CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION

A. Background of the Study The Allegory of the Cavemen, a symbolism used by Plato through his Republic to illustrate his Theory of Forms, is a unique approach illustrating genuine knowledge and the misconception of obtaining it. In his dialogue with Glaucon, Socrates describes a group of people who have lived their entire lives chained in such a way that they have had no choice but to face the wall in front of them. Socrates describes how behind these men is a pathway passed through by all sorts of objects and structures, and further beyond, a fire that lit passed the pathway, casting the shadows of the passersby unto the wall faced by the cavemen. With no other choice, the cavemen face this wall of shadows and misconceive it to be reality per se rather than recognize it to be merely the silhouette of it. The Allegory of the Cavemen reflects Platos World of Forms, as it presents a tangible example of the error in perception. Contrary to empirical belief, Plato explains through his dialogue that despite the fact that sensation may indeed be a medium of attaining information through our many experiences, to be able to grasp genuine knowledge, one must do so through knowledge of the World of Forms.

Our perceptions of the material world around us, is based on appearance alone, which may lead us astray from the truth. In the case of the cavemen, they had no choice but to see the shadows on the wall, and from this perception was lead to think that this was already all that there was to know. This goes to show that what is observed and absorbed through the senses is not, or at least, may not, be the truth, and it is only when we break out of the shackles of ignorance that we would be able to look towards the fire, step out of the shadows and into the light, and be able to genuinely understand the world in all its truth- which is exactly what happened in the latter part of the Allegory. Once the freed caveman had seen the light, he considered himself lucky, and pitied the still imprisoned cavemen that had been left behind. He then decides to return to the cave to enlighten them of his discovery, but is rejected by them out of fear and misunderstanding of this new, seemingly unconventional, perspective. In his attempt to show them the truth, and due to the disdain they have towards such radical thinking, the enlightened one is eventually killed, together with his ideas of looking into the light. This part of the analogy represents the Philosophers role in society- to enlighten the prisoners among us, who are tethered by the chain of ignorance that stops them from looking into the light- the World of Forms- and seeing the truth. It parallels as well the cavemans going up to our journey to the intelligible, reflecting the relevance of education and in consequence- knowledge.

Plato discusses thoroughly his standards for knowledge, distinguishing it from the standpoints of validity and truth-value. The standard for knowledge is represented through the satisfaction of three criterion, namely, as a Justified True Belief; and plays a vital role in the Analogy of the Cavemen working on the premise that the more one would know, the more he would be able to act on or understand better the World of Forms. The cavemen who are chained share a common view, a false knowledge if you will, of the truth. They believed that the shadows moving in front of them were already a true image of the world rather than merely its shadow. Though they did have basis, their ignorance stopped them from seeing the truth. Their belief may have been justified, but nonetheless un-true, which given the standard of the Justified True Belief mentioned earlier, would entail that it is not knowledge. In summary, Plato assumes that those chained, facing the shadows know nothing, and from their lack of knowledge, he concludes that anything that sprouts from their false beliefs should not be considered genuine as well. From the knowledge they may conceive to know to the happiness they may claim to have, given all that has been said, both are considered to be illegitimate due to the false premise that they are argued on. Indeed, the assumption to how anything that sprouts from a false premise-as the fruit of the poisonous tree- must somehow be tainted in its own respect may have basis. However, if one were to take this to mean that he who is ignorant may no

longer be happy, that one presupposes genuine happiness is bound by truth rather than there reality the object of his observation faces. Returning to where we had begun, The Allegory of the Cavemen concludes that the chained men to be incapable of happiness, owing to the fact that whatever basis they may misconceive to have that would have brought them to whatever the conclusion would be false. Throughout his other works, Plato reveals the value to be given to truth, however, in spite of its normative standard, perhaps the possibility of attaining things genuinely, particularly genuine happiness, would still be feasible. Venturing through Platos Allegory of the Cavemen with the application of such a notion may open new doors, especially in terms of ones understanding of knowledge and happiness.

B. Statement of the Problem The purpose of this study is to analyze the capability of cavemen of attaining happiness despite the absence of truth in order to show whether it is the absolute truth or the subjective reality that serves as its basis.

For the purpose of discussing the problem the following general questions are to be addressed:

1. What is Happiness? 2. What are Rationalism and Empiricism, their relationship to each other, and the role they play in this discussion? 3. Considering the difference between Truth and Reality, what could be the new notion for cavemen and happiness?

C. Significance of the Study The significance of this study is to discover the rightful value of truth in the acquisition of happiness. Undoubtedly, as discussed by Plato through his various works, truth has a vital role the achieving of genuine happiness. From the normative standard alone, the recognition of truth is apparently necessary. However, considering as well the regulative aspects each individual faces day by day and its subjectivity, would an absolute truth undeniably be necessary for one to achieve genuine happiness? This research will be done in review of the factors to be considered in our analysis of happiness. Through a step-by-step breakdown of these conditions, we will define each one of these factors in our aim to have a better-rounded understanding of cavemen and their capability of achieving happiness.

D. Scope and Delimitation of the Study In this study, the researcher aims to provide an analysis of Platos Allegory of the Cave. By adopting other philosophies and theories, and applying them to the Allegory, the researcher works to supply evidence to how indeed cavemen, despite the lack of truth, would still be able to achieve genuine happiness based on their perception of truth, alone. The study will be considering multiple factors in the acquisition of happiness aside from truth alone, including concepts and ideas taken

from other philosophies and the sciences, to be able to have a better understanding of the cavemans competence. This study is not made to disprove Platos theory per se. Rather, it is made merely to point out alternative results that may come about with the consideration of other factors outside those that were mentioned through the Republic.

E. Review of Related Literature and Related Studies Evans, Dylan. Placebo: The Belief Effect. London: Harper Collins. (2003) The book in gist is an analysis of the power of belief, independent of truth-value. It is thoroughly discussed through empirical evidence how, despite the used of placebos, or dummy-drugs, the healing process would still take effect. This explains this phenomenon by emphasizing how ones belief, irrelevant whether it be true or not, would be enough to achieve a genuine outcome. Research of the Placebo Effect proves that despite the lack of actual medication, the healing process is triggered 30% of the time. This goes to show that, in spite of the ignorance that one may have that would lead him to mistake a placebo to be actual medicine, an authentic reaction could still be achieved.

Markie, Peter. "Rationalism vs. Empiricism." Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/rationalism-empiricism/ (accessed 2012) This webpage offers a thorough discussion of Rationalism and Empiricism, their respective premises and the common ground they share. Rationalism is defined to believe the primary source of knowledge to be reason, and recognizes experience only as a stimulant that prompts innate knowledge to be recognized. Empiricism claims the senses and ones experiences to be the primary mean of achieving knowledge, and is only applied with reason only after the initial sensation. By first explaining these two schools of thought, we aim to understand more wholly the Allegory of the Cave, by identifying the premise that it is founded on, and the

arguments against it. Ultimately as well, one will be able to better anchor him through this epistemological journey.

Plato. "Book VII-VIII." In Plato: the Republic, 531d-534e. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.(1982) Book VII and VIII of the Republic is where the Allegory of the Cavemen is first introduced. The two books mainly illustrate Platos argument to how the ignorant cannot say they attain knowledge nor happiness granted that the premise to such claims is false. The shadows and echoes, that were respectively viewed and heard by the cavemen, served as their only reference of the external world. Plato argues how these echoes and shadows cannot be considered knowledge of the world because they are merely an outline of it, rather than the world per se. Ultimately, Plato concludes that, rather than the world we experiences through our senses, it is our recognition and understanding of the World of Forms that will lead us to the attainment of knowledge, and genuine happiness.

Sartre, Jean-Paul . "Existentialism is a Humanism." Lecture, Public Lecture from Mariet, Marie. (1946) The work of Jean-Paul Sartre emphasizes the human being as an existence before essence being, rather than the essence before existence. As a being for himself, Sartre argues against pre-determinists claims, such as that of Christianity and their notion of man as the likeness and image of God, and that of Atheism and their claim of a human nature, and asserts absolute agent of our own actions, ones fate and identity is up to his own doing and responsibility. In consequence of Sartres claim of the autonomy of one being, he also theorizes how reality is subject to ones own perception of it. It is through what a man does that he will be defined, and it is through his experiences that he would shape his reality.

Sartre, Jean. Sketch for a Theory of the Emotions. London: Methuen & Co., 1962. In Sartres Philosophy of Emotions, he claims that emotion is misunderstood to be a hindrance in the path of reason. Through his philosophy, Sartre describes the emotion and the one with the emotion through the subject-object relationship.

As we attempt to comprehend the external world, we as the subject objectify these things. Emotion is no different. Sartre argues how when we fear, we fear something, and through this formula one may argue that these is still an object to out comprehension through emotion. Rather than it, emotion, being different from reason, these feelings are nothing more than ones way of conceiving an object. Sartre claims that in ones desperation of describing the rush he may feel, he is forced to apply the title of emotion to it to be able to, one way or another, find comfort in knowing.

