metonymy4u

consider for a moment how we think about “certainty.” on the one hand we could view certainty as following from intellectual proof. following the rules of logic, we deduce that the sum of the angles of a triangle always add up to 180 degrees, or that 2 plus 2 always equals 4 or that all bachelors are unmarried. on the other hand, following the experiences of our senses we might deny all that, saying that clever explanation of concepts does not amount to any sort of proof at all and that the only thing anyone can “know” is that a particular sensation is passing through your mind at any given time. what kant, kierkegaard and nietzsche perceived in this seemingly endless debate over “mind” and “body,” is that both sides of the dialectic presuppose some sort of hidden authority of human understanding, just waiting out there somewhere to be discovered. for rationalists it was the authority of mind, empiricists the authority of body. addiction to authority has kept us bewitched by its endless possibility like some holy grail shimmering always beyond our reach. yet how anyone can truly become the “author” of their lives has never been satisfactorily demonstrated, despite centuries of effort. will this search continue ad infinitum? will we exhaust ourselves in this sisyphean task? or blow each other to bits arguing over whose eternal truth is more true? these are the lessons of kant’s antinomies, kierkegaard’s leap to faith and nietzsche’s eulogy for god. if we continually insist on chasing an illusion, despite centuries upon centuries of ignominious failure, how on earth can we be truly surprised at our never ending frustration?