> "I think therefore, I am." [Refuting the claim of illusionists that 'nothing exists']

[Qatada]

:


The main question throughout philosophical history is; what percieves everything and what is everything? i.e. when you look at the computer screen, the light goes through your eyes, the retina and into your brain - which accepts the image and interprets it to what you see, so this is all based on the brain recieving stimuli and everything around it is just an illusion and may not even be real.


But what is it that knows that you have seen the image? What is 'you'? Some materialists would say this is your brain, but your brain is simply a piece of meat/proteins and the nerve impulses within it convert the light rays/image so that you can percieve it, and when the signal is sent to the brain - the brain converts the image so that you can see it. But what is 'you'?



The brain cannot see

When you see an image, your mind converts it so that 'you' can view it - while the brain by itself cannot view anything [what is in your brain is total darkness]. So to view that image, there has to be some 'viewer' who can interpret and then finally 'see' the light rays/image you saw [i.e. from the computer screen]. Someone could say that it is a 'viewer' within you who sees it all (sometimes described as 'the little man inside the man who views what you see'), but who views what the 'viewer/little man' sees? I.e. what is the final thing that is really 'you'. i.e. what is your Conscience?



Argument for: Why nothing exists

Due to this concept, some people said that nothing really exists, because everything evolves around the main part of the body - the brain. The brain senses everything and converts it so you understand life. When you touch the keyboard, signals from your nerves are sent to the brain telling you that you felt a touch, so your brain told 'you' that you felt something. When smell passes through your nose, your nerves recieve them and transform them into a signal which your brain recognises - so you know that a smell was present. Therefore it is all to do with the brain.

Some people tried to refute this by kicking a stone, and saying 'i exist - thats why i was able to move a rock which was outside my brain conscience'. But the 'illusionist' will say that your mind only sensed this rock based based on your eye which sent the signal to the brain that it is a rock, then 'you' interpreted that image to mean the rock. It doesn't necessarily mean a rock was there.'



Rejecting Reality altogether

Due to there not really being a clear explanation for these people of what this conscience really is, they decided to reject reality altogether. i.e. If we cannot understand or prove who or what this 'little man in the man' [who views what the human mind sees] is, then how can we say anything really exists? Because if they said a 'little man in the man' existed, then who views what the 'little man in the man' saw? (he also needs a mind.) They could say there is a 'little man in the little man' too, but this would go on forever until it would be infinite 'little men in little men' who view what the previous one saw. So there is still no satisfactory answer as to what is the final thing in the human/animal which percieves reality.


Therefore they say that nothing actually exists or that you're a small part of something greater, it could be that your just an attribute of something else, and this is what alot of sufis say when they argue in support of wahdat-ul-wujud. They say that the 'creation' is an attribute of Allah and everything is just an illusion but Him. Harun Yahya fell into this mistake too (he believes in Wahdat ul Wujud).

We discussed that here;
http://www.islamic-life.com/forums/r...-god-1225.html



But anyway, when some people deny that anything exists at all - there is a quick refutation to such a claim.

The answer is; If nothing existed at all, I would not be able to think. And because I am able to think, I am existant ... (I think, therefore I am.)


And the 'little man in the man' is the soul according to Islam which percieves the reality, without this soul - a person is unable to live (and percieve life.)

We've also discussed in a previous thread that scientists are unable to create life while knowing the major and minor details of the human/animal body systems and how they function - yet they are unable to produce a living creature - not even a small fly. We believe this is due to the soul being a part of the human body as a source for life.

[Assad]

JazakAllah for the post bro Qatada,

You have written it in a very appealing way and indeed it boosts my iman. We all have a RUH!

[Hassan_Abd_Allah]

"COGITO ERGO SUM" i.e. "I think, therefore I am" is undoubtedly my favourite statement :)

The one who made it happens to be my favourite philosopher as well :) DESCARTES ROCKS :D