F. Conceptual Framework The philosophical framework we will be adopting in this study are epistemological concepts such as Sartres Existentialist theories and his theory on Happiness. A general discussion of the philosophies on happiness will be explored through the first chapter to be able to consider both sides of the argument in our analysis. Through the second chapter we will further define the foundations of these philosophies by analyzing the Empiricist vs. Rationalist dilemma. The Existentialist theory will be used to address the problem that is revealed through the first two chapter- a dilemma to what happiness may truly be.

10

Schematic Presentation of the Conceptual Framework

Philosophy of Happiness

The Empiricist and Rationalist Approach

Implications to Platos notion on Happiness in the Allegory of the Cavemen

11

G. Operative Definition of Terms

Happiness- The point of discussion; this term will be recognized as the emotion one feels at the point of satisfaction, pleasure, or contentment. Empiricism- The approach that theorizes that all knowledge is obtained from the sense-experiences. Coming off the premise of the Tabula Rasa or the clean slate principle, it is through the five senses that one would be able acquire knowledge of the external world. Rationalism- Contrasting the Empiricist approach, this theorizes how it is through Reason that knowledge is acquired. Through the acquisition of a priori knowledge, ne would be able to find footing, and undoubtedly find a justified true belief. Truth- This term is used to refer to a priori and absolute truths that exist despite human perception. Truth refers to what is rather than what is perceived through the senses. Reality- We make use of this term as the acknowledgment of external world through ones subjective perception. Reality is utilized to reflect how one

recognizes the world he finds himself in, whether or not his understanding would be considered right or wrong. Placebo Effect- The medical phenomena where beneficial symptoms that cannot be attributed to the dummy drug used are exhibited due to the patients mere belief

12

in the treatment. The ethical concerns of its use will not be considered in our search to define happiness.

H. Methodology The study will analyze Platos claim to how happiness is unachievable to those who are ignorant, or those who do not grasp the truth. By factoring in the conditions he places on the cavemen through his Allegory, and through experimentation including other factors, such as Existential and Empiricist philosophies, the study will aim to see how the understanding of acquiring happiness, in terms of the cavemen, would be affected. In our aim to prove how happiness is not bound to the world of Forms, we will be gathering and comparing both scientific and philosophical articles.

I. Division of the Thesis: Each chapter in this thesis is made to address problem deductively. Through Chapter I, by first addressing the general dilemma of defining happiness, the chapter will discuss various philosophies on it, to be able to paint a well rounded understanding of it. The problem of which of these theories should be adopted would reveal itself, and be addressed in Chapter II. Through the second chapter of this thesis the discussion on happiness will be taken further by analyzing the foundations of the philosophies discussed in the previous chapter.

13

In Chapter III, the researcher will factor in other philosophies and findings to be able to find the affect on the initial philosophy of Plato. Here, the case of the cavemen of the Allegory will be applied with Sartres Existential philosophy, to be able to understand this scenario through an Empiricist-esque perspective. Through Chapter IV, after analyzing Happiness and its implications, the researcher will provide alternative understandings of the Allegory of the Cavemen that may be adopted through the study of philosophy.

14

CHAPTER II

HAPPINESS AND FALLIBILLITY

In the world of Philosophy, the word Happiness is used to refer to more than just ones personal feelings of enjoyment, cheer, or gayety. Perhaps initially, the term would seem nothing more than the physical attributes we associate to being happy. Though once we take a step closer, it is then we will we realize how it carries much more value in its role in various philosophical concerns, particularly, Ethics. The concept of happiness is anything but simple, and as mentioned earlier, when it comes to its ethical aspects, there is no exemption. Through this principle, Happiness is questioned further from multiple perspectives. From the questioning of its authenticity, basis, motive, all the way to the value of its effect; what seemed to be nothing more than a banal, trivial part of ones everyday life reveals a much more complex side. Adding to its complexity is the consideration as well of an interminable number of philosophies on happiness that do share their own points as well but notably contradict the points of contemporary notions on happiness. When all is said and done, the philosopher-to-be is then faced with the dilemma that is painted with ceaseless approaches to the subject at hand. And it is in this light that this chapter is given birth to; to somewhat address the issue. Not in such a way to sway the reader to agree with the belief of the researcher, but rather to acknowledge the fact

15

that there is more than just one side to the philosophy of happiness, and to take into consideration these other approaches. We will be approaching happiness, first off, as an emotion, which according to Sartre is not an opposing force to reason, but rather a form of it. Emotion after all reflects a form consciousness of our world. After all, given Sartres notion of the subject-object relationship of things, when we emote, we do so toward something. When we fear, we fear something, and in relationship to this study, when one is happy, he feels so toward something. Emotion then, in general, is understood to be a manner of apprehending the world, yet in a different fashion. It is given rise when one is incapable of fully comprehending the object of his interest, so he then substitutes the action of fully comprehending it by coming to a compromise wherein the unintelligible is put under a different category which may be understood. This new category is what we recognize to be emotion. To be able to have a well-rounded understanding of emotion in general, and happiness in particular, we are somewhat obliged to at least factor in other philosophies other than that we have already found ourselves to practice, in our attempt of being impartial. Though, in the face of it being close to impossible to discuss each individual philosophy down to the last dot, the researcher instead has chosen to adopt only a few from the many that he feels would best illustrate the

16

vast spectrum of the philosophies in general, and that would best reflect respectively the Rationalist and Empiricist1 approaches.

A.

Platonic Happiness

Plato defines Happiness, referring to it through the Greek term Eudaimonia in terms of internal benefits, unlike the consequentialist approach and the philosophies similar to it that base happiness off the reaping of external rewards. Eudaimonia to him does not refer to the feeling of euphoria per se, or to the spontaneous moments of glee, but rather does it do so toward a notion that is founded on the premise happiness is rooted to is much more than the physical characteristics it is expressed through. That in order to be genuinely happy, one would need to be in accord through a balanced heart- one whose parts are expert to his own distinct function. It is the harmonious individual and it is he who is contented within himself who is genuinely happy for it is only through such selfreliance that one would be truly, securely happy.2 If one were to be happy based on external goods, then his happiness would be bound to change in view of the ever-changing material world. Expounded on through The Republic, those who thrive off materials (Material-Lovers, MoneyLovers, etc.) are described as people who receive their love from the physical

"Empiricism vs. Rationalism." CogWeb: Cognitive Cultural Studies. http://cogweb.ucla.edu/CogSci/Empiricism.html (accessed January 16, 2012). 2 "Book VII-VIII." In Plato: the Republic, 531d-534e. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 1982.
1

17

world, which from a Utilitarianistic perspective, pertains to the avoidance of pain and the gain of pleasure. Pain and pleasure however come in degrees, and are therefore matters of opinion, and cannot be considered knowledge. It must also be considered how happiness that is based on the external world, which is an ever changing one, is solely contingent on it. Taking this into consideration then, the type of happiness established off it may one day change into something unsatisfying.3

B. Aristotelian Happiness Through Aristotles own words, [i]t is for the sake of happiness that we all do everything else we do. Here, happiness is recognized to be more than just the physical experience of feeling such, but as the ultimate goal of human action.4 He establishes two conditions, namely, first, how happiness must be an end in itself, and not a mere mean to a higher calling; and secondly, it must be intrinsically good. Eudaimonia5, the Greek term used to refer to happiness, may be achieved through a life of virtue. It is reason after all that separates humanity from plants and animals, and it is therefore our function as human beings to be reasonable. Our desire to acquire happiness then is not an excuse to commit nor omit certain
Ibid.
4

Anthony Kenny, and Charles Kenny. "The Philosophy of Happiness." In Life, liberty and the pursuit of utility: happiness in philosophical and economic thought, Aristotle on Happiness, 13-17. Exeter: Imprint Academic, 2006. 5 Rosalind Hursthouse."Virtue Ethics (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)." Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/ethics-virtue/ (accessed January 21, 2012).

18

actions, for all actions must be done through virtue. This reflects as well that it is not enough to merely think virtuously or whatever to that effect, we must act virtuously as well, for it is when we do that we reflect reason, and it is through reason that we are virtuous, and in consequence, are pleasured.6 Aristotle stresses however that this pleasure is not the same as the physical pleasures we may experience through the senses. In the latter mentioned however, Aristotle comes to their defense as to argue how sensual pleasures are not all that evil, for like all things, as long as they too are handled through virtue, particularly, the virtue of Temperance7, it would then too be good.8

C. Happiness through Sensual Pleasures

a. Epicurus Hedonism Rooted from the Greek word hedone9, which means delight, the hedonists argue how Happiness is the search for external pleasures. Here, all forms of pleasure, no matter what the cause, whether it may be good or evil, is good.

