Friday, November 1, 2013

A clinical analysis into the working of man’s faculty of reason

In every discussion and writing of modern man, the word ‘reason’ and logic crops-up at least once. Such is the relevance of our mystery faculty called reason !

But the sad fact is that very few of us are aware of what we really mean by reason and logic. The great book like ‘critique of pure reason’ by Immanuel Kant touched only its reaches and limits, but NOT what reason as such is. When a robber and murderer accuses his colleague for leaving a witness of the crime alive, he too use the terms reason and logic; wasn’t it logical to kill the witness and destroy the evidence before leaving the crime scene? There was no ‘reason’ for leaving the witness unharmed ! For a subatomic particle physicist, it is illogical to apply Newton’s mechanics  to track the motion of an electron or any other such particle in his experimental world. The two models of reality are entirely different.

 In the above two examples, the context where reason applied was subjective experience fields of the robber and the scientist. It simply bring-out the fallacy in our general assumption that Reason is some-kind of a UNIVERSAL REFERENCE point applicable to every context of inference ! ( the middle premise in syllogism)

What about the logical content in the absolutely general contexts where previous experience does not have any role, such as algebraic equations like; all a,s are b’s, and all b’s are c’s, therefore all a’s are c’s ?  Or the universal law of causality that insists, every effect necessarily have a cause ?

Whenever mind comes across any context wherein the ‘logical relation’ is to be determined between any seen or already observed fact or object with an unseen, or unobserved fact or object, exclusively on the strength of the explanation and evidence, we use the services of our  faculty of reason to ‘sense’ such 'relation'. Many a times the context comes the way like the law of causality, where there is no reference to the seen or observed to compare with, but the paradigm directly appear demanding the extraction of the ‘sense’, or logic ! Even if there exists no previous analogy ( or  a 'universal premise' to check the 'consistency' with, man finds enabled to sense the ‘logic’ content in the paradigm presented before the mind !

Let us take two examples of such context from history of mankind itself, wherein we had arrived at the inevitable necessity of human FREEDOM from man’s ‘self-evident’ , or ‘universal sense of what is right’. First context is American revolution, and the incident is the drafting of ‘ the bill of rights’.We hold these truths to be self-evident that all men are created equal and they are endowed by their creator with certain inalienable rights…such as Life, Liberty and pursuit of happiness”.
The second context is the justification for democracy given by historian Thucydides, during Pericles’ funeral address; ‘we are also taught to observe those unwritten laws whose sanction lies only in the universal feeling of what is right’. What is important to note here is reason’s inherent ability to come-out with such universal axioms at times of need. One can not explain such unique features of our faculty of reason without giving them a metaphysical touch. Of course they are not creations of our mind out of past experience. Our new faculty senses such axioms virtually from the blue. This feature of our faculty of reason strongly indicates its inherent role, or probably nature’s own ploy in giving man ultimate moral codes for living better personal life, and devising universal values for ensuring sustainable community lives.

Not only that mind (or more specifically our faculty of reason) is able to detect  or sense the ‘order’ or the ‘sense’ content, but it is able to sense the ‘disorder’ factor, or the ‘non-sensible, or the ‘inadequacy of sense’ factor also of the paradigms. For example, modern science, even after gaining reasonable knowledge on all the four known forms of energy, it is certain that it lacks a ‘unified theory’ of all energy forms ! One of the greatest hope of modern science is that it would be able to lay hand on such a unified theory in the near future ! What is that helps man to ‘sense’ such adequacy and inadequacy of reason/sense/order/consistency/unity factor in the paradigms presented before mind ? Won't it straight away points towards mind’s inherent ability to sense order as well disorder in existence as well as in routine life situations ?  

Modern world attribute this capacity of mind to our faculty of reason. But how does this faculty actually work ? Though in most of the cases, mind extracts a relation from its past experience or learning, and apply it in the current context and validate the conclusion. But in many other cases, mind is required to ascertain the validity of conclusion from abstract evidences or arguments presented before it. Or in many other cases, it is even without any argument or evidence but a direct appeal to our sense of reason, like in the case of the law of causality, the algebraic equations, and the finding of inevitable social values such as human liberty and freedom as exemplified above in the cases of American Bill of rights, and Pericles’ funeral address on democracy by historian Thucydides.  

