Last weekend at the IA Summit, I was reminded of some papers I wrote back in college on various areas of philosophy. I was surprised to realize that many of these papers oddly enough dealt with the very thing I find myself doing everyday as a User Experience Designer. Below is the first of several papers I’ll be posting from this time in my life, please bare in mind that my skills as a writer were not the greatest back then and I’m slightly embarrassed at the state in which I found them.
Imaginative Creation: Interactive Dualism in the works.
What if there were two worlds? One of them being physical, the other non-physical, with our minds being that which is the non-physical and our brain being that which is physical. This is the common view of the general public, known as dualism. One accepted throughout history due to many different reasons. In the philosophical world this view is not as accepted, in some cases it is actually looked down upon. It is my belief that dualism should get more credit than this. Throughout this paper I will be talking about the subclass of dualism known as interactive dualism. Using real world examples I will show how interactive dualism is all around us. I will begin by giving a brief description of interactive dualism, with arguments for and argument against. Following this I will use the human being ability to use their imagination to create art and works of literary fiction is interactive dualism in the works. Interactive dualism is all around us, we just need to open our eyes to be able to see it.
To begin with, I think a brief description of interactive dualism is needed to make this paper clearer. Dualism as a whole is a field of the philosophy of the mind. It deals with explaining mental phenomena and how our minds work. Interactive dualism core is very simple; there exists a physical and non-physical which is able to interact with each other. The physical is about directly affecting the non-physical, and the non-physical is able to directly affect the physical. An example of this is given by slamming your physical fist into a wall; your physical brain goes “ouch”. Your non-physical mind says “punch the wall”, and your physical fist slams into a wall. The pain felt in your hand which fires the nerves that travel all the way up to your brain is the physical part. When you yell out “ouch” that is the non-physical pain that occurs in your mind. In the end we can see how each can equally affect the other, making it a full circle.
The website Answers.com gives a very through explanation of dualism giving both arguments for and against. The following will be brief paraphrasing from those arguments. One of the best arguments is one using the traditional Christian take on the soul. Our non-physical mind can be seen as our immortal soul. One such soul has no tangible body or any physical properties what so ever. This soul of ours is able to live on after our physical body has died and turned to dust. After your physical body is gone, then a whole new realm of non-physicalism is introduced with the concept of heaven, hell, or some other place. Since the majority of the world’s populace has some kind of faith in an all powerful being, dualism must have some truth behind it. This defensive of interactive dualism relies on having a belief in some sort of afterlife, soul, and god, which you may not have. However, since on general the belief exists then there is some underlying truth to the whole matter.
One of the arguments against interactive dualism is the fact that there is no one place where you can say that the interaction takes place. If you slam your fist into a wall, what is the exact place where the pain goes from physical to non-physical? If you come to the conclusion that the pain resides in the brain, then what need is there of pain existing in the mind? Then the next step is to say the pain doesn’t exist anywhere in the brain, just the event that causes pain. This bring up a problem of the causation of pain exists in the brain, but the effect of pain happens somewhere else, which just so happens to be nowhere. This creates a bit of a problem since a dualist cannot pinpoint where pain becomes pain and where its position is. This argument is flawed because it is hard to pin point when anything becomes or meets anything. What is the exact point when I am in the hall compared to when I am in the room? It is a gray area that, which doesn’t hold much water. These are the arguments for and against interactive dualism, both have there strong points and their weakness, depending on your personal views.
There are many phenomena that exist in the real world that would support interactive dualism; I have narrowed it down to three which seem to work out the best. All three rely on our ability to use our imagination to create many different forms of art and literary fiction. The signs of interactive dualism in art have been around for millennia; starting with the oldest cave drawing found in France to the abstract work we see today. The cave drawings in France are believed to have been forms of primitive magic. By drawing the figures of the creatures that early humans hunted they thought they could control them and make it easier to kill. The drawing themselves fit the role of being non-physical in their nature. They control the souls and action of wild beasts in some abstract, non-spatial, to do the bidding of the given drawer. But, where did the idea of the drawing come from, better yet the idea of animal controlling magic? Nothing like this is found in nature anywhere, you won’t accidentally find random drawings on some cave that just so happens to control a local herd. Magic in it self is the idea of non-physical “things” being able to directly affect the physical. Now, the definition of magic does not depend of dualism, for the idea of magic is just a part of the big dualist picture. Dualism can survive even though we have now real example of magic. Again it comes around to how these two non-physical ideas, a herd controlling drawing and magic, come to be a part of our physical world. Some very basic human being with limited intelligence had to have access to a separate area where these things could exist and be able to apply them to the real world. Now, it is no question that herd controlling drawings and magic don’t really exist in the normal world, the idea of them does. Magic is an idea apparent throughout history from the time of Jesus to modern day where you can find a whole section about it at your local Borders. The idea of magic is what is ultimately important, not the actual real work practice of it. The idea behind herd controlling drawings has changed, but at its core has stayed the same. Examples of this are the statues and altars that are found in the ancient world that were devoted to gods and natural spirits. As with some many things, it is not the actual events of the supernatural brought on by ancient art work, it is the idea that has survived. This idea must exist in some non-physical place that no physical being or item has access to without a mind. For it is the mind that allows our physical being interact with the non-physical and vice-versa.
