Paris 23rd January 2017
I find myself at a threshold, a liminal space
wherein I am somewhat bewildered. I have not hitherto spent much time in the
late 17th and 18th centuries. Some of what I perceive
around me is reasonably accessible. I can understand what is being proposed by
various renowned and distinguished philosophers; however, much is somewhat
bewildering. I have not previously read most of the material I am presented
with and I find quite a lot of it now superseded by current knowledge. Scientific
discoveries in the last 300 years have clarified certain concepts which these
philosophers puzzled over at some length; but it is because of their theorising
and curiosity that others continued to explore, study and develop the means
with which to penetrate unknown territory and find more accurate solutions,
changing theory into fact.
 |
| Gottfried Leibniz |
 |
| John Locke |
A great deal of speculation and exchange of views,
about space, time and motion was taking place between Thomas Hobbs, Baruch
Spinoza, Isaac Newton, John Locke, Gottfried Leibniz, David Hume, Adam Smith
and many others. I mention these as it is their writings that I am currently
attempting to engage, hence the number of avenues out of my liminal space is extensive.
I find a quote from David Hume of particular relevance:
When we look about us towards external objects, and consider the
operation of causes, we are never able, in a single instance, to discover any
power or necessary connection; any quality, which binds the effect to the
cause, and renders the one an infallible consequence of the other. There is
required a medium, which may enable the mind to draw such an inference, if
indeed it be drawn by reasoning and argument. What that medium is, I must
confess, passes my comprehension; and it is incumbent on those to produce it,
who assert that it really exists, and is the origin of all our conclusions
concerning matter of fact. This question I propose as much for the sake of
information, as with an intention of raising difficulties. I cannot find, I
cannot imagine any such reasoning. But I keep my mind still open to
instruction, if any one will vouchsafe to bestow it upon me. (David Hume,
1737)
 |
| David Hume |
Today Hume would be less
troubled by the questions of cause and effect which concerned him in 1737, as
many of them would have been answered, but he would most certainly keep his
mind open to instruction. Indeed the medium through which the mind is able to
draw an inference, is a mind open to instruction. Hume goes on:
If I ask you why you believe any particular matter of fact, which you
relate, you must tell me some reason; and this reason will be some other fact,
connected with it. But as you cannot proceed after this manner, in infinitum,
you must at last terminate in some fact, which is present to your memory or
senses; or must allow that your belief is entirely without foundation. (David
Hume, 1737)
But I come back to the first part of
Hume’s thought on external objects considering the operation of causes – the
problem of finding connections and not being able to bind the effect to the
cause.
What initially and topically springs
to mind is how nearly 63 million American citizens voted for such an external
object as Donald Trump. The puzzlement is that nearly 66 million voted for
Hilary Clinton, yet in terms of actual electoral votes the object carried 30
out of the 50 States to succeed to the Office of President. Yet that is the
electoral system. What is the quality that binds cause and effect in that? Only 55% of eligible voters actually turned
out and just under 46% of them voted for the object, which means that about 25%
of the voting public have put this man in office. That appears to be a fact. It
is an undeniable, bewildering and disturbing fact which, in my view, has no
foundation or quality, Yet it is so.
On the other hand, the effect caused
by this fact was yesterdays Women’s March attracting over 2.6 million
protestors round the world. Marches
were organized in all 50 U.S. states and Puerto Rico, as well as in 55 global
cities, including Tokyo, Sydney, Nairobi, Paris, and Bogotá. On the morning of the march, people marched in
Paris, London, Berlin, Amsterdam, Mexico City, Bangkok, Delhi, Cape Town, and many
other cities. My initial feeling is that
the external object, the cause of this global demonstration of disapprobation,
will pay no heed to this initial effect of his newly acquired position.
 |
| Los Angeles |
 |
| London |
 |
| Paris |
 |
| Washington |
Clearly, on numbers alone, the majority of citizens of the United States disapprove of this object. The rest of the world is equally as distraught. One can only hope that there will be sufficient pressure brought to prevent any of his drastic thinking from being put into action. Let him be instructed quickly that the power he thinks his office might have is strictly limited in a government of the people, by the people and for the people. I still choose to believe that the majority, the 75% who did not support his election to high office, will prevail regardless of the voting procedure that let him in.
You might suppose that as a student
of Locke and Leibniz I am being naïve, but no more so than both Locke and
Leibniz attributing men’s better attributes to the blind belief in a God. More
of this anon.
No comments:
Post a Comment