From whatever we have discussed above, one thing comes out very clear that,  what mind, or more specifically our faculty of reason does is the job of ‘sensing’ the logical factor, or the ‘sense’/order/consistency/unity factor that exists between the seen and the observed with that of the unseen and unobserved, or the evidences and arguments and their respective conclusions, analogy and its object of comparison, and finally the direct paradigms that demand the faculty to ‘sense’ the ‘order’ factor out of the blue.

Upon close analysis, it comes out that, the role of our faculty of reason is that of a typical sense organ; if the eyes and ears senses certain external categories of the world, this inner faculty ‘senses’ the mystery ‘relation’ that unites the two, or even the single paradigm, that appeal to the said faculty. This is similar to a colour shade-card presented before the eyes, demanding matching of a certain shade that best matches the sample in the hand, or the task of tea or wine taster engaged in the act of matching a certain sample quality with the bench-mark tastes already available in the stock. Often these professional tasters could be asked to assess the quality of an altogether new flavor also, out from the blue !

Kant had shown to the world that what our external sense organs provide us are not the reality in itself, but a certain phenomena destined by nature, to give us Her chosen experience of life. He claimed that when the unrelated sense experiences are received by the mind, it is the structural design of our faculty of reason is what CATEGORIZES them into various preset knowledge forms. But what we have seen above is a different role of reason. It acts in the role of another internal sense organ, that senses the ‘order/unity/consistency factor between what the external sense organs supplies to the mind ! There are no fixed categories. Instead, it is the abode of sensing, or detecting another existential category, or quality: ie. ‘order, or unity/consistency/unity factor of what is presented before it by the mind.

Descartes preferred to call this faculty ‘ understanding’, while Bergson, Einstein, and even Bertrand Russell* preferred to call this faculty ‘INTUITION’. While ‘intuition’ is a not yet a well probed faculty of mind, it is better for us to attribute this faculty to our faculty of reason itself, as it is found to be the abode of mystery relations that it helps us to sense, and apply to our multitudes of day to day experience paradigms.

What is most important here is to state the fundamental difference between Logic and Reason here; while Logic is about the 'technicalities' of fixing consistency with the 'universal premise' in the syllogism,Reason is about fixing consistency with the content 'principle', or even coming-out with new a new universal, or an axiom, or a new set of evidence to transform, lead the subject-matter into a new realm of reality.

The two distinct functions of the faculty of reason

Hope we have now learned to look at our faculty of Reason with an entirely different eye; from its unexplained earlier role, into a very specific and sensible role, as an internal sense organ, with a very specific role in every act of deduction and induction, that of sensing/detecting the logical relation between the known with proposed unknown.

Now let us identify the not yet known and recognized role of reason in the very act of analytical thinking. Whenever we engage the mind into an analytical mode, ie. to ponder over any issue of day to day life, or into a given scientific or philosophical project, have we ever watched how does mind work on them ? The moment we feed the ray of thought into the mind, and attain the required level of concentration, it is the mind itself that split the given issue or ray of thought into all its possible constituent sub-issues or possibilities, and present a new SPECTRUM before us ! The issue, or the given ray of thought now stands split, like the ray of white light gets split into a spectrum !

When all the possibilities, extensions and options are before the mind, and in many such cases, the new spectrum often reveals new evidences that question our old stand, or conclusion ! Here a new deduction could take place, and also a new conclusion. New hypotheses emerge in this process, and new experiment begins in-order to qualify the newly found propositions as theories. This is a non-stop natural process of the ‘Prismatic’ mode of our faculty of reason. . This function is the most creative function of human mind. Charles Sanders Pierce was very specific about the source of landing of ‘hypotheses’ in the mind: He said it was always from source ‘up-above’, ie, from un-explained sources in existence.  

The metaphysical elements of our faculty of reason

If we truly open up our mind and look at how do we get the unique experience of life, the central role of our external sense organs will come to surface. There could  be several other categories of existence other than sight, sound, taste, touch and smell. It is quite possible that man has been bestowed to live with only limited number of these existential categories/qualities, that enter into his mind through the respective sense organs, to give him his pre-set experience of life. The limited range of our sense organs, such as the limited distance and size of objects of our eyes, the limited hearing range of our ears ( we can not hear audio-signals below certain decibels and wave length) are also can be evidence to what has been claimed above. Suppose we could hear even ultrasonic range of audio-signals. In that case our kind of normal live would have been impossible for us to live ! Or an eye that could see microbes of every size and variety ! Life would not have been on the lines that we live it today with such a range of vision.  

