PHILOSOPHICAL EGGS

A student recently declared that philosophy and science, while interesting, simply can’t get very far given the “fragility” of our minds which, after all, are beset by all kinds of things, such as emotions, neuroses, defense mechanisms, fallacious reasoning, limited perspectives, and so on, which make prospects for gaining truth grim indeed.

I responded by pointing out that the fragility of the mind, while certainly a cause for concern, is a good reason for joining a community of inquiry so that we can hope to reduce our myopias by exchanging and testing ideas with others. It is also a good reason for embracing a self-correcting method with fallibility built into it. Science offers such a method since all its conclusions can be overturned in light of new evidence. The Socratic Method holds all conclusions as tentative as well. In both cases we can never be certain of our justifications. But it need follow from this we don’t have any knowledge. Indeed, that would seem highly unlikely given the vast and transformative results of both approaches. Seen this, the fragility of our kinds can be transformed into a strength with the help of the right method and community of inquiry.

But I also responded with a more general and self-referential point: Are claims about the mind being inherently fragile true? If so then perhaps the mind isn’t as inherently fragile as we think since it can accurately discern its own nature. And if they are not true then, again, the mind isn’t as fragile as it seems. Either way, there may be more hope to access truth than our often fragile minds may realize.