Thrown out into the comprehensibly incomprehensible cosmos with mind as the instrument of comprehension mankind has ever since tried to excavate his ontological basis and to address that perennial question as was paraphrased by Allama Iqbal in his reconstruction as “What is the general structure of the universe in which we live” ?
More than anything else it is man’s own existence that scares him the most. Having overcame the fair of hypothetical vampires and mythological demons, man’s own existence has reappeared to him as one of the scariest phenomena. This fact is underscored by the growing wave of existentialism in philosophy which was for eons dominated by the question of essence. In a sense both essence and existence are issues that confront humanity at large and that has estranged thinking minds ever since. Those having slightest understanding of the history of science will agree to the fact that science as has been presented to us today as a bedrock of modern technology is historically inconsistent. The earliest scientists had slightest interests in utilitarian aspects of science and their sole concern was to gain an in depth understanding of universe and for that matter to elucidate the position of conscious man in this unfathomable universe.
The objectives of philosophy were and still are no different and this remark applies to almost all branches of knowledge with some exceptions of alchemy only to prove the rule. Notwithstanding the existence of sacred texts like old Testament, Vedas and others that predate Greeks by centuries modern history has came up with the postulate that it was among Greeks that the earliest discourses on themes concerning man and cosmos attained an intellectual dimension. Conceding concessions to that end makes our intellectual life as old as 2500 years. Rest for those sticking to the concept of sacred and loyal to the institution of prophet hood, “there has been a no nation to whom guide has not been send” makes our intellectual journey as old as our existence. To religion, we shall return shortly, but to philosophy and science we must ask as if they have really succeeded in arriving at a consistent and sustainable answers to those of our basic questions. By basic questions, I am not putting the burden of aesthetics and ethics on science and philosophy, for there’s no theory of art possible in scientific paradigm and nor do philosophers stand unanimous in defining good behaviour . My domain is limited to ontology and for that end to epistemology. Well, those aware with the philosophy of science and particularly the contemporary science and those having a close look at contemporary philosophical developments will agree to the point that at least as we understand now both science and philosophy have failed short of their purpose. Before, I proceed a note of clarification is needed. By asserting that they have failed I do not imply or anyway believe personally that science or for that matter philosophy has deceived us. Only those unaware of role played by philosophical underpinnings in affairs ranging from local societies to geo political alliances can make such an absurd claim. Likewise the failure of science shall not be taken to mean its failure in utilitarian perspective for that hypothesis is amenable only to a person still living a subhuman life in some remotest possible corners of life where fever and cold is still seen as an earthly manifestation of the movement of stars in skies. What is meant by failure is that our “over trust” and the “Quantum of responsibility” that we had once assigned to philosophical and still recently to science as an interpreter of life and universe has brought us but little fortune. If we don’t believe this radical statement then the next option open to us is either to opt either Camus” Absurdity of life ” or” Incredulity towards metanarrative ” as espoused by the knights of post modernism. As for science, the quantum reality that is reigning supreme only to be expected to be replaced by String theory in remote future the answers are again bleak and even with strings with whatever little we have understood about their character in the fabric of cosmos, it may emerge as a scientific elegance, but it is not at any cost expected to solve our existential queries, unless we are comfortable with the notion that the purpose of science is not explain not to interpret. In this jargon of Ideological plurality where reality succumbs to the infinity of narratives where shall we go to get our issues solved and things settled. The issue is not as simple as some scholars of religion paraphrase while criticising the pioneers of philosophy and dub them as blind racers in black sea. Religious scholars brought up in traditional upbringing who have in our times turned almost oblivion to contemporary intellectual trends perhaps fail to perceive the intellectual struggle that a philosopher faces while arriving at any holistic picture of reality and unfortunately he arrives at none. The philosophical mode of examination and their journey to conclusions may be a subject matter of ridicule to religious circles as ate scholars of religion now and then ridiculed by philosophers but none has the right to gimmick at other’s “quest for reality” rather they need to benefit from one another, anyway. So where shall we turn, lost in the wilderness of cosmos how shall our mind that’s no lesser wonder than the universe itself find solutions to the issues that spring from the roots of consciousness, how shall spirit that lives in a state of eternal thirst quench this fiery thirst that besides burning an individual sends flames out to the frontiers of cosmos.
