Quote:
Originally Posted by de Silentio  [color=black]How are some of the examples you gave ‘real causes’. I don’t think anyone would think that the boulder falling on the hiker was caused by himself. Or is there something I am missing.
Physics includes consciousness as a possible ‘causal agency’ also. (if I undertand what you mean by causal agency) It is demonstrated in the two-slit experiment.
I can see how you can use Kant’s metaphysics to show this, but it is a real stretch, and unless you can make an extremely good argument to support yourself on this, I don’t think I can acccept what you are saying with any certainty. |
Re: (quote) "I don’t think anyone would think that the boulder falling on the hiker was caused by himself. Or is there something I am missing". (end quote)
The 'missing' something is a 'metaphysical' interpretation.
'Metaphysics' requires a shift in one's 'origination point'. The shift is from mundane physics (quantifiable phenomena) to a metaphysical interpretation of the sequence of events.
The 'metaphysical' interpretation includes the self as a participant in the chain of cause and effect.
Another example is that a person notices that when he or she is angry they then have a tendency to bump into things. The 'anger' is included as a 'causal' event of the 'bumps'.
Kant's metaphysics is not applicable.
The 'slits experiment' is only relevant in a remote type of way. Mundane physics would only be aware (as an example of metaphysics) of what was going on between the screen with the slit(s) and the board. Metaphysics would attempt to discern what was going on behind the slitted screen where mundane physics did not investigate.
Mundane physics has Man as an observer and metaphysics has Man as a participant/creator.
A perfect example of 'metaphysics' is Plato's 'Allegory of the Cave'. One interpretation of Plato's allegory is that Man watches 'images' projected on a screen and participates by 'naming' (supplying names for) the shapes and forms (i.e., mundane physics). Man does not see his own consciousness as projecting the images, but rather incorrectly experiences the images as having a source independent of the observer.
That's (above) a thumbnail sketch of metaphysics.
The bottom line (if there is one) is that Man exists in a convincing hologram of his/her consciousness and fails to recognize (consider) that his/her consciousness is a 'causal' agent (a 'first cause').
Descartes' philosophical statement, "I think, therefore I am" is more 'on point'. Descartes (one interpretation) sees 'thought' as being the creative cause of his existence. He 'thinks himself' into being. Descartes is NOT... born of a woman (but was),.. but was, rather, delivered into 'beingness' by 'thought'.
Thought and consciousness are the primary focus of metaphysics. Ask any 10 people who witness an event (a non-scientific event without strict lab conditions) and you will get 10 different interpretations. Each interpretation will be given according to the individualized contents of consciousness.
It all comes down to where one wishes to draw the line, in-so-far as investigation is concerned. Metaphysics includes the observer as a possible 'causal' event. I suppose that the primary issue of metaphysics is 'does thought embody a creative component that can and does affect the 3D reality'? Metaphysics says 'yes'!
The metaphysical point of view cannot be rationally argued because of the nature (consistently reproducible) of scientific proof. How-so-ever, metaphysics poses the following question..... "What is the inherent power of a consciousness that has been trained and disciplined (shut off internal dialogue) and focused"? and (continuing) "is control over matter one of the abilities (an emergent characteristic) of a disciplined consciousness"? In other words, my consciousness can send commands to my body.... "get up! Order a pizza!" and my body then moves through space/time and orders a pizza! So, the metaphysical question is... "what is the extent of the power of consciousness"?
How much more is consciousness than a mere 'observer'?
The answer is that consciousness is a potent creative force that Man has not, as yet, become familiar (with). Why? Because 'the powers of consciousness are 'emerging characteristics' that go way beyond 'self awareness' and mundane/general awareness.
Plato says it best.... (interpreted) 'as far as consciousness is concerned, Man is sleeping in a cave unaware that he (Man) is sourcing the phenomena that he observes.... he observes, names and records his observations utterly unaware of his higher powers'.
To simply 'dismiss' the possibility of the existence of these 'higher powers' (in the name of mundane science) is a severe self-imposed limitation.
"I think, therefore I AM"! plus, Plato's "Allegory of the Cave' says it all!
.