“The world of our experience consists at all times of two parts, an objective and subjective part, of which the former may be incalculably more extensive than the latter, and yet the latter can never be omitted or suppressed.” (James)
The idea that we are products of two separate worlds: the physical, and subconscious is a very prominent idea within James’ lecture. This idea is worth noting because often times scientific evaluations of the “real” world omit the human subconscious and the effects it has on that very world. James takes the idea a step further, suggesting that the subconscious or subjective world is more of a “reality” than the physical world which is built around the most general ideas. Since the subconscious mind can drive one to certain beliefs it also influences the actions that one might perform. These actions are “real” in a physical sense because they have real consequences and often times change the way the world itself functions. According to James, an individual’s subjective world provides more of a concrete foundation for one to experience the objective world.
“…it is the one thing that fills up the measure of our concrete actuality, and any would-be existent that should lack such a feeling, or its analogue, would be a piece of reality only half made up.” (James)
Yet, so often the subjective world is discredited from any “scientific” examination of the objective world in exchange for rash generalizations. This idea is quite profound and can actually prove useful in evaluations of the objective world. Living in a world dealing with only “the cosmic and the general” deprives one of the many diverse subjective worlds that have helped to form it.
This article is the most interesting that i have read so far. I heavily agree with the author's arguement that the the way we view and act in the world is heavily influenced by our psychological functioning, and so is the way that one might have a religious experience. What i also found very interesting is how the author(James)describes subjective world as the "inner state", that when our subjective world comes out, it is how we form our objective world. Another example that i have to add is how James describes the science of religion as intipersonal and the divine as personal which coincides with the idea of the subjective world being an inner (personal) state and the objective world being an outer(antipersonal) formation.
ReplyDeleteThe subjective world, in essence, is based on the perspective of the individual and also of the group. In terms of the individual, we live in constant attention to our own perspective and religion, in this sense, can allow a liberation from ones own views but can also define them and limit ones ideas as well. Within the group, these views can be strengthened even further as rules are created and perpetuated.
ReplyDelete