Determinants of the Human Mind
Yahya Mohamed
The human mind is subject to several general laws, whether concerning knowledge of objective reality and existence in general, natural science and other sciences, or religious understanding, and the like. These laws are subjectively related to mental activity so perception, knowledge, and understanding are subjectively governed by the laws mentioned above, so they are immutable unchanged, and without them, the mind cannot exercise its aforementioned functional role.
There are also several Sunan (social laws) that affect the mind accidentally. Despite the fact that they do not subjectively control perception, knowledge, and religious understanding subjectively, it does affect them.
Moreover, there are rules for these three worlds, namely perception, knowledge, and religious understanding, that the human mind chooses as practical methods amid an indefinite number of procedures, whether this is done consciously or unconsciously. Just as the rules are chosen or innovated, they can also be replaced as required. But this can't happen outside the scope of what the laws determine because the rules operate according to the latter's nature.
So, whether in the case of perception, science, or religious understanding, these cases are subject to the mind determinants of laws, Sunan (social laws), and rules, noting the difference between rules on the one hand and laws and Sunan on the other hand. Rules may differ from one domain to another, as they are subject to the choices of the mind as appropriate to the research topic, unlike the laws and Sunan, as they determine the aforementioned mental activities and influence them without any difference or discrimination:
1- Sunan (social laws)
The human mind is influenced by many factors that affect its activity, thus determining the course of its perception, science, and understanding. These factors may be internal within human nature in terms of his psychological and biological composition- including the genetic impact, and maybe external, represented by the influence of the environment, zeitgeist, and the various cultural structures that ensue.
These factors may include the multiple effects that the objective thing itself has on the perception. An example of that is the endless and multiple understanding possibilities that the linguistic text creates. It is one of the understanding Sunan which does not depend on anything and is not regulated by rules or regulations. What is meant by understanding here is a formative or ontological understanding according to Georg Gadamer’s expression; it is open with the unlimited flow, whether it is a disciplined understanding of specific rules or not.
Reality is considered the most important factor affecting mind perception, and by changing it, cultures, sciences, ideologies, and religious understandings change. According to human Sunan, this influence takes place, which is why it is characterized by a lack of discipline. All that can be done is to monitor its flow without us having a role in influencing this Sunan relationship. Nevertheless, it is possible to utilize this Sunan by transforming what is ontological into epistemological and what is objective into a state of knowledge to explore appropriate ways to questioning the external subject, including religious understanding, with awareness and planning.
In the latter case, what is called the Raison Constituante can be penetrated by the Raison Constitueé, according to André Lalande's expression, as the former is characterized by a stagnant culture of tradition, while the latter is characterized by the creativity of new thought, which requires procedural rules such as those inspired by reality.
Unlike the latter, the former represents the realistic Sunan, which is based on procedural rules. Thus, reality has a different effect, sometimes under the category of Sunan, and sometimes under the category of rules.
2- Laws
In research, the laws of objective questioning, including religious understanding, have particular importance; as it allows us to get acquainted with general laws, by which we conduct thinking, rather than thinking of these laws, and they also allow us to perceive how the process of questioning an objective thing takes place as well as its limitations, and how the range of walking through the rules of questioning is conducted, as in understanding, and whether we can do without them or not? They also reveal the nature of the relationship between questioning and the objective thing, as in understanding and its relation to the text, and then define the conditions required to achieve congruence between them.
There is a number of these laws, such as those we have mentioned in (Science of methodology علم الطريقة ), but we will suffice with one of them related to religious understanding as follows:
The law of inverse relationship
It is a law that indicates the existence of an inverse relationship between the priori concepts and the text in their inevitable influence on understanding. The greater the influence of the priori, the weaker the influence of the text, and vice versa. However, we have to take into consideration that it is the act of a priori that determines the act of the text without the opposite. This relationship is one of action and reaction, for the action is the product of a priori, and accordingly, the text's reaction is determined reversibly according to the aforementioned law.
Therefore, there are three types of relationships in this law, the latter may be weak if the influence of priori is weak on understanding compared to the influence of the text, which is what we termed the weak sense of understanding. In contrast, the strong relationship, which we call the strong sense of understanding. The relationship may also be medium, where the influence of priori and the text on understanding is characterized by mediation, so we called it the medium sense of understanding.
The three pre-understanding relationships can be applied to the three reading patterns identified previously in (Science of methodology علم الطريقة), namely: exoteric, interpretation, and esoteric (symbolism). The law of weak relationship usually applies to exoteric reading, and the law of strong relationship applies to esoteric reading, just as the law of medium relationship applies to interpretive reading.
These laws apply to the product of natural sciences, just as they apply to religious understanding. In natural science, we also find the law of the weak, strong, and medium relationship, according to the nature of the priori concepts adopted in the research.
3- Rules
According to the law of the inverse relationship, it is indispensable to work according to some procedural rules for priori, whether consciously as in scientific culture or unconsciously as in popular culture. As in science and religious understanding, the laws of questioning cognition are in line with procedural rules, as this cognition can't transcend the authority of the possible options of priori rules, even though these options are open, in the sense that the mind can choose one or more priori rules, but it is impossible to think outside the limits of the possible rules and procedures. Therefore the questioning process can't occur without priori rules, whether consciously or unconsciously.
Accordingly, priori rules have two angles of consideration, but on the one hand, they express the law for questioning perception in general. Still, on the other hand, they express a free procedure for perception in particular because they are chosen among several possible options. However, it is impossible to bypass all of these options. Therefore, it is considered - in this respect - within the laws of questioning perception.
In other words, there is no contradiction in the combination and unity between the laws of perception that are deterministic and subjective on the one hand and the free non-subjective procedural rules on the other hand if the latter is held as a set of possible options. Thus, these rules become inevitable and non-deterministic, as well as subjective and non-subjective. They are inevitable in the sense that the choice must take place within these rules without overstepping them, but they are not inevitable considering that the choice possibilities
vary. They are subjective in the sense that the questioning perception is attached to them. They are subjective, given that this perception is not attached to one of them specifically.
Noting that questioning cognition is not devoid of some rules, whether in science, religious understanding, or other mental activities, as it is based on the rule of induction and the logic of probabilistic clues. Thus, this rule can be considered to include the law without contradicting that it is a procedural option.
The rules of questioning perception can be divided into neutral procedural rules and content ones. The advantage of the latter is that it is loaded with priori contents that serve to form a cognition pattern in a way that suits these contents, as is the case with the homogeneity rule of philosophers in their perception of existence.
The most prominent neutral procedural rule is the rule of induction on which the questioning perception depends. It represents a law that human knowledge must rely on, whether in realizing objective reality, science, religious understanding, or other objective issues.
Many advantages distinguish this rule from other rules. On the one hand, it is innate, not acquired, because it is based on the logic of rational probability. Therefore, it represents a common rule for all sane people, and all accept it. In this respect, it is similar to the principle of general causality. It is also a revealing base without being revealed by other rules. It is true that the principle of logical non-contradiction is also one of the priori that no other principle reveals, but this principle does not reveal anything else, contrary to the rule of induction.
The rule of induction has the advantage of the formal and negative neutral side of the detection, as it does not include any concept related to the external aspect of the issues examined, whether these issues are textual or factual. It is thus suitable to be an important criterion for evaluating and weighing conflicting issues.
Translation review by Ali al-Inizi
The reference
https://www.fahmaldin.net/index.php?id=2580