|
What is
an Idea?
by Mortimer Adler, Ph.D.
In the vocabulary of daily speech, the word
"idea" is generally used to name the subjective
contents of our own minds -- things that each of us
has in his or her own mind. This use of the word
predominates in a large portion of modern
psychology, concerned as it is with something
called "the association of ideas" or "the stream of
consciousness" -- with the images we experience in
dreams or in acts of imagination. It is a kind of
omnibus term that covers all the contents of our
minds when we have any conscious experience -- our
sensations and perceptions, our images and
memories, and the concepts we form.
But that, obviously, is not the way the word
"idea" is being used when we engage one another in
the discussion of ideas. In order for a discussion
between two or more persons to occur, they must be
engaged in talking to one another about something
that is a common object of their conjoined
apprehension. They do not have a common object to
discuss if each of them is speaking only of his own
ideas in the subjective sense of the term.
Consider, for example, a number of individuals
arguing with one another about liberty and justice,
about war and peace, or about government and
democracy. They probably differ in the way they
subjectively think about these matters. Otherwise,
they would not find themselves arguing about them.
But it must also be true that they could not be
arguing with one another if they did not have a
common object to which they were all referring.
That common object is an idea in the objective
sense of the term.
These two uses of the one word "idea" -- the
subjective use of it to signify the contents of an
individual's conscious mind and the objective use
of it to signify something that is a common object
being considered and discussed by two or more
individuals -- may be a source of confusion to
many. We might try to eliminate the source of
confusion by restricting the use of the word "idea"
to its subjective sense and substituting another
mode of speech for "idea" in its objective sense.
We might always use the phrase "object of thought"
instead. Thus, freedom and justice, war and peace,
government and democracy might be called objects of
thought.
One other example may help to reinforce what has
just been said. Let us turn from our thinking to
our sense-experience of the world in which we live.
We are in a room sitting at a table. On the table
is a glass of wine. You are facing the light and I
am sitting with my back to it. We have, therefore,
different subjective impressions or perceptions of
the color of the table and of the wine in the
glass. But in spite of our divergent subjective
perceptual experiences, we know that we are sitting
at one and the same table and looking at one and
the same glass of wine. We can put our hands on the
table and move it. We can each take sips out of the
same glass of wine. Thus we know that the table and
the glass of wine are one and the same perceptual
object for both of us. It is that common object
that we can talk about as well as move and use.
We live in two worlds: (1) the sensible world of
the common perceptual objects that we move around
and use in various ways and (2) the intelligible
world of ideas, the common objects of thought that
we cannot touch with our bodies or perceive with
our senses, but that, as thinking individuals, we
can discuss with one another.
Enrich
Your Life With a Philosophy Book...
Enrich
Your Life With a Philosophy
Magazine...
Academy
Showcase
Specials
|
|
|
|
|
|