From a psychological point of view, what we hear and see is only the reconstruction of external acousto-optic signals, not the essence of external things. In other words, what we think of as the real world is just a virtual scene of our brain! Moreover, the materials used to construct this virtual scene are only a tiny part of the huge existence of nature. For example, the electromagnetic waves that we can recognize with the naked eye are only between 400 nm and 760 nm. The so-called sound waves are just vibrations that propagate in the air, and the frequency is between 20 Hz and 20 Hz to 20hz~20000hz. Now physics finds that the "strongly interacting particles" that make up our present world only account for 20% of the whole universe. What kind of existence is the "dark matter" that accounts for 80% of the universe, even our imagination can't touch it.
So Descartes proposed to doubt everything, what we heard and saw, all kinds of inferences and conclusions made on the basis of what we heard and saw, and their authenticity. For example, is the essence of the red cloth you see red? No, it is even "anti-red" in essence, because only cloth that does not absorb red light waves will look red. So what is the essence of red cloth? With our eyes, ears, nose and tongue, it is impossible to draw a correct conclusion at all. Moreover, to understand the essence of things, we should not only rely on the six senses, but also get rid of their misleading, so as to get closer to the essence of things.
That is to say, in Descartes' view, everything we hear and see is untrue, illusory and needs to be peeped. Psychological research has also confirmed that the world we see is indeed the result of brain re-creation. However, when Descartes began to doubt everything, he had to answer this question: "If all phenomena are false, then am I also false?"
It is a new idea to explain philosophical views with psychological principles, because psychology is born out of philosophy. It's a little unreasonable for my son to comment on Laozi, but who can say it won't work?
Psychologist alfred adler said that no one can jump out of the category of "meaning". Everything must have its meaning in people's eyes: wood is not wood, you have to see whether it can be made into tables, chairs and benches in the future, and stones are not just stones, but may be jade, ore and Taihu stone, full of artistic bacteria. Anyway, everyone has to have a meaning of existence.
Since human beings can find some meaning for these things, why can't they find some meaning for their own existence? To talk about the "meaning" of your existence, you must first make sure that you do exist. The scene described in "The Matrix" is not a problem that only existed in 2 1 century, but existed before Descartes. Furthermore, the old Buddha also believes that what he sees is not what he sees. Everything you see is as unreal as Venus flying in front of you after your finger is stuck in your eye.
This makes people panic. How do I know I really exist? So Descartes suggested that if I have no problem, I will think that I have my own thoughts, and my thoughts belong to me, which proves my existence.
In short, the "meaning" of philosophy is to doubt everything. To be a qualified philosopher, you should ask again, are you sure your thoughts are your own, not a program that makes you think?
"I think, therefore I am" is a philosophical proposition to solve the fundamental problem of how to determine whether people exist or not. Psychology is a psychological law under the assumption of human existence. The former is obviously ahead of the latter in principle, so it is impossible to explain the problem of "I think, therefore I am" with psychological principles, just as it is impossible to prove the physical principles through sociological phenomena.
How to explain Descartes' "I think, therefore I am" with psychological principles?
I am thinking, so I exist. I am here, so I can think.
Existence is existence, and mindfulness is existence.
When I can really think, I really live in the present, in this moment.
And more people can't think, live in remorse for the past and fear and worry about the future, and can't think about the present.
And when I can really listen, see and think at this moment, I can really live in the present.
Descartes' "I think therefore I am" is a philosophical theory, which can be understood as Descartes' own heart full of doubts. He doubts everything in the world, which means Descartes himself is a suspicious person, so he will think, doubt and think that nothing in the world is beyond doubt.
Haha, first of all, you should know who you really are. . . Only enlightened people can understand. . . 20 19 is my enlightenment year. .
Use other people's ideas to influence their own behavior.
You are a walking corpse.
Use your thoughts to influence your actions.
You are a megalomaniac.
Dig into the reasons and learn something.
I am ignorant.
Why ask for more?
Without thinking, there is no me.
In fact, there will be a true self.
Presence lies in the present, you and yourself.
"I think, therefore I am": when I think rationally, I really get the value of existence. Reason can get rid of habits, superstitions and all kinds of so-called "established ideas" and let real thinking penetrate into one's life. Then, my existence has a real meaning.