Therefore, it is ‘sensible’ to conclude that we have been put into a very specially chosen ‘experience bubble’, to undergo a very specific life experience in the world.  

Now we have seen at the beginning of this short-write up that our faculty of reason is also helps us to ‘sense’ yet another ‘category’ or quality of existence, ie. the mystery ‘relation’  or unity/order between what is just in-front of our external sense organs, with those are not in their direct range of perception. We have to arrive at such indirect knowledge through deduction or induction process, a process wherein we absolutely depend upon our mystery sense organ of reason for the act. Hence, ‘logical relation’ or order/unity/consistency is also to be treated as yet another necessary category or quality of existence in line with such other categories that our eyes and ears provide us. One exception is  that the latter complements what all other external sense organs give us in the true experience of life ! Sense of reason is what gives us ‘proper sense’ to the world that ( the world) primarily enters our mind through the external sense organs. 

In a way, what each sense organ provides us is ‘intuitions’ in a certain sense: as we are too familiar with what our eyes, ears and nose provide , its intuitive nature is not realized by us. AS the new category of ‘order’, ‘unity’ or ‘sense’ factor is altogether new to us, we tend to look at it as ‘intuitive’. That is the only difference. We in fact are passive recipients of what these various sense organs ‘sense’, or gather from the external world, and give us our experience of life. It is the familiarity factor that makes the difference.


Ps: The above proposition and idea is completely explained at our self-published e-book at, details at link :    

Also see the bit lengthy paper posted just after this post down.     
The intention of the author is to convey the actual role and function of man’s faculty of Reason to the scholastic world by this or that paper/book. He realizes the difficulty of minds that are trained to look at faculty of reason in an altogether different light from time immemorial. But time is a magician, hence old concepts of knowledge are supposed to alter altogether periodically. There was virtually no attempt to understand what is ‘reason’ from the Greek masters’ time. Hope my humble attempt would at least trigger a lot of new interest for research into this important field.

Abraham J.Palakudy ( Author)
E.Mails:, and 

Note: * Bertrand Russell, one of the greatest minds of modern age, who could also be considered an authority on matters regarding science of logic, had detailed the above referred un-solved problems of modern logic, in his ‘second lecture at Cambridge’ (1914) viz. ‘ Logic as the essence of philosophy’. This is a problem around logic’s main purpose of arguing on the basis of ‘observed facts’ to prove some ‘un-observed facts’. He admits that this could be “ done only by means of some known ‘relation’ of the observed and the un-observed”  ( page 291, essays in Philosophy, Russell, Edited by Houston Peterson- Washington Square Press, New York-1974)

“ but the un-observed, by definition, is not known empirically, and therefore its relation to the observed, if known at all, must be known independently of empirical evidence

After listing Mills remedies to solve the above problem one by one, Russell proves them all inadequate and fallacious. He concludes: (page 293) “Thus logical knowledge is not derivable from experience alone, and the empiricist’s philosophy can therefore NOT be accepted in its entirety” .

“ We must therefore admit that there is general knowledge NOT derived from sense, and that some of this knowledge is not obtained by inference but is PRIMITIVE” (page 309)

When Reason is understood and recognized as an internal sense organ, the source of such MYSTIQUE knowledge in logical exercise referred by Russell could be explained and solved permanently. That ‘ general knowledge NOT derived from the senses’ whose source who called ‘PRIMITIVE’  is in fact provided by the ‘sense organ of reason’. It is the much required sense of ‘order’, or UNITY provided by our sense organ of reason, that exist between every cause and effect, every instance of inferring a conclusion from a set of evidences or arguments, and every analogy and its object of comparison. This is what fills-up the gap that Russell had named as coming from ‘non-empirical, primitive’ sources !

Though Russell had later clarified that the source of such 'primitive' knowledge is 'intuition', at closer look we would realize that whatever we call as 'intuition' is nothing but the work of our mysterious ' faculty' of reason. 


Wednesday, September 11, 2013

Is Reason an internal sense organ ? A super-mind above the known mind ?

Is Reason an internal sense organ?A super-mind above the known-mind? 

