When You Lean

 
There are many situations where presumption prevails over reason. Philosophers are hung up on the meaning of reason and those million words said about the matter have not managed to settle what it is, why it is, where it comes from and how it relates to its constant companion, logic. What is often not discussed is when it might be appropriate to apply a bit of it.

Mathematical reason is straightforward enough given that the variables have a fixed numerical relationship with each other but the idea of moral reason which Kant introduces with the use of the word 'pure' demonstrates the very limits of logic when entering into metaphysics. If by 'pure' it means that some authoritative truth about human nature is being sought, through some interpretive process (also called reason) then we can't help but admit that Wittgenstein was right when he talked about the confusions caused by the limits of language itself.

Terry Eagleton neatly sidetracks the philosophical roadblock by using the word 'autotelic' which when analysed is just another way of saying that there is no reason for anything existing apart from the fact. Things just are, are they not?

Eagleton's 'reasoning' is not too dissimilar to Avicenna's neat proof of the existence of God simply applying the principle of necessity. After all if the universe is a made thing then by necessity there must be a maker. A simple enough deduction that merely illustrates the absurdity of the existentialist paradox.

There you sit, on a chair. When you lean back on the backrest, you look so self absorbed. Then suddenly you put the chair back on all fours. Now you lean on the table on your elbows, fists on the cheeks and suddenly you have a plan. If implemented it will set philosophy back two thousand years.