Product Code Database
The floating man, flying man, or man suspended in air argument is a thought experiment by the Persian philosopher Ibn Sina (Avicenna) which argues for the existence of the soul. This thought experiment is used to argue in favor of knowledge by presence.
Using his knowledge, Ibn Sina saved one of the Iranian rulers, Shams al-Dawla, from death, which caused the envy of many of the courtiers. As a result, after the death of Shams al-Dawla, Ibn Sina was arrested and imprisoned in a castle between the Iranian provinces of Hamadan and Isfahan, where he supposedly wrote the floating man argument. The name of that castle is recorded in the old books as "Fardjan," "Mazdjan," or "Mazdavan."
The Floating Man argument that is known today is the product of three distinct yet related versions. In the early days of its creation, Ibn Sina attempts to prove the dissociability of a consciousness and its physical body. In doing so, this initial version focuses on the principle of existential separability, the self and its ability to conceptualize its existence. In an attempt to solidify his argument, Sina expands his argument into what is known as the second version. In this updated version, Sina creates a new ideology, namely conceptual separability, which details that because the body and self are perceptible, one is able to conceptualize the self without the associated bodily parts. In the final edition of his argument, Sina brings into question self-awareness and the continuity of consciousness.
Ibn Sina states that the eyes are the only thing preventing them from seeing anything externally, and he further describes that the floating man is created in the air, like a vacuum. Thus, this is to make sure that nothing was to overlap, allowing him the form to continue connecting with no issues. Additionally, he suggests that his extremities are separate and not interlocked. Therefore, since they are separate, Ibn Sina believes that he has no consciousness of his limbs, innards, heart or anything external to him that is truly there. Although He won't know his exact length, breadth, or depth, he will be aware of the existence of his essence. Even if he were to be conscious of his extremities, for instance, he still would perceive them as an essence of a condition of his essence. Therefore, he is warned and instructed to pay attention to the existence of his soul as something separate from his body and immaterial.
We can deconstruct Ibn Sīnā's Floating Man argument into the following points:
1. The Floating Man is conscious of the existence of his soul without being conscious of the existence of his body.
2. The Floating Man validates the existence of his soul without validating the existence of his body.
3. When the Floating Man is taken out of his body; all that is left is his soul, which is validated in itself.
Therefore, one may determine that:
4. Rejecting the existence of his soul is unimaginable, since it is necessary for his existence.
5. Rejecting the existence of his body is plausible, since it is not necessary condition to validate his existence.
6. Following the points 4 and 5: validating the existence of the soul without validating the existence of the body is plausible.
This argument relies on an introspective thought experiment. We have to suppose a man who comes into existence fully developed and formed, but he does not have any relation with sensory experience of the world or of his own body. There is no physical contact with the external world at all. According to Ibn Sina, this subject is, nonetheless, necessarily conscious of himself. In other words, such a being possesses the awareness of his own existence. He thereby believes that the soul has an unmediated and reflexive knowledge of its own existence. Thus appealing to self-consciousness, Ibn Sina tries to prove the existence of soul, or Nafs. Some scholars like Wisnovsky believe that the flying man argument proved the substantiality of the soul.Wisnovsky in Ibn Sina believes that innate awareness is completely independent of sensory experience.
Descartes' famous phrase "Cogito ergo sum" ("I think, therefore I am") bears resemblance to the Floating Man argument, and some even believe Descartes to be inspired by Ibn Sina in that both argue for knowledge by presence. Whether these similarities are deep or trivial is a matter of scholarly disagreement.
This argument is not supported by the concept of substance in metaphysics. This experiential field shows that the self is not consequently a substance and thereby there is no subjectivity.
|
|
