A Further Thought on the Self or the Soul

 

I would like to return to this:

 

Western philosophy typically conceptualizes the self as a stable, controlling entity, comparable to a pilot, while Eastern philosophies such as Buddhism argue that the self is an illusion, a byproduct of our thought processes.  Modern neuroscience provides evidence that aligns with the Eastern view, revealing that the left hemisphere of the brain constantly creates narratives to interpret reality, leading to a mistaken identification with these self-narratives.

 

It’s hard to untangle sense from nonsense in this passage. The “stable, controlling entity” – part of us – for Plato was Reason, understood as the mind’s ability to see the essence of things in the fleeting, changing stream of consciousness informed as it is by a multiplicity of phenomena. Or to recognize the Good even in the social arena with its many simulacra of Good. My reason blocks out the thought of gaining something by harming another person: of gaining sexual pleasure by betraying my wife, for example. If my reason is in charge, if my mind is in conformity with the moral reality of my situation (with what is Good), then such thoughts, should they occur at all, will weigh nothing. If, however, Reason is not in charge of my self, an inner conflict could occur between Reason wanting to do what is good and appetite – aided by fantasy – wanting immediate pleasure. Or if Reason has not been developed at all in me, then I will be at the mercy of whatever desires happen to arise. These are three very different types of “self.” Or “soul” (psyche).  Plato was a Western thinker. Just one. There are a myriad of interpretations of “soul” or “self” in Western thought. To reduce this complexity to “a stable controlling entity” is silly.

   And what does it mean “the self is an illusion”? An illusion is writing this? Perhaps like my belief that “I” am writing this is like a dream? Perhaps my brain is writing it? Give me a break.

   Of course, our conscious beliefs and pictures of reality can be cut off from reality, can be pure fantasy. We can be in the grip of an ideology making us into compliant tools of the powers that be. We can be in the grip of self-gratifying fantasies that console or make us feel like we are better than someone else. Like the Buddhists, Plato believed that it was difficult to escape such “false consciousness” (Marx’ definition of ideology). To the extent that fantasy or ideology condition our picture of our “selves”, then it makes sense to say that self-image is illusory.

   But to say that all possible conceptions of self are illusions because science proves there can be no such thing as a self at all, deluded or not – that is something else entirely. I have known people in the grip of fantasy, and loved them. I have been in the grip of fantasy and prayed that I might be loved. Obviously, it is not the fantasies of the relentless ego that anyone could find loveable. If there is anything loveable in us, therefore, the illusory self can’t be the whole picture. An illusory self presupposes a self that is not illusory, a true or authentic self. I call that the soul, to distinguish it from the ego. It is what gives sense to the idea that there is something precious in human beings, that even the worst of us is a limit to our wills, can’t be shot down like vermin, for example. It is why parents love children even when the children are driven by fantasy into self-destructive lives. It is what makes the thought they we are loved by God intelligible. It gives sense to the Golden Rule: “Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.” If all of us were just illusions, nothing by computer-like brains processing data in accordance with hardware written by a mindless nature, none of this would make sense.

   That is what we are doing: trying to make sense. When we try to make sense, we are talking about meaning. Meaning, in turn, depends on our deepest pictures of reality as a whole, which further experience may revise. Questions of meaning are not possible questions of science.