Nichomachean ethics. Indianapolis, N.Y.: Bobbs-Merrill, 1962. Ibid. 8 Anthony Kenny, and Charles Kenny. "The Philosophy of Happiness." In Life, liberty and the pursuit of utility: happiness in philosophical and economic thought, Aristotle on Happiness, 13-17. Exeter: Imprint Academic, 2006. 9 Andrew Moore. "Hedonism", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2011 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = <http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2011/entries/hedonism/>.
7 6

19

We maintain that pleasure is the beginning and end of a blessed life. We recognize it as our primary and natural good. Pleasure is our starting point whenever we choose or avoid anything and it is this we make our aim, using feeling as the criterion by which we judge of every good thing.10

However, this is far from saying that Epicurus is purely pleasure driven and blinded, for one way or another, he agrees with Aristotle that reason is still a vital factor in ones pursuit of happiness. His adoption of Hedonism is different from an absolute voluptuary practice where one is absolutely devoted to pleasure, and is in fact one that still reflects virtue; which is rooted to the avoidance of the opposite of pleasure- pain. In the pursuit of ataraxia, pleasure and the evasion from aporia, pain, the main principle behind the Hedonist practice; reason is still observable as it takes into consideration of the consequences of ones actions. So if passing on an opportunity to experience pleasure in order to avoid a great pain, then it would only be good to not accept the said opportunity. Reversely, if some pain must be sacrificed in order to acquire greater pleasure, then that too would be considered a good act.11 Initially, Hedonism may be frowned on for it seems to be no more than a pleasure seeking way of life; much confused with a voluptuous, pleasure devotee. However it must be pointed out that in their pursuit of happiness, virtue still plays

Anthony Kenny, and Charles Kenny. "The Philosophy of Happiness." In Life, liberty and the pursuit of utility: happiness in philosophical and economic thought, Aristotle on Happiness, 13-17. Exeter: Imprint Academic, 2006.. 11 Ibid.
10

20

its role in the controlling of the satisfaction of ones desires. There is also its role in the consideration of some pleasures and pains over others. b. Carvaka The Carvaka is an Indian philosophy that greatly reflects that of the previously discussed Hedonist approach. This Naturalist worldview however differs from it as it works off the premise that there is no afterlife, which would therefore entail that it is the happiness of the moment that matters most. That being the case, pleasure, without limit or qualification, is recognized as the principle aim of living.12

D. Utilitarianistic Happiness Utilitarianism prioritizes what will provide the Greatest Happiness for the Greatest Number. Like Aristotle, this Philosophy identifies happiness as well as our ultimate goal, however, it differs however for it is not the happiness of the individual per se that is taken into consideration but the happiness of the general community.13 Nature has placed mankind under the governance of two sovereign masters, pain and pleasure. It is for them alone to point out what we ought to do, as well as to determine what we shall do. On the one hand, the standard of right and wrong, on the other the chain of causes and effects, are fastened to their throne. They govern us in all we do, in all we say, in all we think: every effort we can make to

Abigail Turner-Lauck Wernicki. " Lokyata/Crvka Indian Materialism [Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy]." Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. http://www.iep.utm.edu/indmat/ (accessed January 18, 2012). 13 Anthony Kenny, and Charles Kenny. "The Philosophy of Happiness." In Life, liberty and the pursuit of utility: happiness in philosophical and economic thought, Aristotle on Happiness, 13-17. Exeter: Imprint Academic, 2006..
12

21

throw off our subjection, will serve but to demonstrate and confirm it.14

The Utilitarian approach to happiness however should not be dismissed as a mere barbaric understanding of justice for it must be pointed out that it is not only sensual pleasures that is prioritized. As mentioned in the quote above, and through the general principle behind this philosophy, it is the Greatest Happiness that it advocates, and this happiness, and in effect the pleasures that are involved, may indeed be physically sensual, but may as well be so many other things such as kindness, and faith. Whatever that act or mean may be, as long as it serves to acquire the greatest happiness for the greatest number, then that act or mean may be deemed to be good.15

E. Happiness as a Gift of God Through the eyes of the religiously faithful, everything is obtained as a divine grace, from God. And just as Aristotle did, through this perspective it is recognized how happiness is as well the supreme good. A dilemma presents itself however given how one is taught to look forward to death in order to be able to enter the gates of heaven. Given this premise this would entail that one is taught to accept and in fact be thankful for his mortality,

Ibid Anthony Kenny, and Charles Kenny. "The Philosophy of Happiness." In Life, liberty and the pursuit of utility: happiness in philosophical and economic thought, The Greatest Happiness of the Greatest Number, 2532. Exeter: Imprint Academic, 2006.
15 14

22

and in effect, be willing to leave his life behind, and in consequence, at least in theory, leave the happiness he finds within it as well. St. Thomas Aquinas addresses this conundrum, explaining how pleasure will be found in God, after death. We look forward then as mortals, not because we are happy with death, but rather because we are happy in hope to reunite in Gods Kingdom. 16 F. Consensus The survey of philosophies, from Hedonist to Virtue Ethics, illustrates properly the vast spectrum of the philosophy of happiness. There was hardly a time that two philosophers would completely agree with the belief of another, but in spite of this visible difference, it should be noted that at one point, they did agree on one particular note; namely on how achieving happiness is the motive to all actions. Again, this chapter is not written to sway the reader to decide to reject the Platonic beliefs reflected through the Republic, rather it is a mere collection of philosophies that aims to aid in our attempt to be fair and impartial throughout the course of the discussion. In spite of this intention however, the question remains; which theory of happiness should be adopted? And more importantly, why?

Anthony Kenny, and Charles Kenny. "The Philosophy of Happiness." In Life, liberty and the pursuit of utility: happiness in philosophical and economic thought, Happiness as a Gift of God, 21-24. Exeter: Imprint Academic, 2006.
16

23

CHAPTER III EPISTEMOLOGICAL DILEMMA

Philosophy has discussed in so many ways, so many things in its pursuit of attaining the wisdom that recognizes through its very name; love for wisdom. From the very beginning, with the Pre-Socratic philosophers, such as Anaximenes, for example, who theorized air as the primary substance of which all things are made17, or Thales who opinioned how it was rather water than air18; one can observe how members of humanity had attempted to define its essence. A list as long as ones arm can be made for the number of theories made in an attempt to define the world around us, and the components we find within it. Through the Philosophy of Law and Justice, one attempts to understand how to know how to live by the principle of jurisprudence19; Ethics as one aims to identify the values ones actions hold, and the considerations to be made in the making of it20, to be able to define best whether it be good or bad; and even the

Daniel W. Graham." Anaximenes [Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy]." Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. http://www.iep.utm.edu/anaximen/ (accessed January 21, 2012). 18 Patricia OGrady. " Thales of Miletus [Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy]." Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. http://www.iep.utm.edu/thales/ (accessed January 21, 2012). 19 Kenneth Einar Himma. "Law, Philosophy of [Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy]." Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. http://www.iep.utm.edu/law-phil/ (accessed January 21, 2012). 20 Daniel W. Graham. " Ethics [Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy]." Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. http://www.iep.utm.edu/ethics/ (accessed January 21, 2012).
17

24

Philosophy of Beauty or Art, better known as Aesthetics, as one strived to understand the meaning of beauty21. In spite of the consideration of the characteristics that effectually make each of the previously mentioned philosophies distinct from each other, one must recognize the common ground they share, just as they do with so many others. Despite their visible differences, at its core one will recognize that philosophies in general have a shared essence, namely, their nature to attain knowledge on a given subject, or put simply, their purpose to simply know. However, one cannot voyage unto the journey for knowledge without knowing what it is one is exactly looking for. After all, how is one to attain knowledge without truly knowing how to know that he knows?22 In this light, questions such as What is Knowledge?, How is knowledge acquired?, To what extent is it possible for a given subject to be known?, and of course How do we know what we know? surface; and it is at this point that Epistemology, the Philosophy of Knowledge, comes into play. It is not to be mistaken however, that Epistemology is limited to only the four question stated, though it is contestable to argue that they capture the gist of the philosophy in general. And in our argument in defense of cavemen and happiness, we will be putting our focus particularly on the second question-the acquisition of knowledge.

Barry Hartley Slater. " Aesthetics [Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy]." Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. http://www.iep.utm.edu/aestheti/ (accessed February 21, 2012). 22 Edward Stein. "Introduction." In Without good reason: the rationality debate in philosophy and cognitive science,14-15. Oxford: Clarendon Press ;, 1996.
21

25

What the primary source of knowledge is has long been on dispute, with mainly two opposing schools of thought leading the controversy- the Rationalists and the Empiricists. 23 Essentially, the former claims that it is through Reason that knowledge is acquired, for it is through it and it alone that one is able to find footing, and certainly say that one undoubtedly knows; a notion that is reflected through philosophies such as Descartes Meditations24. The latter, the Empiricists, on the other hand, work on the premise that it is through the senses- ones experiences- that he acquires knowledge. The following sections are devoted to the defining of both respective theories to be able to have a clearer understanding of the Allegory of the Cave, and the arguments against it.25 Through the course of the discussion, we will be able to form a better idea of their individual points by identifying their respective premises, and in effect, be able to form our own as well, by anchoring ourselves to either of the two schools of thought, through the epistemological journey we embark on.

