Philosophy
Sanity begins and ends here, the knowledge of self-existence is our primary and indisputable authority
What do we know with absolute certainty?: The sense of self-existence, consciousness or being is never in doubt. We never have to question whether we exist or not, this is the case. It’s a primary absolute and self-evident knowledge.
René Descartes famously wrote, “ I think therefore I am.” He came to this conclusion by using extensive logical analysis, much simpler it’s: I am therefore I am. Our I — the “am-ness” of being is complete knowledge, nothing external needs to justify it. Our mere existence is a “given”.
Now weirdly, as scientific materialism becomes more and more the norm. This very fact, we know with absolute certainty comes into question.
Am I (as consciousness being or sentience) a temporary and transitory product of the brain and nervous system. In order to allow this question, we must first relinquish our primary knowledge or primary authority. We have to move from the perfect subjective knowing of our existence, without doubt, self-evident and indisputable, to doubt of that very truth.
Make no mistake here, if consciousness is a by-product of many (external) processes, brain created and secondary — or proceeding from something else, we are fiction, a temporary and unnecessary outcome, a process rather than a fact.
So, the removal of personal authority is empowered when philosophical materialism becomes the common view: Our authority as a discreet conscious being is undermined and rendered obsolete.
We can then, no longer say. I am, therefore I know with perfect certain I am (or exist) but rather I must ask external sources: Do I actually exist or am I merely the product of brain chemistry?
Already as soon as this position is adopted our own pristine authority as a self-knower, or someone who does not doubt the most obvious fact, that we exist, is undermined.
It’s the beginning of madness, not psychosis but the disputation of your primary ground. The perfect and so obvious fact of inherent being, or tacit subjectivity, which never needs even thinking about, has been slowly by reason of specious argument, removed from the table for many people.
It’s true that what is meant by consciousness is varied but I think this description anyone should recognize, if not let me know.
The viewpoint may be seen as quaint, and old fashioned and based on anecdotal evidence from the science angle:
“Anecdotal evidence is evidence from anecdotes: evidence collected in a casual or informal manner and relying heavily or entirely on personal testimony.” ²
Which is quite ridiculous because it is everyone's personal testimony including any scientist or philosopher including even those who dispute the existence of consciousness itself. It is not solipsism, though this should be guarded against because narcissism, is the other side of this coin:
As a metaphysical position, solipsism goes further to the conclusion that the world and other minds do not exist. This extreme position is claimed to be irrefutable, as the solipsist believes to be the only true authority, all others being creations of their own mind.³
It’s our native-born simple knowledge if it’s lost or weak, it can be recovered and should never be easily surrendered to any external authority.
This knowledge may be left as it is and a life lived from there or it may be explored through to the transcendent principle, as with the great past spiritual traditions East and West or in the current radical-edge philosophies. It is the basis and the primal root of certainty, there can be no certainty without it, this is guaranteed.
