our differences and the confusion it brings as most of us would assert that we are right, where in fact we could be wrong. We may have the same external world but our view of it varies. For instance, some parent would agree that spanking a child is necessary to discipline him or her. However, some would assert that this is wrong. Who among them is right, we cannot tell for sure because how we answer such question would depend on our own biases.

I agree in the existence of an objective truth but this does not mean that I am right. I am only convinced that there is such a thing. In my opinion, someone who does not believe that there is an objective truth is an idealist because he only believes in what he thinks is right, which he considers as the truth.

As what Irwagen mentioned in his introduction, metaphysics will not give you a black and white lesson. It will not pass on facts or data, the like that science and mathematics books would give its readers. Rather, it will challenge its readers to think; and think, I did.

What I discovered about my views of reality can be compared to the theses presented by Irwagen. First, individuality; I believe that all of us came from one supreme individual. Someone who existed by Himself and was able to cause the creation or modification of everything else we see. However, I don’t think that the essence of our reality lies on our being a modification of something else. I may not be an individual in the context of metaphysics, but I don’t think I need to pass the criteria of set by metaphysics in order to realize that I exist because of a purpose.

Next was his discussion of externality. Berkeley’s argument is not convincing for me. Contradictory to his ideals, I believe in the existence of the external world. The external world existed before I did. Being born to such external world allowed me to seek my purpose as a human being. I was born into the world by my parents who could have not existed without their parents as well and the grandparents before them. But how I came to be does not change the fact that I am here at this specific time and date, doing what I ought to be doing. The external world allows me to do what I am supposed to do whether Berkeley describes this world I live in as real or not.

But reality does not end in the external world. This is because the external world does not stagnate; human beings do not stagnate as well. We think and we act. This is because we are bounded by time. Maybe we have different motivations of why we set goals and attempt to reach them at a certain target date. Nevertheless, we are aware that we do not have forever. At some point, our existence in the world we know now will end. We may be given a new life after death, but don’t take my word for it because I could be wrong.

I could be wrong about a lot of things in this world. My faith and everything I believe in could be wrong, but I choose to believe them anyway. Why, because I have faith. Faith is just few of the reasons why we assert on what we believe in. It is true that what I believe to be true may not be true to others. And that is the beauty of living in the world we live in today. We are diverse in what we think is true but we still coexist. Such differences make everyday a learning experience for us. Although such differences have also brought devastations, it has also brought hope. This is because amidst our differences, the desire of the many to have a harmonious world is more powerful. But then again, I could be wrong.