There is a Book also by same the author at with the same title, but the theme explained in a different way and style 

Printed version:

E.Book version:

Reader's comments on the book received by e.mail ( January 2015)

"Your book changed my whole out look on religion, I was deist in philosophy but just felt there was more to this faith thing then I found you! It just made sense to me it clicked. You now have a small but grown fan base here among my friends we read and discuss you blog" 

" Love your work... it has helped me so much"
Meri Novak. ( Ohio, US)

Same reader's review at the Book page

on March 6, 2015
Format: PaperbackVerified Purchase
This book was an enlightenment to this mind! Amazing how much information was packed into this little book. I would recommend and I do to anyone searching for truth and order. Let's hope the word get out about this treasure.

This is a paper proposing that what faculty of reason does is the detecting, or sensing of the not yet recognized existential category of ‘order’, (or the UNITY factor, or the sense’ factor)in the act of  logical inferences, like the similar existential categories of sight and sound sensed by eye and ear in the act of routine life. This unheard perspective of man’s special faculty of Reason , in this author’s knowledge, was never discussed in any academic circle or professional papers, present or past. This paper undertakes a clinical observation of man’s act of inference with the purpose of understanding the role of REASON in it. This author was into a dedicated journey of 2-3 decades into understanding ‘scientific method’ of man, and how does he fixes exactness to his conclusions and inferences, and this paper summarizes what he had found.   



Category of unity and order, Role of reason in inference, Cause and effect, Evidences and conclusion, Analogy , Sensing the order content, Predisposition of sense organs



Wikipedia defines Reason as, ‘ the capacity for consciously making sense of things, for establishing and verifying facts, and changing or justifying practices, institutions, and beliefs based on new or existing information ‘ [1]

Catholic encyclopedia [2]attempts to define Reason/reason as follows:

‘Reasoning, therefore, must be asserted to be a process sui generis. (meaning: of its own kind/genus) This is perhaps the best answer to give to the question, so much discussed by the old logicians, as to what kind of causative influence the premises exert on the conclusion. We can only say, they validate it, they are its warrant’. [2]

Greek masters had understood Reason as a ‘mirror’ of God’s own mind that human beings share;
‘Parmenides describes the Goddess who governs all things as saying  “I will tell you” the order of the universe, “ and you listen and receive my word”. Human beings will be able to receive her word because human mind mirrors her mind’ (Prof. Carlo Cellucci, Sapienza University of Rome in his forthcoming book  ‘Rethinking Logic’ [3]
But philosophers lived and died later-on in history could not perhaps experience Reason in the same way that of the old masters. They, including, and prominently Immanuel Kant, revamped this old notion, and said pure reason can not ever cross the phenomena-wall, and experience the ultimate reality, or even the ‘things in themselves reality’ of the objects of our external senses. They (most of them) stuck on to the old principle that ‘ nothing there in the mind that was previously not there in the senses’.

It is also to be noted that the said Greek masters had not clearly differentiated between ‘mind’ and ‘reason’ in their writings, as all of them interchanged the terms at convenience in the same meaning.

Many of them including Plato had shifted to identifying reason and ‘ logic’ also in one and the same meaning, more or less, as a ‘method’. 

Yet there is another important definition of ‘reason’ that simply use it in its literal meaning; as an aspect of human nature, that insists on valid ‘reason’ for every act, conclusion and event. This definition pits reason directly against belief, belief being conclusions not grounded on valid reason, evidences and explanations.

A good portion of the contemporary world belief that reason is nothing but the ‘living beings’ inherent ability to strategize means towards achieving ends.  Prof. Carlo Cellucci, Sapienza University of Rome, in his forth coming book  ‘Rethinking Logic’  says: 

“ Indeed, reason is a matter of the ‘relation’ of means to given ends. ( word ‘reason’ directly derived from the Latin root   ‘ratio’=relation) It can be defined as the capacity to choose appropriate means to given ends” [4]

The post modern understanding of reason nullifies all the previous definitions; it simply claims that human reason is after-all merely a product of history, and the particular culture of communities. Prof. Charles Brown ( State Emporia UniversityUSA) states in his paper ’Democracy in Dialogue’, that; “  it is now widely accepted that human subjectivity and the diverse forms of rationality are shaped by the contingencies of history and culture” [5]

While the first of the above definitions that in the Wikipedia depicts Reason as ‘a capacity ‘ ( in tune with its usual usage in the world today; as a ‘faculty’ ) the second source (catholic encyclopedia) depicts it as a ‘Process’.

