What Does It All Mean? Essay Example

Introduction

In the scope of trying to understand what philosophy means, Thomas Nagel provides his writtenintroductory, What Does It All Mean? Nagel clearly provides even the most elementary mind the basic understanding of what are the prime theories and factors that make up philosophy. In this short book, Thomas Nagel manages to provide an explanation of the classic philosophical problems of knowledge, mind-body problems, and ethical subjects that are most of the time overcomplicated. Thomas Nagel is a renowned philosophy professor provides a respectable introduction to the significant aspects of philosophical thinking. The topics within the book includes, death, justice, free will, free will, and other weighty subjects. Throughout his book, Nagel argues both that the life of individual is viewed objectively as unimportant, although viewed subjectively is essential, and it is the ability of people to recognize both the self-absorption and the ironic view of our lives. The complexities of philosophy is shrouded in fundamental questions of what does it all mean, and provides readers with a clear understanding that has perplexed even the most intellectual groups. This paper is to provide an analytical philosophical reasoning to Nagel’s works, specifically providing an explanation of what do people know, free will, and the meaning of life.

How Do We Know Anything?

The first line of the second chapter, Nagel writes, “if you think about it, the inside of you own mind is the only thing you can be sure of.” (Nagel 8) This incorporates whatever the individual believes in, including experiences, thoughts, feelings, and sense of self. Things that are further away from an individual’s inner thoughts and experiences are only through them that it reaches. This is meaning that a person knows that their surroundings, and thoughts they have been ingrained with through their perception is what true to them. Throughout his chapter, he seems to provide a debate with views of an extreme skeptic that views the world only exist through an individual mind, however, it seems in actuality this could not possibly be feasible.A person does not question what they ordinarily have no doubts about, but in actuality how does the individuals not believe their existence is only in their minds. Nagel discusses this within the chapter, if people truly know if anything is real and not a figment of their imagination. Nigel provides the reader to use their five senses, smell, sight, touch, taste, and hear in order to distinguish between imaginary and reality. What can be seen is that everyone’s perception is different, as two people can see one thing two different ways. Some people may view the Bible as a book, while others may seek the Bible as the word from God, not to discredit any perception, but both differ on how they view things. In accepting reality, is it right to question if it might be real or a dream? Nagel creates the questions, “if everything you took to be real wouldoutside was just a giant dream or hallucination, from which you will never wake up?” (Nagel 9)  The outside world can be a drawn up ruse that the individual has developed through experiences and based on individual senses. Nagel gives the consensus that in questioning one’s existence, it is not enough to depend on things seem to the individual, but that the mind is the only thing that exists. (Nagel 1)

This is practically in line with the theory of knowledge that predates back into the philosophical works of Plato and other great minds. The answer to do we actually exist is based on that the world as an individual sees it, is not how the world really is. An individuals’ perception of reality is their own created theory in order to account their experiences. Take for example, a group of blind men that are introduced to a giraffe, they can’t see the giraffe, but is told that the animal they are petting is a giraffe. Petting the giraffe, they could conclude that it was a horse, donkey, or any other large animal. They each believe their own account was the truth, and the other was wrong. However, from these accounts about the giraffe, there are no absolute truths, but their accounts are not false either. They all have their own perceptions, and believe what they perceive is the truth. Intuitively each individual has their own sense of logic and reason that they are able to perceived events as their absolute truth.

The view that things only exist in individuals mind is considered solipsism, “an extreme form of subjective idealism that denies that the human mind has any valid ground for believing in the existence of anything but itself.” (Britannica 1) More debatably it provides the perception that only self exists, seen as egotistic view where carries extreme skepticism where the only knowledge that exist is their own. While Nigel did not express the same sentiments, it is clear that in most cases that people feel that emotions, thoughts, and experiences are the only ones that matters and cannot be transcended. This skeptical view is extreme because,if the only knowledge you have to go own is your own then how do you know about the world outside your own domain.In order for people to argue that the world outside their view exist, Nagel points out that they rely on scientific theory or general principles to backed what reality is, however “science is just as vulnerable as perception.” (Nagel 14) In deducing Nagel’s writing, it seems that reality does exists, because if people were to believe they were in a dream, then they would eventually wake up. This is notInception,people do dream, and they eventually wake up. The world around them that people live in are reality, a real world where real people live in that each have different experiences.

