This blog briefly considers the attitudes of contributors discussing the notion of consciousness and our perception of what is ‘real’. The concept of existentialism, in accordance with my HCJ module follows on from Freud’s analysis of the mind – which I find very fitting.
Freud
In Sigmund Freud’s ‘Interpretation of Dreams’ (1900), suggested that dreams are not merely neurotic symptoms, but were a coded expansion of repressed sexual desires. This proposition goes against the grain that Freud considered himself a scientist over a philosopher as this ideology possesses a distinct lack of empirical support. In relation to Freud’s Tri-Part theory this would assume dreams are influenced by experiences in early life.
The Golden Age of the city of Vienna embraced many forward-thinking minds such as Freud; and saw the release Freud’s, ‘The Ego and the Id’ (1923). A fundamental proposition within this discourse was the notion, that the greatest part of our mind was the unconscious. Freud constructed a tool which would help define his Tri-part Theory; a component of three segments including, the Id, the Ego and the Super-ego.
The Id is the share of the mind which reacts in accordance with our instinctual impulses of sex and aggression. The ego - the superficial part of our mind within which we hold, we are able to make conscious decisions whilst being fully aware of them; Freud suggested the Ego was the weakest component of the mind. Then the Super-ego, this develops after birth, and develops with regards to our surroundings and various situations everyday life throws at us.
Husserl
Edmund Husserl studied in Vienna during the Golden Age similarly to Freud. Another common characteristic the pair shared was the fascination surrounding the human mind. Husserl’s initial studies aimed to record a ‘data of consciousness.’ Another common trait Freud and Husserl identify is an empirical nature in relation to their observations of the mind. This ‘Data of consciousness’ was presented in his work - ‘Psychology from an empirical standpoint’ and within this work, differentiated between mental and physical findings. All through Husserl’s studies he preserves a clear division between what is logic, and what’s considered philosophy. Generally speaking, a Platonic type standpoint is employed by Husserl in relation to philosophy. Alike to hundreds of others before him, Husserl took a platonic outlook into consideration when dealing with philosophy. As a measure of Husserl’s differentiation between logic and philosophy, was his new definition which saw a separation between epistemology and philosophy. This came about through the implementation and development phenomenology.
The objective behind Husserl’s phenomenology was to perceive the immediate data of consciousness, without making reference to anything his consciousness could inform him; or in terms of Cartesian dualism, influence or distract him. Husserl’s theory states, ‘It makes no difference to an object presented whether it exists, or is fictitious.’ The example being I can think of a song in my head without hearing it and it still has an effect on me, although I find this problematic as the interpretation will never be as accurate as sensory perception. Similarly as we can envisage an image of an animal, however the detail would not be as specific as it would be, looking at the real thing. Husserl’s proposition of ‘Phenomenological reduction’ outlines the distinction between looking at something, and imagining looking at something whilst being under the impression this something is ‘real’.
Husserl does not affirm in ‘Ideas’, however he postulates that there is a non-phenomenal (neumonal) world, however, these objects should be of no-one’s concerns as they grant us nothing. This proposition reinforces the Platonic thought in Husserl’s thinking, resembling Plato’s ‘realm of the forms’. Further re-enforcement to the prior argument that only consciousness has ‘absolute being’ - all other forms of being are dependent upon consciousness in order to exist. Ultimately suggesting prior to consciousness, there is nothing; and if there is, we have no opportunity to know it as we would have no consciousness to experience it.
Heidegger
Martin Heidegger’s ‘Sien und Zeit’ or ‘Being and Time’, claims Edmund Husserl’s ‘Phenomenology’ wasn’t quite cutting the cloth as it were. Heidegger stresses that Husserl had adopted Descartes framework of two realms, consciousness and reality as two separate entities, but had only actually addressed consciousness and completely ignored reality. Expanding, Heidegger elaborates to comment on Phenomenology as a whole, saying that its first duty was to observe ‘Being’, this form of ‘being’ pre-dates any notions of consciousness, as inconveniently how can we experience something, if we ourselves don’t exist? Consequently we must predate all previous philosophical thinking and vocabulary that we have come to accept.
It is this notion which eludes to Heidegger’s agenda against philosophical vocabulary. With the use of the word Dasein, now commonly used to mean one’s thing for exemplification in a sentence. ‘This is my jam’, could be classed as someone’s Dasein. But Dasein for Heidegger was more like a sense of being, or more accurately ‘being-in-the-world’. This is just being, just doing, a completely natural, perhaps habitual process; ‘going with the flow’ as it were. It is not a thinking thing, but a caring thing. The large majority of professional footballers for example would suggest when they step onto the pitch, they step into their Dasein. Despite this being their place of work, it’s also where they thrive and feel most comfortable and assured.
Objects that we interact with within this natural state are called ‘ready-to-hand’. For example, in the case of our professional footballer, he uses the ball to express his skill. His skill is the use of the ball and to him it comes naturally to pass/shoot/control/tackle.
From birth we enter into physical, cultural and historical context. Heigegger describes this entrance as being thrown into something; this ‘throwness’ as Heidegger calls it, is the ‘facticity’ of Dasein. The context in which we a ‘thrown’ into allow us to facilitate our Dasein, this is because despite challenging situations, there is always your Dasien which is second nature.
The notion of time is a crucial aspect within Heidegger’s philosophy; life is easily divisible into past, present and future. Heidegger states the past brings about feelings of guilt, the present resembles boredom: although if we are participating in our Dasein, we are not bored but ‘in the zone’. Finally the future brings anxiety. These notions associated with our past, present and future are coined by Heidegger as Attunement, Dasein and Directedness. Heidegger becomes the ‘father’ of existentialism, championing the school of thought after Husserl and Kant.
Sartre
Sartre appears to summarise the concept of existentialism. An advocate of Heidegger, agreeing Husserl had not progressed enough with regards to phenomenological reaction, due to his reception of the Cartesian ego. Sartre considers that perception and imagination have no comparable variance. He claims being, is without reason, without cause, without necessity. Being, just is. It needs no explanation as it is defines its very nature.