Markie Peter, "Rationalism vs. Empiricism", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2008 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = <http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2008/entries/rationalism-empiricism/>. 24 David Banach. "An Outline of Descartes's Meditations on First Philosophy." Saint Anselm College : Saint Anselm College. http://www.anselm.edu/homepage/dbanach/medol.htm (accessed January 18, 2012). 25 Book VII-VIII. In Plato: the Republic, 531d-534e. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 1982.
23

26

A. Rationalism

Through Platos Allegory of the Cave, shared through the Republic, we are introduced to a scenario where cavemen are restricted in such a way that they have no choice but to face a wall polluted with shadows, which they eventually acknowledge to be reality. It is illustrated through this analogy how behind these cavemen is a pathway where various bodies and structures, such as people, animals, and objects; pass through. Further beyond is a fire that shines past through these bodies, inevitably casting their shadows unto the wall that the cavemen face. The cavemen, as they had no other choice but face the wall in front of them, mistook these shadows for reality rather than merely the silhouette or outline of it. As the parable continues, we are told of how one of these men was able to break free from his chains, and when faced with the real world, realized what reality truly is, and how what he had perceived as reality in the past was merely, quite literally and figuratively, a mere trace of it.26 It is through this allegory that Plato explains the Rationalist World of Forms. From this perspective, the notion to how knowledge is primarily acquired through reason, rather than sensual experience, serves as premise. 27 What initially differentiates this theory of thought from the other is its method wherein the only criterion in the pursuit of truth is not based on the senses but rather on intuition and deductive reasoning.

Ibid. Marc Cohen. "Theory of Forms." UW Faculty Web Server. http://faculty.washington.edu/smcohen/320/thforms.htm (accessed January 13, 2012).
27 26

27

Given the senses visible and timid flaws, they are considered to be misleading, and are therefore rejected as a reliable source for knowledge. In its place, the Rationalists identify knowledge as a priori, or prior to experience. It is not bound by what one feels, hears, sees, smells, nor tastes, but is an independent, innate part of each individual. At the outset, it may be difficult to fathom such a practice where experiences are taken halfheartedly. The expression Seeing is Believing alone illustrates the value we entrust to the senses, and to disregard them completely may seem close to be, not only unreasonable, but impossible as well. Despite the initial indifference one may have towards this notion, one must eventually admit that the rejection of the senses does have basis. After all, the fruit of the poisonous tree bears no fruit28, and, following this principle, to invest ones confidence on an unstable source may in fact be just as, or even more so, unreasonable. However, through cases such as Descartes Cogito Ergo Sum, he is able to prove that it is indeed possible to acquire knowledge in spite of the neglect of the senses. It is through his Meditations that one is able to legitimately and undoubtedly acquire knowledge, particularly of his own existence, most commonly known through the maxim I think therefore I am. Consequently, we must acknowledge the validity of the Rationalist way of thinking. The rejection of the senses is in truth legitimate, and through the Meditations it is proven as well that knowledge is still obtainable. In spite of this admission though, we must recognize as well that the acknowledgement of its

Nolo's Plain-English Law Dictionary. "Fruit of the Poisonous Tree | LII / Legal Information Institute." LII | LII / Legal Information Institute. http://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/fruit_of_the_poisonous_tree (accessed February 21, 2012).
28

28

validity is completely different from our understanding of principle as a whole, and in this light, we must briefly continue further on through this discourse. According to the Rationalists, there are three types of truths, namely Logical Necessity, Empirical Necessity and Metaphysical Necessity. The first, Logical Necessity refers to things or ideas that are true by definition. The statement To have three, you have to have more than two. for example cannot be false, and would not take any experience to prove it to be so. Next, Empirical Necessity, refers to truths cases that are contingent or synthetic truths. It merely states what is rather what must be, finding territory over those what could have happened. The last of the three is the Metaphysical Necessity. This goes beyond logical certainty, and cannot be experienced either. It is an ontological argument, assuming the existence of something from the very beginning. This form usually appears in arguments defending the existence of God; for under the assumption that there is a God, and He is a perfect being, and as a perfect being is and never was bound by time, He must then had, and always has existed.29 In spite of this apparent primacy given towards reason, it must be pointed out how experience, though shunned as a primary source of knowledge, still does play part through the Rationalistic perspective. Referred to as the Innate Knowledge Thesis, experience is still recognized to be part of the intellectual process, but only as a pawn in the bigger picture that is reason. Here, senses are tantamount to nothing more than triggers that commence a process of consciousness that, through intuition, ones rational insight; and deduction, ones

Peter Markie, "Rationalism vs. Empiricism", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2008 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = <http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2008/entries/rationalism-empiricism/>.
29

29

capability of deriving necessarily true conclusions through valid arguments (Logical Necessities); one would be able to know the knowledge that is innate to him but is yet to be recognized.30 The Rationalist, as seen throughout this section of the chapter, is blatant in its stand that their basis, reason, is superior to experience. Anything gained through intuition and deduction, or is innate to us, is superior to any form of information that may be attained through experience. As proven by Descartes through his Cogito, a priori knowledge is clearly, at least to the Rationalist, to be without a doubt absolute and certain. Unlike the claims of knowledge obtained through the senses; the fallibility of the source alone goes to show how frail such claimed knowledge would be. The fruit of the poisonous tree31 certainly shares the same venom from where it was bore, and it is from this that the Rationalists argue that the tainted source will only provide tainted knowledge. A claim of knowledge that one would never be able to know for certain if it were a case where his senses had perceived correctly, or had succumbed to its natural, innate flaws. Returning to where we had begun, the Allegory of the Cave presents Platos World of Forms- a world where what we know is known through reason alone. These Forms are described to be the unchanging, eternal, and absolute idea of the ever changing, temporary, and contingent world of objects we sense around

30 Ibid.
Nolo's Plain-English Law Dictionary. "Fruit of the Poisonous Tree | LII / Legal Information Institute." LII | LII / Legal Information Institute. http://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/fruit_of_the_poisonous_tree (accessed February 21, 2012).
31

30

us. And it is only once we turn from the shadows and look to and through the light, that one would be able to say for certain that he undoubtedly knows.32

B. Empiricism Contrary to the previous theory discussed, Empiricism on the other hand firmly believes that it is our senses- our sensual experiences-that should be considered the primary source of knowledge. This theory rejects the idea of innate knowledge, and instead adopts the notion of the Tabula Rasa33 or the clean slate mind set.34 Through Aristotles words, there is nothing in the intellect that was not first in the senses35 (or something to that effect). Unlike Plato who had believed that the human mind had existed as an entity before it was given bodily form, Aristotle supports the idea to how, what was first a blank sheet of paper is left marked by our experiences. A view that directly reflects Lockes white paper description of a beings initial acquisition of knowledge, or lack thereof, arguing how, at birth, ones mind is vacant of knowledge of the external world.36

Matthias Steup. "Epistemology (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)." Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/epistemology/ (accessed February 21, 2012). 17 Francis F. Steen. "John Locke." CogWeb: Cognitive Cultural Studies. http://cogweb.ucla.edu/CogSci/Locke.html (accessed January 18, 2012). 33 Uzgalis William "John Locke", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2010 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = <http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2010/entries/locke/>. 35 "Empiricism." Rick Grush's Home Page http://mind.ucsd.edu/syllabi/99_00/Empiricism/Readings/Encyc_Phil/Empiricism.html (accessed January 21, 2012). 36 "Empiricism vs. Rationalism." CogWeb: Cognitive Cultural Studies. http://cogweb.ucla.edu/CogSci/Empiricism.html (accessed February 21, 2012).
32

31

Opposite the Rationalists a priori knowledge, Empiricists work off the premise of a posteriori37- a knowledge that is gained proceeding experience and observation. Indeed, there are some empiricist works that argue that the mind must have innately at least the fundamental capacities for learning, but this stand is refuted as nothing more than a result of confusing intellect and instinct. To whichever side of the empiricist argument one would decide to side on, it would still remain that, ultimately, whether an innate knowledge existed or not, knowledge of the external world would rely solely on the senses alone. Reason may indeed play a part in the digesting of sensation to information, and eventually form relationships amongst the ideas we have already learned. Initially, the external world is taken in through sensation, yet once broken down to primary and secondary qualities, through reflection, would it become genuine knowledge. Whatever the role reason may play in the thought process, what is clarified here is how it is through our senses that these sensations per se are first obtained. This as well goes against the Rationalist notion that identifies experience as a mere trigger that elicits the recognition of innate knowledge that had been buried all along under a veil of ignorance or lack of recognition. Somewhat mocking this Rationalistic perspective, John Locke writes how [n]o proposition can be said to be in the mind which never yet knew, which it was never yet conscious

Jason H. Baehr. " A Priori and A Posteriori[Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy]." Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. http://www.iep.utm.edu/apriori/ (accessed January 17, 2012).
37

