“I Think Therefore I am”: The Baseless Arbitration that is Human Existence

David Varkey
Sep 1, 2018 · 2 min read

When Descartes wrote down those famous words, he clearly delineated the bounds of what we can truly know. As he proposed, the perception of anything beyond our existence predicated the use of some fallible source to verify such thoughts.

Although we have tried to use discrete methodologies such as the scientific method to gain a better understanding of our world, an understanding (nothing definite), is all we can and have been able to do. For example, a “law” such as the law of gravity for hundreds of years seemed infallible. However as our understanding of quantum mechanics developed, we realized that this “law” was only applicable within the bounds of what we had been able to perceive. Despite the seemingly perfect way our classical understanding of gravity explained the tides and the motion of the planets, it had only been tested within what we had believed to be the constraints of our reality. That is not to say, by any means, that all of the scientific study we have done to this point has been fruitless, but that what we know or believe to know is errable.

If something as seemingly immutable as our understanding of natural phenomena could be flawed, why do we hold so many societal standards just as, if not more resolutely than what we have studied for centuries? Depending on your perspective, it may seem funny, sad or even crazy, that so much of what makes us feel safe and happy and guides us as we navigate our modern society has hardly undergone the same tests and questioning that something as seemingly definite as the law of gravity has.

For instance, consider the concept of marriage. Matrimony began thousands of years ago, and developed within many cultures with various procedures and contexts around the world. Regardless of its origins, marriage today is still a pillar of society. For whatever reasons (perhaps there are some arbitrary religious ones) societies have for centuries pressed upon up and coming generations to believe that marriage is between one man and one woman. In a day and age, where divorce rates are continuously rising what is our understanding of marriage? We have slowly evolved to allow for same-sex marriages, but why have we stopped there? Do we need to feel obligated to have a bond for our an entire lives just because that is what has been done in the past? Do we even need marriage?

Asking such questions has allowed us to progress as a society. As Descartes questioned his existence, we must question why our society is the way it is. For if we allow baseless societal beliefs and presuppositions to define our existence, we will remain trapped by the bounds they place on us. By honestly and thoughtfully asking such questions as a society, we will be able to emerge from lives filled with antiquated, illogical and biased beliefs to those more logically and morally arbitrated.