Solipsism is impractical theory in which is baseless because it is egocentric view “my pain” is the only pain that can exist. It is hard to believe that the world only exist in someone’s mind because one individual does not know all about the world to create such perceptions. It the world is just an extension of someone’s own logic reasoning of their external world, then it could be easily done away with. Instead, we as individuals continue to go on the day by day, interacting with objects and people because we “believe” it to exist. This is based on sources of knowledge that includes empiricism, rationalism, authority, intuition, emotion, and most of all faith, not just religiously but trust in their ability or knowledge. In the end, the external physical reality is something that one individual cannot prove exists because it would be a cyclical question that would presenting an argument with no definite proof. People remember their experiences the way they want to, and people perceive the world around them through their own perceptions. Absolute realities do not exist, because people have to rely on what’s in their minds. It is not baseless to believe that of one’s own existence, or that the world around them is not real because that is what has been taught all their life.

Free Will

There is particularlymuch written about the topic of free will throughout philosophical intellectuals and several other discourses. Free will is a complex fundamental issue that has plagued many great minds throughout history. A general consensus of free will is that a person can only be free if they are at some point in their life able to do otherwise. In layman’s term, the personal has free will if in the past they were forced to do otherwise. There is the view of absolute free will in which a majority of people feel that humans are naturally free and a part of our human nature. The behavior that people choose to display is of their own coincidence.  There is a view that nothing is of free will and conditions and factors determine peoples’ behavior.  However, it can be viewed that both factors and individual ability allow for people to make free choices and predestined decisions. Nagel uses the example of going through the cafeteria line to choose between a peach and a piece of cake.The person had the opportunity to choose either one, however, they went with the cake. They regretted their decision, and which instead they would have chosen the peach. (Nagel 47) In his story, the question is not about someone being physically, socially, or politically restrained from making a decision, or about the opportunities one might have, but the nature of human behavior.In examining free will, Nagel brings up the debate on the ability of humans to choose their own behavior. For example, choosing to play video games, study for exams, or deciding to quit their jobs freely? In choosing to do something over the other does not satisfy the answer if humans have free will, but is it inevitable that people will always act in one way or a multitude of ways.  Free will cannot be applied when an individual has chosen to do something such as study for an exam in the past, or if other events prevented them from studying, but given the same circumstances would they have chosen to study. St. Thomas Aquinas defined free will as a rational appetite, where “presupposed powers to form and act upon rational desires…powers to deliberate and choose and to make practical judgments.” (Kane 22) In explaining Nagel’s rationale he believes that free will incorporates the human ability to act independently in the given moment with the same circumstances.

In breaking down what Nagel explains within his chapter, free will is determined by the open possibility that an individual has a choice thatcannot be made until it is actually chosen. In other words, there is no preconceived notion of what is to be chosen, except for things that are guaranteed to happen, such as Nagel points out the sun rising at a certain time. (Nagel 49) There is no open possibility with things that are determined in advance, the sun will go down at a certain hour, as well as the earth will continue to spin. When questioning the existence of free will, an individual’s choiceis not determined until there are no open possibilities. However, it can be argued that there are total of various factors that will predetermine someone’s choices. These factors include a person’s upbringing, family structure, experiences, education, and social circumstances of the decision that make some choices inevitable. As Nagel points out this perspective is considered determinism, a view in which every action and thought has already been determined in advance by a combination of external factors. Many philosophers such as Martin Luther and d’Holback rejected the idea of free will where humans are the originating cause of action. (Kane 40)  In contrast, it is impossible to know all the complexities of circumstances to try and make predictions of what will happen. Even with laws of nature that people perceived to govern everything in the world there are still chances what will determine will happen, will not happen. While it can be proven that people’s behaviors can be predicted, it does not mean that free will is taken away.Determinism provides the debate to rule out other possibilities because factors known or unknown are making the person make the decision. The student could not have studies, even if they thought they could. This theory goes along with fate in which, before an individual is born there choices and everything that happens to them are determined already.