32

of.38, pointing out how it is truly unreasonable to argue how one obtains knowledge despite the fact, in Rationalist terms, that such knowledge is innate but is yet to be realized. Opposite the Rationalist belief that they are innately superior to the Empiricists, the latter takes pride with the fact that their understanding of knowledge is founded not only on logical necessities, but also rather on empirical evidence. Through this school of thought, it is through the testing of hypotheses, and the observation of the external world that conclusions are made, beliefs are verified, and it is only then that knowledge is obtained.39

C. Transcendental Idealism

Given the previous comparison between Rationalism and Empiricism, it may be difficult for one to decide which of the two perspectives to adopt. Though the previous sections were made only to clarify the Platonic perspective used as premise for his allegory, rather than to persuade one to choose one and leave the other, it is inevitable for one to feel the need to. After all, Rationalism does have its valid points as it emphasizes the relevance of reason and the fallibility of the senses, however on the other hand, Empiricism too points out the apparent, to how throughout ones life, knowledge of the external world is taken in, at least initially, through what is experienced. Both perspectives have their respective points, and it is in this light that the perceiver faces a beautiful dilemma wherein

Francis F. Steen. "John Locke." CogWeb: Cognitive Cultural Studies. http://cogweb.ucla.edu/CogSci/Locke.html (accessed January 18, 2012). 39 Ibid.
38

33

he has to choose between two rights. Amidst two considerations that are both sound and unsound in their own respect, dismissing the possibility of personal bias, how else may one decide? Or even more importantly, must one decide? In all candor, the Empiricist approach seems to be more reasonable, for an absolute rejection of the senses, as learned through, for a lack of a better term, experience, would not go hand in hand with the practical value we give to them. After all, no matter what the idea, the realization of it, as stated through the discussion on Rationalism, is contingent on the external world around us. Perhaps senses were merely treated as triggers that would dig out the buried a priori knowledge we obtain innately, but the fact that the senses, one way or another, do hold value is clear as day. On the other hand, we cannot dismiss as well concepts that the Rationalists forward, for experience is indeed liable to err and is not enough to provide knowledge alone. It would still require one way or another a track where it would be digested and taken into our system, reflecting the significance of reason. It is in light of this dilemma that Transcendental Idealism40 comes in, where the realities of the Phenomenal, knowledge as appeared through the sense, and the Noumenal, knowledge in itself, are recognized. Kant discusses through his Critique41 the significance of Empiricism since objects can only be experienced spatio-temporally, the only application of concepts that yields knowledge is to

"Idealism, German [Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy]." Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. http://www.iep.utm.edu/germidea/#H3 (accessed January 21, 2012 ) 41 "Critique of Pure Reason." Center for Digital Discourse and Culture | @ Virginia Tech. http://www2.cddc.vt.edu/marxists/reference/subject/ethics/kant/reason/ch01.htm (accessed January 18, 2012)
40

34

the empirical world42, but acknowledges as well Rationalism and how the mind of the knower makes an active contribution to experience of objects before us43.44 His proposed Science of Metaphysics 45 argues how objects that are experienced are structured in accordance with the minds categories of understanding. That the a priori concepts and intuitions are indeed a priori knowledge that consequently creates a framework for the a posteriori knowledge we learn from our experiences46. For the case of this study, we will choose to adopt this notion for at this point it is clear how both reason and experience play their respective roles in the acquisition of knowledge, and in effect, and in connection with the following chapter, the forming of ones reality.

Matt McCormick. " Kant, Immanuel: Metaphysics[Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy]." Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. http://www.iep.utm.edu/kantmeta/ (accessed January 21, 2012). 43 Ibid. 44 "Transcendental Idealism." Queensborough Community College. http://www.qcc.cuny.edu/socialsciences/ppecorino/INTRO_TEXT/Chapter%205%20Epistemology/Transcend ental_Idealism.htm (accessed February 21, 2012). 45 Ibid. 46 Ibid.
42

35

CHAPTER IV

TRUTH, REALITY, AND PLACEBO

When we began the discussion, we first tackled the cavemen of the Allegory of the Cave. To reiterate, here they were described by the author to be ignorant, and in consequence and summary, incapable of feeling, let alone knowing, anything genuinely. This notion was founded on the premise that the knowledge they believed they had was attained through an ungrounded source- the senses. The senses were disregarded to be less than just a has been turned obsolete source, but even worse; as a never was. And were acknowledged through a misunderstood, ungrounded notion that it could obtain knowledge through the five senses despite its essential fallibility47. In effect, the cavemen then, with the exception of the enlightened escapee; who had perceived the shadows of the real world casted on the wall before them as the real world per se rather than just an outline of it, were all unenlightened. Given this, the author, Plato, therefore concludes by accusing them of knowing nothing at all, and in relation to our discussion, being incapable of feeling genuine happiness given that the foundation of the said happiness was not genuine, or was bogus, to begin with. Following logic, and perhaps to aid us even further, through the help

Plato. "Book VII and VIII (531d534e)." Trans. Paul Shorey. The Republic. Cambridge (Mass.): Harvard UP, 1982. Print.
47

36

of the legal metaphor of the fruit of the poisonous tree48, indeed it is only right for one to assume such. That indeed, the knowledge obtained through tainted means would as well be in themselves tainted, just as the stream of water from a contaminated lake, pond, or river, would be, one way or another, contaminated as well. Through the discussion of The Republic, truth, among many other virtues, is given value to the point that it is a requisite to all knowledge. That there is an a priori truth before the external world, or perhaps even better stated, a truth that defines everything that there is in this world. I wouldnt be one to argue with the mentality that truth should be recognized to acquire some sort of value, for I myself see the legitimacy of doing so, yet I must question nonetheless the notion to how truth in relation to reality is addressed. Truth and reality are inseparable through the eyes of the Rationalist. Through the World of Forms49 alone, it is easily seen how despite what the perceivers senses may take as reality, there is an a priori truth that will define whether it be genuine in the first place50. What we may grasp to be reality- the sounds we hear, the pains we feel, the shadows on the wall that we see- may be a false understanding of what is actually there; all based on the previously stated notion to

"Fruit of the Poisonous Tree | LII / Legal Information Institute." LII | LII / Legal Information Institute. Cornell University Law School, 19 Aug. 2010. Web. 16 Jan. 2012. <http://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/fruit_of_the_poisonous_tree> 49 Plato. "Book VII and VIII (531d534e)." Trans. Paul Shorey. The Republic. Cambridge (Mass.): Harvard UP, 1982. Print. 50 S. M. Cohen"A Priori and A Posteriori [Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy]." Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. S. Marc Cohen. Web. 11 Aug. 2006. <http://www.iep.utm.edu/apriori/>.
48

37

how experiences are no more reliable in obtaining knowledge than Paul the Octopus51 was in predicting the results in last years World Cup. Granted, this argument may hold its valid points, especially in the case of something as farfetched as a prophet marine animal, yet if one were to adopt a different standpoint, an empirical, or perhaps even more particular, an existential one, he would then realize that there is a lot more to truth and reality that meets the eye. Are they really one of the same thing? If ever they were, in what way would they be united? Does truth dictate the essence of reality, or vice-versa? In the allegory, we are presented with the situation where cavemen saw nothing but shadows and heard nothing but echoes, and perceived that to be the real world. Well, perhaps from a third party perspective, we may indeed mock their beliefs and consequential actions as we, from a relatively omniscient viewpoint referred to by Plato as the World of Forms, know what the real world truly is.52 Yet if one were to consider that to these less enlightened souls, the echoes and shadows were all that there was, especially factoring in the particular to how they were chained down, having no choice of running away, or in other words, having no chance of knowing any better; the possibility then of seeing the truth to be either different, or perhaps even irrelevant to the analysis of reality, could be born53.

51 Mark Tran. "Sucker for Soccer: Octopus Predicts World Cup Finalist | Football | The Guardian." Latest News, Sport and Comment from the Guardian | The Guardian. theguardian, 8 July 2010. Web. 16 Jan. 2012. <http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2010/jul/08/soccer-octopus-world-cup-final>. 52 Plato. "Book VII and VIII (531d534e)." Trans. Paul Shorey. The Republic. Cambridge (Mass.): Harvard UP, 1982. Print. 53 Jean-Paul Sartre. Sketch for a Theory of the Emotions. "Introduction: Psychology, Phenomenology, and phenomenological psychology)."Trans. Philip Mairet. Ed. Mary Warnock. New York: Routledge Classics, 2004. Print.

38

Who are we after all, to require something that is unattainable to those who fall victim to its incomprehensibility. Wouldnt such a requirement just be as unrealistic, and even worse, unfair in the situation- in the reality- that the cavemen find themselves in? In the analysis of these questions, the latter part of this chapter will be dedicated in defining truth and reality through the Existential perspective, with the addition of a psychological, empirical study of a false reality, and its undoubtedly genuine effects on the external world despite its fallacious basis. For the purpose of the discussion, we will be focusing on the Existentialist philosophy of Jean-Paul Sartre, through his works Being and Nothingness54 and Sketch for a Theory of the Emotions55.