The basic guiding principle in this direction has to start with epistemology as only after establishing the sources of knowledge and their relative certitude and universality can one march towards a satisfying answer to the quest for our ontological basis. Religion and now scientific disciplines like para psychology and philosophical discourses on metaphysics posit that man is in essence at least endowed with sensory, rational and intuitive means of learning and acquisition of knowledge. These three human modes of experience and learning pertain to and work on different levels of natural, psychological and transcendental domains. Whereas sense perception that involves both space and time are suited to deal with the phenomenon of material universe as it presents to us. All scientific development as has occurred over years has primarily rested on the utility and reliability of sensory perceptions. The theory of measurement as it exists in scientific texts and that’s often taking in lighter vein by students is a pointer to the same fact.
Russell has aptly appropriated this sense perception in his book “The problems of Philosophy”. Philosophically the trustworthiness of sensory perceptions is debatable primarily for their narrow operational range and importantly for the fact that do they really transduce the outer physical realm to our mental domain. But the technological progress that we have witnessed is primarily because of the sensory perceptions and the positive role they have played in this material development. But to substitute them as instruments of ontological enquiry does not come without a risk.
The rational faculty has been used differently by man throughout the historical evolution. Not satisfied with earth, primitive man chose skies and stars as the earliest concern of his intellectual expedition. This astrology and astronomy were the first subjects of human interest and from the very first day the human mind has been on a journey leading vertically up. As if it was a call from subconscious that the keys to the secrets of earth lies there in the skies. Following the historical course man made best use of his rational faculties ranging from the discovery of farming to the invention of wheel and then what not. All this development by humans not witnessed in other species has came only on the premise that human mind is capable of connecting cause to the effect and through the instant of present he is able to link past to the future. This tendency is not seen in other species where life is all about “isness” of time. The rational front of human existence has not only genesised an entire technical episteme, but human mind, in its journey towards reality has forced itself to ask some hard questions, the questions that lie far beyond the domain of science and sometimes there answers lie beyond the conceiving mind itself. It is no less than a wonder that human brain occupying an incommensurably small amount of space holds the entire vastness of space and all expanse of time in it. It has not been without a reason that many philosophers and psychologists have deemed mind as the only reality, the debate that continues. The miracle of consciousness that is at work within human mind is one of the deepest puzzles of universe, I should say as profound as universe itself. The absence of unified theory of consciousness and the impossibility of explaining consciousness and mind as a molecular squabble has inspired many thinkers to classify mind different from matter. Even if in the remotest possibilities we envisage mind as a manifestation of matter, the next issue of teleological importance will square us and therefore compounding the issue instead of simplifying it. Well, this is mind and this is what defines our rationality. But the unfortunate part is that human mind is bound within the limits of space and time. As is it impossible for foetus to look beyond womb so is human mind enmeshed within the limits imposed on it by the peripheries of space and time. Leaving aside the capability of looking into transcendental and metaphysical perspectives, human mind, at times fails even to handle the mundane and material issues for its limited nature. As such it will be but an unjustifiable proposition to drive the chariot of mind to the realm of transcendence which lies far out of its reach and any attempt to do so promises infinite paradoxes if not solutions. Writers like William James, Dr Iqbal, Arthur Eddington and innumerable philosophers have forewarned us of the fallacy of this adventure.
….to be continued
Amir Suhail Wani is a freelance columnist with bachelors in Electrical Engineering and a student of comparative studies with special interests in Iqbaliyat & mystic thought. Besides being widely published in and outside state , the author is a guest columnist at Kashmir Pen.
