Objective . Idealism

The links in the table on the left take you to sub-headings in this article.

The crucial difference between subjective and objective views of philosophical Idealism is that I need to explain two central features of life : the experience of relationships, along with the existence of confusion and determinism. These features react on each other. A subjective Idealist, considering himself to be a monad, can ignore relationships ; I cannot. This is because I centre on psychology ; I use philosophy only to explain my psychology.

Two Forms of Perception

For a subjective Idealist, experience is of objects only ; this gives rise to static perception (the object stays the same). For an objective Idealist, experience is enlarged to include relationships. In addition, confusion and determinism indicate that a subconscious component to mind exists – this feature of mind is not part of monad theory. These features give rise to dynamic perception (since relationships change) as well. Therefore, the main difference between the two forms of Idealism can be interpreted as pivoting on the issue of perception.

Within a perspective of reincarnation, both static perception and dynamic perception are learned responses. Knowledge acquired by experience in past lives becomes subconscious in this life. Subconscious knowledge is part of the mental ‘background’ of a person, and is the intuitive basis on which he faces life. Knowledge not acquired in past lives becomes knowledge gained through experience in this life.
In Kantian metaphysics, past-life experience is called a priori knowledge, whilst experience in the present life is called a posteriori knowledge.

Dynamic perception is acquired by the infant before static perception is. This means that the infant becomes sensitive to the relationships to its parents before it becomes sensitive to the perception of objects. This order of perception creates the possibility of infancy trauma. The infant acquires sensitivity without having, as well, the ability to interpret accurately its relationships. [¹]

The perception of dynamic relationships leads to the ‘not-self ’ (that which is different from the ego) and so to the ‘creation’ of objects through static perception. The subconscious mind of the infant stores its learning from past lives, and subconscious memories of relationships are always more powerful and profound than subconscious memories of objects. Therefore the need to relate dynamically to people always overrides the need to relate statically to objects.

Metaphysics & Psychology

In general, perception has both metaphysical and psychological factors.

Consider metaphysics.
Everything that I see produces images or ideas in my mind. An image is just a non-verbal idea. I am only aware of ideas. But I am not an idea, since will and feeling are separate from mind. In the sequence of perception there is more than one mind involved. A perceptual sequence occurs because an idea in the mind of god becomes reflected as an idea in my mind.

The permanence of objects occurs because they exist as ideas in the universal mind of god, and are maintained by the will of god (Schopenhauer’s impersonal will ). The transience of my mental images is due to the restlessness of my mind ; my will is not powerful enough to maintain my images. The factor of will is the factor that Berkeley ignored.

Consider psychology.
At this level my mind evaluates the idea or image. I assume that the idea in the mind of god is not associated with value since equanimity is the basis of divine consciousness (that is, the state of Nirvana). It is the role of centres of consciousness, such as humans, animals, and other life forms, to add the factors of value. Hence objects have no value in themselves, and only acquire value from animals, humans, etc.

In my understanding of reality, god generates universal mind but centres of consciousness have their own unique mind. God provides perception and the ego interprets it. There are two components to perception, one being static and the other being dynamic :

a) The god-ego relationship.
This requires a scenario of subjective Idealism (focusing on monadism). This is the static perspective ; it centres on object recognition and is due to intellectual discrimination of sensory stimuli.

 

b) Projection and introjection.
This requires a scenario of relationships (focusing on bonding, with its factors of imprinting, identification and transference). [²]. This is the dynamic perspective. It centres on value and meaning, and is due to desire and emotion. [³]

Taken together, factors (a) and (b) form objective Idealism.

Therefore a comprehensive theory of perception requires an adequate understanding of psycho-dynamic psychology.

Will and Mind

Some deductions from these ideas :

Emphasising the Will
Perception depends upon awareness. Awareness can mean that we decide what we want to see before we see it. This brings in the will. Therefore perception depends on will. Perception is controlled by the will. Perception can be considered to be our fundamental moral experience: our moral choices are reflected in our perception.

States of social situations and relationships form objective reality. In any situation or relationship, the will controls perception, and thereby cognition, by turning the perceptions into conceptions. The concepts formed then induce the appropriate emotions. So the ego experiences the feelings appropriate to the perception of that situation. In short, the will controls perception so as to experience desired concepts.

Cognition produces awareness but not experience. The development of a material brain and a material body as a function of cognition allows the soul to experience that awareness.

We experience objective reality because we desire to do so. Hence the will is dominant. Then the will develops the intellectual aspect of mind : the intellect serves the will and allows it to achieve its aims. The magnitude of the intellect is proportional to the needs of the will (Schopenhauer's view).

At the level of mind we work with projection. It is the way of experiencing ideas. So projection and the will work hand in hand.

Emphasising the Mind
There is another orientation to perception. It functions differently according as to whether I am engaged in subjective reality or in objective reality. Subjective reality can be an absorption in meditation, day-dreaming, contemplation, or listening to music. In this orientation, the mind is dominant.

Two Orientations to Perception

The two orientations are :

c) In subjective reality, the mind is dominant.
Therefore perception is governed by the mind.

d) In objective reality, the will is dominant.
Therefore perception is governed by the will.

Value and meaning are the grounds of perception. So :

in (c) we have : value governs belief.
belief governs perception.

in (d) we have : value governs will.
will governs perception.

Bonding complicates this simple pattern. I enlarge it to :

e) In subjective reality, perception is governed predominantly by the mind and emotion.

f) In objective reality, perception is governed predominantly by the will and desire.

To unravel perception fully requires the addition to these ideas of two other descriptions of consciousness.

First,
the understanding of philosophical phenomenology, or the philosophical description of states of consciousness (as in the works of Edmund Husserl).

Secondly,
the understanding of psychic phenomenology, as portrayed in theosophical theories.

I have not yet investigated Husserl's ideas, and exploring theosophical ideas is beyond my empirical ability. I have been concerned with the understanding of psychological phenomenology, or the psychological description of states of consciousness.

Only by understanding all these states of consciousness can the ideal of truth be fully attained. Despite my limitations, I can formulate a definition of truth.

Truth is a phenomenology of consciousness.

The number in brackets at the end of each reference takes you back to the paragraph that featured it. For the addresses of my websites, see Links page.

[¹]. Trauma in infancy occurs when the stresses and negative states of mind of the parents’ own lives are transmitted to the fledgling ego of the infant. This is one of the origins of violence.

Infancy trauma is explained in two articles on my website Patterns of Confusion. The first article, Vulnerability of the Ego, focuses on the origins of violence. And the second one, Guilt & Meaning - part 2, centres on why trauma occurs unintentionally ; a shortened version of this article is Infancy Trauma, on my website The Subconscious Mind.

Also, an article on Bonding focuses on some problems of a sensitive child and explains an unintentional source of infancy trauma. This is on my websites Discover your mind, and The Subconscious Mind, and The Strange World of Emotion. [1]

[²]. See glossary for a short note on projection. In more detail, Projection and Introjection, as well as Bonding, are explained in articles on my websites Discover Your Mind and The Strange World of Emotion. [2]

[³]. See the article Meaning and Value. [3]

The overall framework of my metaphysics is also outlined in the articles Monism and Dualism and End States of Mind.

The articles in this section are :

Subjective Idealism

Criticisms

Will and Representation

Objective Idealism

Copyright © 2003 Ian Heath
All Rights Reserved

The copyright is mine, and the article is free to use. It can be reproduced anywhere, so long as the source is acknowledged.

Ian Heath
London, UK

My email address is likely to change.
So if you want to write to me, go to the Home page and use the address at the bottom,

or click on http://www.modern-thinker.co.uk/