A. Existentialism

According to the traditional philosophies that preceded the contemporary philosophies that now dominate the present day way of thinking, man was treated as an agent of his own action, who aimed to fulfill a certain purpose in life. Through Platos Republic Nichomachean Ethics, and more significantly through Aristotles

this said purpose was defined to be one that was

predetermined before the existence of the said being. In summary, both

Sartre. Being and Nothingness; an Essay on Phenomenological Ontology.New York: Philosophical Library, 1956. Print. 55 Jean-Paul Sartre. Sketch for a Theory of the Emotions. Trans. Philip Mairet. Ed. Mary Warnock. New York: Routledge Classics, 2004. Print.
54 Jean-Paul

39

philosophers wrote on the essence of man that was to achieve happiness through virtue. It was only through doing so, through acts in accordance to this quality, that one would be able to live a happy life. Even the relatively modern Kantian Ethics, one way or another, shared this mindset in saying that it is through our acts of duty that ones actions would be considered good, and in consequence, help one be a good person56. Atheism and Catholicism breed their followers and believers as well to adopt such a mind set, and are actually put by Jean-Paul Sartre, despite their irreconcilable and obvious differences, on the same plane, as they both build off a common ground. What both beliefs have in common is to how they both root from the same bole of thought, resigning to the idea that mans essence comes before his existence. Catholicism, just as philosophers such as Leibniz, Kant, and so many other predeterminist believers, recognize a supernatural artisan57 to be at hand behind all that there is- God. That in some sense, mans role throughout his life is to fulfill his predetermined role.

Thus, the conception of man in the mind of God is comparable to that of the paper-knife in the mind of the artisan: God makes man according to a procedure and a conception, exactly as the artisan manufactures a paper-knife, following a definition and a formula. Thus each individual man is the realization of a certain conception that dwells in the divine understanding. 58

56 Jean-Paul Sartre. "Man Makes Himself." p.4 Reading For Philosophical Inquiry: A Brief Introduction. P.L.E. Philosophy Lander. Web. <http://philosophy.lander.edu/intro/articles/sartre-a.pdf>. 57 Ibid

58

Jean-Paul Sartre. Existentialism Is A Humanism. Trans. by Philip Mairet. Public Lecture,

1946.

40

Catholicism works off the premise that it is their divine Gods hand at work behind all that there is in this world and out, including man. That man is, granted, many things, but mainly a mean in fulfilling the conception of what he was meant to be through the eyes of the creator. Atheism as well does not exempt itself from this impression. Though they may visibly contrast Catholicism through their rejection of God, the discipline still recognizes that each man has an essence that is prior his existence.59

In the philosophic atheism of the eighteenth century, the notion of God is suppressed, but not, for all that, the idea that essence is prior to existence; something of that idea we still find everywhere, in Diderot, in Voltaire and even in Kant. Man possesses a human nature; that human nature, which is the conception of human being, is found in every man; which means that each man is a particular example of a universal conception, the conception of Man. 60 Both of the mentioned belief systems define man as a sum of qualities predetermined before his existence. That he is but a quantified total of factors that made his very existence possible, which therefore defines his essence for existing.61 Sartre compares this, as mentioned earlier through the first quote, to the paper-knife, or any object for that matter, which is made by the artisan to serve a certain purpose, such as cutting, and serves for the rest of its existence in doing so. The object had its purpose, its roll, its essence, even before it had been made, prior to its creation, a priori to its existence.

60 Jean-Paul 61 Ibid.

Sartre. Existentialism Is A Humanism. Trans. by Philip Mairet. Public Lecture, 1946.

41

Sartre, however, counters this perspective of man as an essence before existence being, which he refers to as a Being-in-itself, with the mentality of existence before essence, or a Being-for-itself. Needless to say, here man is recognized to first exist and defines his essence through the course of his life. Unlike the previously mentioned philosophies that describe man to be one on a journey in performing certain things through certain ways to be able to fulfill his essence (that, to be clear, is predetermined), through Sartre Existential philosophy, it is the experiences of man that defines him, that it is his actions that determine what man he is and is known to be, and how, through his own words, [h]e will be what he makes himself. In summary, man attains existence when he is able to be what he himself, and no other, purposed him to be.

Man simply is. Not that he is simply what he conceives himself to be, but he is what he wills, and as he conceives himself after already existingas he wills to be after that leap towards existence. Man is nothing else but that which he makes of himself. That is the first principle of existentialism.62

Rather than as an object made to pursue or fulfill the interests of a creator, wherein the creator is the subject who is objectifying man as puppets carrying out His will, man here refuses to wear the veil of objectivity and recognizes himself as subject instead. In doing so, every man is put in his own possession, where his existence is put in his own hands, or through Sartres words, it is through existentialism is [that it puts] every man in possession of himself as he is, and
62 Ibid.

42

places the entire responsibility for his existence squarely upon his own shoulders.63 Sartre refers to our role as an absolute agent of our own actions as Subjectivity. The definition of oneself is determined through his very actions. However, he also introduces the notion of Inter-Subjectivity, explaining how our responsibility as a subject is a duty for our individual selves, and for all other men as well, because in our actions, whether it be a decision to make a difference or one to not make a decision at all, which ultimately is a decision in itself; in the end the action of one man plays a part in the creation of the image of man, and in effect, defines what men in general ought to be. In summary, by choosing for ourselves, we choose for all men.

Or if, to take a more personal case, I decide to marry and to have children, even though this decision proceeds simply from my situation, from my passion or my desire, I am thereby committing not only myself, but humanity as a whole, to the practice of monogamy. I am thus responsible for myself and for all men, and I am creating a certain image of man as I would have him to be. In fashioning myself I fashion man.64

One other relevant theory of Sartre, among the many, is his concept of facticity. As mentioned, through the Existentialist belief, each individual is responsible for himself, and it is, for the lack of a better term, a grave sin for the subject to excuse his actions to be ones forced upon him by others, or by nature, or by any

63 64

Ibid. Ibid.

43

external factor aside from his own will. The thinking that one acted not according to his own decision-making is said to be an act out of bad faith. Facticity then comes into the picture for it is undeniable that there are times that man cannot control the situation he finds himself in- the unpredictable weather, and the spontaneous actions of others may attest to this happening. This then is the throwing65 of a subject into a certain situation. This however does not excuse the subject from being an agent of his own actions, for the decisions he may decide to make then are still all up to him. The situation he finds himself in is merely a set of conditions that shape the possibilities, that either adds or lessens the choices that he may make in the said scenario. For one may indeed be unwillingly thrown into a situation, however, what he makes of it is still arguably still all up to him. Ultimately then, facticity shapes our freedom, and in effect, the freedom we have will lead us to a path that will shape the facticity, the situation, we will inevitably find ourselves in. Sartre goes on further through his discussion in Being and Nothingness, such as through his theories of Anguish, Despair, Bad faith, etc. however, we shall only set our attention on those that play a significant role, and remain within the realm of our topic of happiness. In summary, Existentialism addresses our thesis topic through the principle of how [m]an is defined by what he can know. Here, it is what we do that determines us and defines what we know; and in consequence, our reality. That our reality is an a posteriori accumulation of our experiences, which consequently

David Banach. "Existentialism." Saint Anselm College : Saint Anselm College . http://www.anselm.edu/homepage/dbanach/sartreol.htm (accessed February 21, 2012).
65

44

defines it (our reality), rather than the traditional a priori belief of an essence or truth set before our very existence. In Sartres own words, [a]nd since the human reality is essentially its own possibility, this existent can itself choose what it will be, achieve itselfor lose itself.

B. Placebo Effect

Through the emerging field of Psychoneuroimmunology a clear correlation between the internal mind and the external body has been shown, especially, with respect to this particular field, in terms of health and healing. Here, the ability of the immune system to naturally fight off detrimental bodies off the minds belief is studied. 66 This phenomenon is visible through many various instances whose conclusion is most commonly referred to as the Placebo Effect.

