Unlock document.
This document is partially blurred.
Unlock all pages and 1 million more documents.
Get Access
P a g e | 1
In Thomas Nagel’s book, “What does it all mean?” he asks a lot of very interesting and mind
boggling questions. All of which are followed by more questioning, attemptable explanations, and
ultimately left in uncertainty. One question Nagel brings into focus is that of “How do we know
anything?” – Which really makes us question everything in existence besides our self. Can we really be
sure of anything? Can this all be just one long dream that we cannot seem to wake up from? Nagel also
brings up the question of “Free Will” and whether or not we truly have a say in any choices that are put in
front of us. Does our past and the experiences we have been through make our “choices” for us? Should
we be held responsible for our seemingly self-imposed decisions if they are really inevitable? Lastly,
Nagel discusses a topic that has probably been contemplated by everyone at one point or another which is
about “The Meaning of Life.” Why are we here? What is the point of our lives if there is one? In his book,
Nagel takes us on a journey of the mind to explore different philosophical views on some of the
uncertainties in life and gets us to dig into our own beliefs and question them.
Wake Up
Are you awake right now? Maybe you just don’t realize that you are dreaming. Go ahead. Pinch
yourself. “Ouch!” you say? Your body must be real if you felt your pinch, right? Well, what if the pain
you felt from your pinch is just part of your imagination and what you perceive, in your mind, is what a
pinch would feel like? Perhaps everything you see, touch, and feel exists only in your mind. Nagel
introduces us to a view that believes this very concept known as solipsism. This view believes that the
self is the only thing that we can really be certain exists and everything else is just a concoction of our
own mind. That “existence is everything that I experience -- physical objects, other people, events and
processes -- anything that would commonly be regarded as a constituent of the space and time in which I
coexist with others and is necessarily construed by me as part of the content of my consciousness.”
(Thornton) So, I am the only one that exists?
This is a view, which like most philosophers, I do not agree with. Why waste time writing this
essay if I didn’t think my Professor existed to read it? For my own entertainment? Well, maybe. But, I
P a g e | 2
could never understand why a world like the one we live in, in its entirety, including every bird, flower,
ocean and person, would exist only for me. And, even more so, that none of those things are real. Just a
figment of my imagination? I don’t think so. I understand that trying to prove that everything outside of
our minds is real by using our minds and trusting our senses would take us in circles because, like Nagel
mentions, how can we “prove the reliability of our impressions by appealing to our impressions?” But, I
think it would be pretty egotistic of me to think I was the only one that existed. And, not really even me-
like my skin, bones, heart and brain- but only my mind? This is an interesting perspective but one I could
never hold true for myself.
Nagel himself does not follow a solipsistic view and calls it a “lonely view.” (Nagel) He goes on
to propose that maybe the only thing we can be sure of is that we can’t really be 100% sure of anything.
Now that, in my opinion, is more believable. This philosophical view is called skepticism, which believes
we could never be completely undoubtful when trying to prove what is real or not. We can’t be sure that
the eternal world exists any more than we can be sure that it doesn’t. Nagel mentions that we cannot even
be doubtless of our past memories because we can’t be sure that we were not put into existence today
completely equipped with those memories imbedded in our minds. If you think, “well, what about the
people I shared those memories with?” Then you would be relying on other people’s minds which would
be uncertain to be true, also, because those people may just be a part of your mind. And around and
around we go. This is a theory that will also take us in circles trying to prove that anything is real or not
real. Because we are confined to our own perspective of the world and others, we couldn’t be sure of
anything more than ourselves. This is what might be called the egocentric predicament. “Put simply, we
cannot escape ourselves. Whatever we feel, think, speak, or believe, it is we who are doing the feeling,
thinking, speaking, or believing. When we engage God, others, and the world, our reference point or
center is inescapably our ego.” (Kapic)
I do agree that the only things we can completely be sure of is our own thoughts, emotions, and
perspectives; and not even so much what they mean, but, what they are and that they exist. However, I
P a g e | 3
don’t think that makes me the only person in existence creating, in my imagination, you, the person
reading this. If I could create anything with my mind the world would be so much different. Why wars
and suffering; sick children; violence; prejudice? Why slow and painful deaths? If the world was a
projection of my mind than none of those things would exist.
As difficult as it may be to prove that anything is truly real besides one’s self, I could never
believe that. What would be the point of such a lonely life? I think these views can also be dangerous
because if you think that you might be the only one that truly exists than you might not care too much
about others and their well-being. Being skeptical is more realistic. We really cannot be sure of anything
until we die from this life. And even then, we may not learn it all. I think questioning things- the “why?”
and “how so?” behind everything – is great, though. It makes you think more about things before making
up your own mind as to what you want to choose to believe. However, that is really what I think it all
comes down to – we question, we hear a variety of uncertain answers and explanations, and then we
choose which one works best for our self.
I choose to believe that the world we share exists along with all the people, plants, and animals in
it. My view of the world is undoubtedly different than yours and the next persons, because our lives
including all of our experiences, our hormonal and genetic makeup, and even our geographic locations
vary. But, I think that all human beings share many commonalities such as feelings, thinking, pleasure and
pain, living and dying. Going by the concept called verificationism- which Nagel explains is believing
that “our idea of the things that exist is just our idea of what we can observe” - our individual perspectives
and difference in views makes complete sense. It can seem like we are the center of our own universe,
because everything we think, feel and see we do with our own minds, and we will never have that kind of
access to anyone else’s mind, but each person is the center of their own world, or their own version of it,
and our worlds simply intersect and collide.
As a mother, I feel like the most amazing experience I have ever had in my life is bringing my
little boy into the world. The connection I felt with him while he was still in my “belly” and even more so
P a g e | 4
now that he’s a year and half, is amazing. I could never believe that he, our connection, or our love is just
imaginary. He is his own world and I am mine, and our worlds are closely intertwined.
Fate or Volition
Our lives are filled with an infinite amount of choices in which we are faced with every single
day. Many of which we convince ourselves, after the fact, that we should have chosen otherwise. But,
what if our choices are really predetermined and we do not or cannot really choose anything for
ourselves? Do we really have a say in what we choose? Or do our choices stem from our past
experiences, moral values, and personality all acting on us to inevitably choose what we end up choosing?
Nagel uses the hypothetical scenario of someone having the choice between a peach and a slice of
chocolate cake. After choosing the cake you might later think back and say “I should have gone with the
peach” because you know that it’s healthier. But, does this mean that you really could have chosen the