Nagel furthers his discourse on free will with the action of praising or punishing those that are perceived to be predetermined actions. The possibility of determinism states that people should not be praised or blamed for their behavior. While other slightly disagree because people are still acting acted bad, or still did a good deed so they should receive the correct consequences. This perception is only if determinism is believed, however scientists have proven this to be untrue. While it is impossible not to prove or believe that some actions can be pre-determined, up until a certain point people are able to make their decisions. If determinism is true then people are not responsible for their actions, however if free will is true than people are responsible. As Kant believed, determinism and compatibles that believe free will goes hand in hand with determinism is “wretched subterfuge.” (Kant 189) He as well as others that believe determinism to be false because it does not account for humans’ natural conviction about the nature of moral responsibility.  Nagel points out that if determinism is true then circumstances beyond ourcontrol are responsible, but if fault nothing is responsible. (Nagel 57) This extensively means that there are no rooms for morality in human existence. If actions are predetermined, then mankind cannot be weigh down on moral responsibility. If that is the case then people could not be blamed for committing immoral crimes such as rape, murder, incest, pedophilia because their actions were predetermined.

Drawing into real-life examples, people do have a choice in their lives. People do have factors in which could hold them back or make them make decisions, where they feel has no other option. The concept of free will however, lends itself, that people have the freedom and ability to make their own fate. People have the capacity to gain more knowledge, seek out a higher education, and a better way of life. People have the choice to eat healthy or indulge on sweets which has consequences of gaining weight. If everything is predetermined then they would not be programs that help people change their life, such as schools, gyms, jobs, rehab, jail, and other institutions. Nagel takes the position of believing in casual determination in which things just happened, which does not threaten free will, only certain event does. While he does not wholeheartedly agree with that conclusion, there are implications in which people’s decision are the effect by external circumstances. It is no clear indication that people choices are not determined, or if people really feel they could have made another choice.In some instances, choice is a philosophical illusion where there is no clear logical answer. However it can be viewed as a result of the causal process in which an individual makes a choice. Aristotle said, “when acting is up to us, so is not acting.” (1915:1113b6)” (Kane 32) His quote is to reiterate the belief that free will is the power to act otherwise, in the moment it is taken place.

The Meaning of Life

The meaning of life is a philosophical question which has boggled the minds since the beginning of time. Many great minds such as, Plato, Aristotle, Socrates, Epicurus, Kant, others have weighed in on man’s purpose in life. Many such as Socrates and Plato believed that it was the purpose of humans to gain knowledge in order to be prepared for the next life in the ideal form of Good. Others believed that it was for living a life of virtue, being self-sufficient, and seeking pleasure, but in reality the answers more complex. Wrapped in religious and philosophical conceptions of society, existence, consciousness, and overall happiness. The answer includes many factors that Nagel discusses such as free will, life and death, good and evil, and the existence of one or more Gods, an afterlife, and the ideal of a soul. Scientists as well as theologians, have provided contributions that range from empirical facts on the universe to explain how life came about, and how the life of men is developed through morality in a pursuit of happiness.

In Thomas Nagel’s chapter, “The Meaning of Life”, he comes to the consensus that life is absurd. Life is meaningless, in the next centuries people living now will most likely be dead, and the goals and achievements that many strive for will not be permanent. The day to day tasks of our daily routine do not satisfy the resolution of what is the meaning of life as a whole. While an individual might matter to their family and friends and vice versa, it does not provide the answer to why life is basically meaningless, according to Nagel. Nagel believes that life is perceived by humans as a subjective and objective, in which people view their life warranted because they feel it is important. On the hand, life does not really matter because humans cannot justify why it matters. Religious conceptions of life are interjected in this argument because many feel that the ideal of God answers life purpose as it is viewed as, “the meaning of life comes from fulfilling the purpose of God, who loves you, and seeing Him in eternity.” (Nagel 99) It is not appropriate to question why does that matter, as it made it a point that the presence of God(s) explains why humans are put on Earth. This notion can be applied to most religions as seeing their purpose is to fulfil their virtuous, and overall good measure to be good and be good to others.