It has been documented in many cases that positive attitudes and emotions can affect the biochemistry of the body to enable personal healing. This is, in essence, the nature of the placebo affect, such that "The placebo is the doctor who resides within" . The placebo affect has been shown to be a healing factor in hypertension, cardiac pain, headaches (implicating the autonomic nervous system); diabetes, menstrual pain, adrenal gland secretion (implication the endocrine system); colds, fever, asthma, and cancer (implicating the immune system). This demonstrates a corollary interaction between the mind and the body in terms of health and healing.67

Mercurio, Mary Gail, James Walton, Deborra James, David Fiorentino, Alexa Kimball, Michael Davis, and Valerie Ojha Ojha. "Study Redefines Placebo Effect as Part of Effective Treatment - News Room - University of Rochester Medical Center."University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester NY. URMC, 22 Dec. 2009. Web. 17 Jan. 2012. <http://www.urmc.rochester.edu/news/story/index.cfm?id=2718>. 67 Kinser, Patricia. "Psychoneuroimmunology and Natural Healing by the Brain."Psychology of Immunity (1999). Serendip. Web. 17 Jan. 2012. <http://serendip.brynmawr.edu/bb/neuro/neuro99/web2/Kinser.html>.
66

45

Through a study made by the University of Rochester Medical Center, it was found that though patients would be given only a half or even a quarter of the required dosage, the expected results from a full dosage were still acquired. Psoriasis patients were treated as such, and through a comparison between the group who received a full dosage, and the other that had taken in only a portion of the drug, or at times, nothing but a dummy-drug (a combination of anything from sugar to wheat), it was proven that the placebo given would be just as successful.68 The Psychomatic Medicine journal recognizes placebo for its effective and beneficial results. Through their study, it was shown that drug benefits were maximized in the sense that those who took in placebos were able to reduce side effects, extend their use of the drug because it was neither as addictive nor intoxicating as a full dose would be, and were less costly.69 Placebos are inactive, or dummy-drugs, given to patients who are undergoing certain symptoms of a number of illnesses. Utilized either through dummy-pills, sham surgeries, and other treatments, it has been found that, though the pills may not contain any medication whatsoever, their results prove to be successful thirty percent (30%) of the time. The theory behind this phenomenon is how the power of the mind is enough to make real, tangible effects in reality. Our hopes, beliefs, or the very reality that we may assume to be in, is enough to trigger off the release of hormones, such as endorphins, that would cause the healing process to occur.70

Psychosomatic Medicine. Web. 17 Jan. 2012. <http://www.psychosomaticmedicine.org/>. Laura Bishop. "Case 8 Placebos and Placebo Effects: Placebo Effects." High School Bioethics Curriculum Project. Kennedy Institute of Ethics, 22 Dec. 2009. Web. 17 Jan. 2012. <http://highschoolbioethics.georgetown.edu/units/cases/unit3_8.html>.
70 69

46

Our study provides evidence that the placebo effect can make possible the treatment of psoriasis with an amount of drug that should be too small to work While these results are preliminary, we believe the medical establishment needs to recognize the minds reaction to medication as a powerful part of many drug effects, and start taking advantage of it.71

Through the study of the Placebo, we are able to recognize the power of the conception. Inactive drugs are still able to produce a healing process, clearly not because of a direct effect of the medication and the substances it may contain, but because of ones belief that what he had just taken in was indeed a genuine treatment. To hit closer to home, one may recall traditional beliefs on how Chicken Soup is treatment for the common cold, or how hot lemon would be enough to rid a headache 72 , and especially to the common Filipino, to how gargling a mix of water and salt would foster the loss of sore throat. All these mentioned cases serve as an example to how, though something may not contain any healing powers, as long as one would believe them to be, one way or another, associated to be so, the expected results may be developed. In other words, the effect of the drug that was replaced with placebo would ensue just because the patient believes it to be the actual thing. This phenomenon

Mary Gail Mercurio, James Walton Deborra, David Fiorentino James, Alexa Kimball, Michael Davis Kimball, and Valerie Ojha. "Study Redefines Placebo Effect as Part of Effective Treatment - News Room University of Rochester Medical Center."University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester NY. URMC, 22 Dec. 2009. Web. 17 Jan. 2012. <http://www.urmc.rochester.edu/news/story/index.cfm?id=2718>. 72 Ruth C. Engs "Information About Drugs: Psychological Effects of Drugs, Alcohol and Other Drugs: Self Responsibility . Bloomington, IN:Tichenor Publishing Co. 1987. Used by permission of the author. Available on: http://www.indiana.edu/~engs/rbook
71

47

goes to show how reality, whether it be true or not, may bring about something genuine.

C. Conclusion

In the dilemma between truth and reality, through the Existentialist perspective, reality is what we make of it. It is the experiences we had, the actions that we make, that define who we are, and in consequence define what reality is to us. The power is clearly placed in the hands of the perceiver, rather than in the power of a preordained higher power, which therefore invites the notion to how we, as subjects rather than objects, define our own essence. In the case of the cavemen from the Allegory, their belief in shadows and echoes then may not seem so farfetched as described by Plato. Whether we acknowledge the author of The Republics claim on a World of Forms, of an actuality thats essences are predetermined, or of an a priori truth for that matter, it would not really matter through the existential punto de vista. Ultimately, whether such things existed or not would be irrelevant, what would matter though is the reality that is in reach of the being or subject at hand. What is attainable to these prisoners of the cave, chained and shackled down with no choice but to face the shadows and hear the echoes, is their reality, and given all that has been said, theoretically speaking, that is all that matters. That is why the portion on the Placebo Effect is given much relevance, because it is through this point that we are able to jump from the realm of theory to something

48

as tangible as the sciences. And through their empirical study, it is shown and proven how indeed, placebo, despite it being a faux to begin with, can reap very real results, sometimes just as genuine as the actual medication. With this said, one may therefore conclude that truth is in the eye of the beholder, or perhaps even that an absolute truth may exist, but is separate from the reality which is all that there is to the subject being. Either way, what would be acknowledged through both points is how it is up to the subject, that it is in the hands of the cavemen, whether one were to feel or know anything genuinely, all based on the reality that they had formed through their respective experiences. Adding this into the picture of the cavemen of Platos Allegory, it becomes apparent to how even the ignorant cavemen may acquire happiness. Just like the patients given placebos, the cavemen as well believe in something undoubtedly untrue. Despite this fact however, the patients, in the case of placebo studies, are still able to manifest healing symptoms given their belief that what they had taken is indeed true; and on the other hand, the cavemen as well may indeed manifest genuine happiness in spite of the fact that their belief is false. The degree of truth then behind our beliefs, though ethically significant, is not a mandatory factor in the production of genuine things- whether these things be found in the realm of emotion or through our very bodies. Ultimately, what truly matters is the reality that the perceiver sees and believes to be true, whether it be so or otherwise.

49

CHAPTER V

CAVEMEN AND HAPPINESS

A. Summary and Findings

In the previous chapters, we have thoroughly broken down the factors that we feel may play key in the deliberation on caveman and his acquisition of happiness. In gist, through Chapter II: Happiness, we first defined what Happiness73 is per se and compared it through the various theories of it. It was through the journey of defining this key concept that we transitioned from discussing happiness in general to the more particular debate on how one attains knowledge; shedding much light on the Rationalist74 vs. Empiricist75 debate. And finally, in the preceding chapter, we take an even closer look at the latter of the two, justifying how, despite the claim of its infallibility, is it still possible to actually achieve genuine happiness, through the consideration of ones reality76. As tackled throughout the previous chapters, the Allegory is firm in its condemnation of the cavemen shackled to the floor to see nothing but shadows on a wall, and hear only echoes- a description that exhibits in essence that their lives

Anthony Kenny, and Charles Kenny. "Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Utility: Happiness in Philosophical and Economic Thought." University of Notre Dame. St. Andrews Studies in Philosophy and Public Affairs, 1 Oct. 2006. Web. 74 The High Desert Christian Writers Guild. "Logic: Rationalism vs. Empiricism." QHST Home. Quartz Hill School of Theology. Web. 21 Jan. 2012. <http://www.theology.edu/logic/logic4.htm>. 75 Peter Markie "Rationalism vs. Empiricism", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2008 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = <http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2008/entries/rationalism-empiricism/> 76 Jean-Paul Sartre. Being and Nothingness; an Essay on Phenomenological Ontology.New York: Philosophical Library, 1956. Print.
73

50

would be ones based on merely the outline of a truth, rather than of the truth in its own, sincere, form . 77 To reiterate, through the Cultural Relativist approach however, it is seen how such an assumption is unfair for it is seen from a third party perspective, which reflects how it is primarily focused on viewing, distinguishing, and most apparently in this case, scrutinizing the culture or acts of another rather than first trying to understand it78. Indeed, the philosopher and anthropologist may be completely different animals, but with the application of this approach, the significance of being able to see things from the perspective of those committing the act does have its point. If we were to look at the cavemen from our respective view point of life, truth, etc it is not only understandable but also rather foreseeable how feeling of disdain could be held for their practices compared to ones own. In order to successfully and fairly compare the notion carried by the cavemen and that in the World of Forms79, one must first have the proper approach. Cultural Relativism then comes into the picture, at least to serve the philosophers purpose, as it provides the standards how one should study the practices of others based on their own ideals, and acknowledge these respective cultures autonomously and equally in order to initially level out the plains80 before one would move on to judge completely right from wrong, truth from falsity, reality from fantasy.