Above was an example where ancient art work itself supposedly had non-physical properties. Now, I will move on to recent historical artwork to modern artwork. Where the idea of artwork is no longer how it will affect the world, but how it represents the world. So the question becomes how does the non-physical influence the artist in their work? There are many pieces out there where the artist was so skilled that the work seems to be a piece of time that was placed on what ever medium is used. Here is where the non-physical comes into play. Whatever the medium is that is used, it is meant to represent some event in the physical world. The event can be a place or person which can be in many different circumstances. Now, physically this event can only happen once, for a very temporary time. Once this event has past, the artwork then represents something non-physical which no longer exists. Also, no matter how good the artist is the work will never be an exact duplicate on the event it is supposed to depict. In the end, the art is physical; it is made up of wood, paper, clay, or some other medium. However, the art does not depict something physical, it depict a non-physical idea that someone by looking at it can place themselves in the event in their minds. Here we have a physical piece of artwork, causing a non-physical event in the mind that takes the mind to a non-physical event. This will work for any piece of artwork that resembles an event that has either happened or will happen.
One other form of artwork exists that causes a non-physical event in a persons mind. These are abstract works where the art on the medium is supposed to depict some intangible idea or thing. Most abstract artwork is just a huge mixing of different colors or materials that don’t seem to have any order to them at all. This mixing is supposed to stir some thought, or belief, in the viewers mind and create an image that is personal to only them. This personal image, which is created in their non-physical mind, will be unique for that person. No other viewer will have the same exact image in their minds. Again we have a mass of seemingly random material creating a unique non-physical image in a persons mind. It works the other way with the artist as well; they have their own unique image in their head which they then translate into the mass of random material. In both cases, different types of artwork have a circle of causation going from the physical to the non-physical. Some of the events caused by the given artwork cannot be described by only physical means, especially with the unique images caused by abstract art. The abstract art examples are special due to the idea and inherit beliefs that are put in the artwork. Each one would be different, for each viewer the artwork would be seen differently. This different view is influenced by personal beliefs, like and dislikes, and possible physiological difference, i.e. color blindness.
The second case where a human’s imagination creates something that is non-physical is when we write literary fiction. Literary fiction is in itself a huge field to cover, so I will narrow it down to writings that involve science fiction or fantasy. Writings in this genre rely the most on our imagination because most of the time everything in the book must be created strictly from the writers mind. There is nothing in our world that we can relate to some of the things, places, or creatures that get created when some writes a story. The first area were the non-physical has some effect of the physical is this ability to create such things and place them on paper. Today, the idea of magic, dragons, fairy forests can easily be created using our imagination. However, the first time it was created is what counts in the case. Not that the reworking of these ideas are not important to the advance of the genre, but it is the original idea that really counts. The idea of dragons, fairy forests, and advanced alien are to this day strictly fiction, not real. So, what caused this now generally understood idea to be created in the first place? A person in deep introspection of their imagination, which could have been caused by many natural sometimes illegal physical things, came up with the first idea of these non-physical things. Many different things that exist in their non-physical mind get all jumbled together and out comes this unique completely unnatural being, event, or place. These then get created and put together with words on paper in a logical and rational way that ignites some reader own imagination.
Here, is where the physical that has a causational effect of the non-physical. There are hundreds upon hundreds of science fiction and fantasy literary works out there. Each with its own plot, characters, creatures, and places. In some way each is unique in its own little way, some more than others. Each book has been influenced by either previous books or some idea that solely belongs to the author. Many times throughout my own life I have been asked why I like reading books such as these. Each time I reply with relating the story to a personal movie that gets created in my mind as I read. Here is the unique part, if I read a book and a friend of mine reads the same book at the same speed as me, each of us will see the movie differently. Each of our movies is built differently by our own personal imagination, creating something in our non-physical mind that is unique to each person. Many times I have used the term unique as being important in these matters. If something isn’t unique, that means it can be repeated in different people, which could ultimately get explained by physical means. If something is unique, that means there is a sense of randomness. With randomness the chance of a physical explanation becomes very remote. Here the unique “movie” that gets created by reading some literary work, is in itself another’s unique “movie”. In both cases from the creation of the idea that builds a story, to a reader creating a “movie” in their minds by reading the story based on the idea, there is a circular causation between the physical and the non-physical. A non-physical idea creates a physical story which in turns creates a non-physical “movie” in some readers mind. Again the circular movement is kept intact. Literary fiction differs from abstract art because of its aboutness. Artwork is a picture that ignites a mental image of that picture. Literary fiction is a story that ignites a mental state, or mental movie, of the story, from the plot to any possible moral statements.
Evidence of interactive dualism is everywhere; you just have to know where to look. Going through the history of art, the evidence of dualism is built right into it. Literary fiction, more specifically science fiction and fantasy, would not be on our bookshelves if it were not for the interaction between our physical brain and our non-physical minds. In respect to the general field of philosophy of the mind, interactive dualism does not get enough credit. Some theories take some very difficult notions and try to apply it to the mind. As the old saying goes, most often the correct answer is usually the simplest one. The simplest answer to the mind and the brain is that they are in fact two different things, one that we can easily see, and another which is personal to each and every one of us.
Sources
Title: Answers.Com
URL: http://www.answers.com
Searched: Dualism
Books: Sanford Goldberg, Andrew Pessin. Gray Matters: An Introduction to the Philosophy of Mind, M.E. Sharpe; August 1, 1997