Nagel further debates on why life is meaningless by offering people a constellation opinion, that people should not mind having a meaningless life. The problem is, how does Nagel measure which person’s life is meaningless?  Is a person that is living on a modest income, working, and supporting their family, but content and happy, any less meaningless than an actor, activist, or a billionaire that is unhappy?  Nagel rejects the notion of God being an end-point to the question of life, and disregards that God being unexplainable cannot provide a full explanation to a complex question.  The meaning of life is based on the natural order of things that are beyond man’s comprehension.

Each individualperson provides something to this ecosystem that humans are living in. The contributions that people make big, and small, moves societies forward to progress into a more advanced society. The meaning of life seems to be making it better for the next generation. In a hundreds year, society may have advanced that they are able to cure all known diseases, solves the world’s problems, and be so technological advanced that they finally have flying cars, and homes on Mars. If people were to look it as they do not mean anything to the bigger picture, than they are taking away the chain of events that exist throughout each cause and effect. What one person does, does have an effect. It is not always big and not always small, but one person can change society. Look at Rosa Parks, Gandhi, Martin Luther King Jr, Abraham Lincoln, George Washington, Ben Franklin, President Obama, and countless others, whose contributions have changed entire lives to move society forward. It is groundless and ridiculous for Nagel to believe that just because he cannot provide a conclusive answer that life is meaningless. The answers to the meaning of life are developed from the natural order, religious conceptions, science, soul centric, and the duality of good and evil where choices have consequences in an afterlife. The meaning of life, is a question that will continued to be asked. The focus of people living day to day is to continue to have goals, Friedrich Nietzsche believed, “life is worth living only if there are inspiring goals, or goals that inspire to live.” (Reginster 23) Nagel also agrees that people should not mind that there life is meaningless as long as they do not take themselves too seriously that in the bigger schemes of things they might not matter, but life is how an individual makes it.

Conclusion

Thomas Nagel’s What Does It All Mean? is a well written explanatory book on deep fundamental philosophical issues that have and will continue to be debated? His book provides a clear argument in his perspective on elements that might confuse the most intelligent mind. By first questioning do we really exist, Nagel reduces reality to mean that it exist because of our own individual perceptions of reality.In actuality, no two experiences will be the same and the way in which we see the external world is constantly changing because we are constantly interacting with it. Free will is important, while he proposes how determinism threatens the assumption of freedom, he provides that a casual determinist view in which we are free to make decisions, but in some instances there are elements in which we are more susceptible to make certain decisions. The meaning of life is a complex question in which is what people believe to be true based on own innate beliefs. We feel our world subjectively and objectively in which we see our lives are the product of luck/fate/, or in some cases chance, and our lives are warranted because they are important. In reality, life is what we perceive, our decisions are causal process where we choose otherwise, and the meaning of life is what people choose to make it.

Works Cited

Kane, Robert. The Significance of Free Will. Oxford University Press. USA. 1998. Print.

Kant, I. “(1788) The Critique of Practical Reason” W. Beck, Indianapolis, IN: Bobbs-Merrill, 1956.

Nagel, Thomas. What Does It All Mean? A Very Short Introduction to Philosophy. Oxford University Press. USA. 1987. Print.

Reginster, Bernard. The Affirmation of Life: Nietzsche on Overcoming Nihilism. Harvard University Press. 2006. Print.

“Solipsism.” Encyclopedia Britannica. n.d. Web. 27 Jan 2014. http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/553426/solipsism