Barfield and Consciousness

When we discuss thinking and perception, we enter tricky philosophical territory. For instance, there are philosophers today who deny the existence of human consciousness. We may take a cheap shot by asking them how they can profitably write books about this, what they believe their readers are up to, if not consciously appreciating the contents of the book. More to the point, most of these arguments, however sophisticated, are on the wrong track in that they objectify consciousness—reify it—and then, when they fail to find an object (even an immaterial, mental object) called consciousness, announce that it is an illusion. We all did this for decades with intelligence (IQ) back in the twentieth century.

Owen Barfield takes a different approach to this problem. He points out—my paraphrase here—that no one disagrees that we perceive the world around us (however defined) and that no one disagrees that we may think about this world (although what we mean by “think” may be open to discussion). Our consciousness is what mediates, maintains a healthy tension between, or, in Barfield’s terminology, arises when these poles of perception and thinking “interpenetrate” each other. Our consciousness is not a thing, not a hormone or quantity of electrochemical energy, however structured.

Two analogies may clarify this thought. First, the ancient Greeks discussed courage in a way analogous to Barfield’s description of consciousness. In a stressful situation we may experience fear and we may experience an urge to foolhardy behavior. To give in to either makes us ineffectual. Fear prevents action; foolhardiness prompts thoughtless, dangerous action. By mediating these two poles, maintaining a healthy tension between them, allowing them to interpenetrate within us, we may rouse ourselves to courageous action.

Second, Goethe’s theory of colors is predicated on just such phenomena. By allowing light and darkness to interpenetrate each other, colors arise. For those familiar with Goethe’s work, this should be clear. For those not familiar with it, a thorough explanation goes beyond the scope of these paragraphs.

When light and dark simply mix, we get shades of gray. This is instructive in that fear and foolhardiness may also mix in us, unmediated, and produce a state of anxiety. Similarly, our perceptions and thinking may mix in an unconscious, unmediated manner and give rise to thoughtless convention and unexamined “common sense.”

Nothing like wrestling with the big questions.