Sophie’s World Essay (Online Submission)

Sophie’s World Essay

This book that we read over the summer has been one of my favorite books of all time. I think this is because it tells of and describes all these different philosophies, as well as simply these vastly different methods of thinking. And it wasn’t only just the content which astounded me. It was the method in which it was communicated to the reader. Gaarder (through Alberto) didn’t try to promote any philosopher, or state anything in his novel as an absolute truth. He simply stated that each of these different schools of thought exist, and allowed the reader take their pick, and decide for themselves if they wanted to believe it or not. There were certain philosophers who I adamantly agreed with on all points, and then there were others who I was certainly skeptical, if not downright angry with. An example of this later point was Sigmund Freud. Personally, I disagree with a vast amount of his theories. However, there are a few others which I have to admit that I feel a strong basis for truth about. If I had to state my favorite philosopher in the book though, it would be Rene Descartes.
Descartes is described in Sophie’s World as believing, “...that certain knowledge is only attainable through reason” (p.230). This statement correctly identifies Descartes as a rationalist. Being a rationalist, Descartes then relied heavily, if not solely, on his reason and logic to come to all conclusions about the world and reality. However, using this basis of reason, he quickly figured out that all the knowledge of philosophy passed down from the Middle Ages, “was not necessarily reliable” (p.230). Thus, this prompted Descartes to construct his own philosophical system, from the ground-up, thereby vastly limiting the possibilities for doubt. Soon, Descartes arrived at the point where he simply doubted everything. But this is where Descartes differed from many others. He figured, since I can doubt, I can think, which means I must exists - Cogito, ergo sum - I think, therefore I am (p.235).

This statement, I had heard before. It was not a new concept, or a new phrase. But the explanation which proceeded it, and the clarity with which it was expressed, let me truly understand this idea of “I think, therefore I am.” It was an epiphany moment of mine. I realized, truly, fully realized what this Latin phrase meant. For me, as a regular human being to be in the process of simply thinking, I was alive. I was more sure that I was alive, and self-consciousness than ever before. It was a fantastic moment of self-awareness.

Descartes’ rationalism also had another significant and profound effect on me. This was brought out during a discussion in class today. We talked about the differences between Descartes rationalism and Hume’s empiricism. This eventually led to a discussion about rationality versus emotions. And this was best summed up when Mr. Summers asked, “What is the strongest emotion?” The immediate response (me included) was “fear”. Almost instantly afterwards, people said, “wait, isn’t it love?” Thinking about this later totally blew my mind. It made me think, wait, what truly does control  or lead us? Our rational mind, or our emotions? Can a mutually exclusive relationship exist between them? This debate has made me question what rules the decisions that I myself make, and, to what extent, I really control them.

In short, this book has made me laugh, made me angry, made me question, but most of all it has made me think.