Plato. "Book VII and VIII (531d534e)." Trans. Paul Shorey. The Republic. Cambridge (Mass.): Harvard UP, 1982. Print. 78 . "Cultural Relativism." The University of Texas-Pan American. 16 Dec. 1994. Web. 21 Jan. 2012. <http://www.utpa.edu/faculty/mglazer/Theory/cultural_relativism.htm>. 79 Plato. "Book VII and VIII (531d534e)." Trans. Paul Shorey. The Republic. Cambridge (Mass.): Harvard UP, 1982. Print. 80 Mark Glazer."Cultural Relativism." The University of Texas-Pan American. 16 Dec. 1994. Web. 21 Jan. 2012. <http://www.utpa.edu/faculty/mglazer/Theory/cultural_relativism.htm>.
77

51

In this sense then, we apply this approach of open mindedness81 by broadening the borders of our own minds. Initially, how can one disagree with Plato after all if he had no other theory of knowledge to refer to. Admittedly, the authors argument through the Republic82 is convincing and logical, however, as Sartre put it, one cannot obtain any truth whatsoever [about myself], except through the mediation of another.83 This illustrates for us the significance of comparison, and how it is key to understanding more the truth of the subject matter. In this light, we expound on the philosophies of happiness84, and discuss not only those that agree with Plato, namely the Rationalists85, but explore as well those who give the utmost value to physical pleasure, mainly the Empiricists86. It is through this portion of the discussion that one would realize that, on one hand we have Plato, and on the other we have a number of sensual-based standards that may as well be considered. The question however stands on which of the two perspectives to adopt. It is at this point that we transition to our next chapter, and debate not on the level of happiness per se, but rather based from its epistemological roots- the means of obtaining and knowing knowledge87.

Mark Glazer. "Cultural Relativism." The University of Texas-Pan American. 16 Dec. 1994. Web. 21 Jan. 2012. <http://www.utpa.edu/faculty/mglazer/Theory/cultural_relativism.htm>. 82 Plato. Trans. Paul Shorey. The Republic. Cambridge (Mass.): Harvard UP, 1982. Print. 83 Jean-Paul Sartre. Being and Nothingness; an Essay on Phenomenological Ontology.New York: Philosophical Library, 1956. Print. 84 Anthony Kenny, and Charles Kenny. "Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Utility: Happiness in Philosophical and Economic Thought." University of Notre Dame. St. Andrews Studies in Philosophy and Public Affairs, 1 Oct. 2006. Web. 85 Peter Markie, "Rationalism vs. Empiricism", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2008 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = <http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2008/entries/rationalism-empiricism/> 86 Peter Markie, "Rationalism vs. Empiricism", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2008 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = <http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2008/entries/rationalism-empiricism/> 87 Peter Markie, "Rationalism vs. Empiricism", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2008 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = <http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2008/entries/rationalism-empiricism/>
81

52

In the debate between Empiricism and Rationalism, we define the former to be one of an a posteriori nature, and the latter, that of an a priori. Through empiricism, we argue how it is through the senses that we acquire knowledge, including reflection, while rationalism does so by sighting that before our very existence, we obtain innate ideas, regardless of the senses.88 Empiricism argues that ideas rely on the world to be realized. One cannot say that one knows what is yet to be enlightened in ones head. As John Locke had put it No proposition can be said to be in the mind which it never yet knew, which it was never yet conscious of.89 Experience is considered through the philosophy as the only source of knowledge, which stains our Tabula Rasa90 minds through each occurrence. Following off the premise that [t]here is nothing in the intellect that was not previously in the senses91, Aristotle as well discusses how our senses are key to the attainment of knowledge. Rationalism on the other hand, probably most well known through Descartes Cogito ergo sum criticizes empiricism for its fallibility, and its openness to subjectivity. Given this thesis, they therefore conclude that any knowledge obtained through intuition or deductive reasoning is superior to any knowledge gained through the flawed, error-prone experience that basis knowledge on an ever-changing external world.92

Ibid. Francis F. Steen "Empiricism vs Rationalism." CogWeb: Cognitive Cultural Studies. Communication Studies, University of California. Web. 24 Jan. 2012. <http://cogweb.ucla.edu/CogSci/Empiricism.html>. 90 William Uzgalis "John Locke", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2010 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = <http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2010/entries/locke/> 91 Aristotle, and D.W. Hamlyn. "Empiricism." Rick Grush's Home Page. Web. 24 Jan. 2012. <http://mind.ucsd.edu/syllabi/99_00/Empiricism/Readings/Encyc_Phil/Empiricism.html>. 92 Peter Markie"Rationalism vs. Empiricism", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2008 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL =
89 88

53

The debate between the two may be an interminable one, but for the purpose of the study we choose to adopt Kants Transcendental Idealism , recognizing both Phenomena and Nuomena as knowledge 93 ; acknowledging that there is a foundational knowledge a priori, but the reliance on the senses nonetheless when it comes to the knowledge of the external world, a posteriori. We do so for as deduce in the following chapter, a truth to exist both a priori and a posteriori is enough to show that the external world, and in respect to it, our internal reality of it, does exist. Through the last chapter prior to this, we bring in the existentialist perspective of Jean-Paul Sartre94 into the picture to justify how cavemen, or the ignorant of truth, can still be genuinely happy. Through this philosophy, it is the experiences we had and the actions we make that define who we are. We are an essencebefore-existence being, who are absolutely autonomous and who are solely responsible for ones respective life; and most significant to this thesis, responsible for ones reality.95 We argue that the prisoners of the cave who see nothing but shadows and hear only the echoes of the true world are legitimate in their inferring of knowledge from what is implied through such experiences for the simple case that that is their reality. For as mentioned earlier, how is it in any way realistic and moreover fair to

Jean-Paul Sartre. Being and Nothingness; an Essay on Phenomenological Ontology.New York: Philosophical Library, 1956. Print. 94 Jean-Paul Sartre. "Reading For Philosophical Inquiry: A Brief Introduction." P.L.E.Web. <http://philosophy.lander.edu/intro/introbook-links.html>. 95 Jean-Paul Sartre. Being and Nothingness; an Essay on Phenomenological Ontology.New York: Philosophical Library, 1956. Print.
93

54

require something that is unattainable to the situation- to the reality- that the cavemen and all the ignorant, if they may be labeled so, find themselves in. What is attainable to these cavemen96 is only what they can perceive from their viewpoint. Adopting a Cultural Relativist97 perspective, can one truly blame these men to think the way they do? Their reality is such, and as proven through the use of Placebo98, the power of ones reality despite the truth behind it is enough justice for a genuine reaction of healing to occur. From all that has been said, we can therefore conclude that cavemen are indeed capable of being happy. Plato argues through his Allegory that genuine happiness, or anything genuine at all even, is unattainable by the cavemen because they rely on their fallible senses to obtain knowledge99 of a mere outline of the true world. What we have proven through this paper however is that, despite their not being any truth, genuine happiness is still achievable for such genuine manifestations are based, not on what is real, but on one recognizes, through valid reasons to be real.

Plato. "Book VII and VIII (531d534e)." Trans. Paul Shorey. The Republic. Cambridge (Mass.): Harvard UP, 1982. Print. 97 Mark Glazer. "Cultural Relativism." The University of Texas-Pan American. 16 Dec. 1994. Web. 21 Jan. 2012. <http://www.utpa.edu/faculty/mglazer/Theory/cultural_relativism.htm 98 Mary Gail Mercurio, James Walton, Deborra James, David Fiorentino, Alexa Kimball, Michael Davis, and Valerie Ojha."Study Redefines Placebo Effect as Part of Effective Treatment - News Room - University of Rochester Medical Center."University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester NY. URMC, 22 Dec. 2009. Web. 17 Jan. 2012. <http://www.urmc.rochester.edu/news/story/index.cfm?id=2718>. 99 Southwell, Gareth Southwell. "Rationalism - Empirical & Logical Necessity." Rescources, Reviews, Discussion, and Books for Students and General Readers Interested in Philosophy - Philosophy Online. Web. 21 Jan. 2012. <http://www.philosophyonline.co.uk/tok/rationalism4.htm>.
96

55

B. Recommendations

With the findings established through this study, the researcher would suggest for the adoption of this notion of happiness through philosophical discussions and even practice in everyday activities. Happiness is to be recognized as a form of comprehension whose outcome is based on standards one makes for himself, and through the measures one defines and recognizes through his own volition. It is not an absolute form of spontaneity, but rather a factor in life that man and his will has control over.

C. Trends and Prospects The study may initiate a new mindset in terms of the approach to happiness, or activities in general. Granted, the idea of man as an agent of his own action has been an idea that has echoes through the histories for centuries now, but nonetheless, this study may still change how that said notion is understood and accepted. Through the theoretical arguments raised, and the empirical evidence given through the brief discussion on the Placebo Effect, the study may open new doors, or at the very least cast old ones under new light.

D. Areas for further Research The study has factored in many other philosophies and disciplines in its research, however there is much more to be known regarding these mentioned terms, and others unmentioned as well. This is a mere skim of the surface of the

56

Existential philosophy, and further research must be made to understand it betterrounded, especially in terms of its regulative application. The Placebo Effect especially should undergo special attention, as it is a phenomenon whose limits are not yet well established. Indeed, invasive measures cannot be replaced through the mind alone, however the very fact that an intangible belief may conjure up such a physical and visible effect is already in itself commendable. Another aspect that should be taken further is the ethical facet of this philosophy, and its implications to it. Indeed, normatively its categorical that one should thrive off truth, however, in a world where truth may not be as accessible as one may hope, or perhaps is not accessible at all, how then would that affect the practice of the Existential standards of happiness.