Kant’s depiction of reason was dissimilar to any ‘faculty’ or ‘method’ definition. He pictured it as a structural aspect of the mind, that “ moulds and coordinates sensations into ideas….and transforms the chaotic multiplicity of experience into the ordered unity of thought’ [6] ( Will Durant, in his ‘Story of Philosophy’ , chapter; ‘Kant and German idealism’) He too, had not differentiated between mind and reason. According to a paper by Prof. Williams G. of Lancaster University;

 “ Kant rarely discusses reason as such. ( in ‘Critique of pure reason’) This leaves a difficult interpretative task: just what is Kant’s general and positive account of reason ?’  [7]

It is obvious from the above definitions and explanations that Reason has not yet been defined, or understood by mankind in its deserved clarity. World should probe further and understand what it really is; a capacity or faculty of mind, an internal organ with specific functions; a process, a special aspect of human nature that always demands supportive evidence, and scientific explanation for his actions, stand and conclusions that differentiate him from animals; or merely a specialized structure of the mind that transforms mental inputs into knowledge form?

Or, is it really at par with its post modern understanding; as very relative, particular to each culture, and their
 history ?  Such a view is equal to NOT having any  reason at all, wherein each individual, community and nations could claim validity of their own particular reason, based on their particular history and culture ! It is obviously very dangerous a calamity for the future of mankind, as we have already started witnessing its negative signs in the contemporary world ! There is Zero understanding and compromise between any two community, nation or culture. What we have is only a name sake ‘pluralistic’ tradition, ( or multicultural tradition) which is  nothing but a burdensome arrangement for ‘tolerating’ the other till one’s patience’s reaches its limit. It is equal to having no universal ground in sight before mankind, for achieving a common stand, or a moral and intellectual direction for the future of mankind !

This task is so vital for the modern world because, reason is the singular faculty that mankind depend upon for claiming certainty of his conclusions in every field, including  that of scientific laws and theories. Nations, and mankind in general also have no other means to claim validity for their social and political theories that affect lives of large populations of people, and the future of civilizations. In the absence of a distinct and clear understanding on Reason, any one can create his-own tenet of reason at will and put the peace and harmony of the world in danger. Best example is Hitler’s logic of the superiority of Aryan race, and their inherent right to rule over all other races. He could easily sell this dangerous logic to his countrymen, who willing supported his madness to the peril of the world at large !    

Hence this paper intend to deal with the following four central questions and issues around man’s faculty of reason:  

1)     What is the real genus of reason? Is it a capacity or faculty, an internal organ, a process, or a specialized structural aspect of mind for converting sense data into knowledge
forms ?
2)     Irrespective of all the above different depictions of reason, this paper will attempt to locate and pinpoint a single, all unifying, distinct essence of the faculty of Reason from all the definitions above: what reason ultimately does is detecting, or sensing the ‘ORDER’
( or the UNITY, consistency, ‘sense’, or orderly ‘relation’ ) ‘content’ that lies between every conclusion and its presented evidences, every cause and its effect, every analogy and its object of comparison etc. ( note here the usage ‘causative influence the premises exert on the conclusion’, in the Catholic encyclopedia definition)

This would be the chief theme of this paper. Such an observational task has not been undertaken for a long time, even for centuries. What Kant had attempted was to find out reason’s reach and limits, not as to what ‘reason’ as such was. The latest Analytical Philosophy traditions also, upon looked at from close quarters, touch only the various possibilities of ‘logical forms’, and not the actual function, or role aspect of reason in the universal inferring act.

This author has been into single minded plain observation and research into this specific subject for 2-3 decades. It would be obviously difficult for the academic world to even consider dismantling of the old (though vague) conceptions around human reason, as they are very old to be touched for re-verification. But knowledge is a non-stop high-way journey, and mankind must be ready always to embark new routes.    

Some of the old conceptions that we have seen above seems to have a vague glimpse about the ‘sense-organ’ like role of Reason in the act of human inference. Role of reason in ‘sensing’ the ‘order’ content ( or the ‘unity’ content) in existence is at least ‘implied’ in the old Greek masters’ definition ; ‘cosmos’ means order, hence reason ‘mirrors’ the mind of God, what it reflects is the very order element contained in the existential scheme.

Kant’s version was slightly different ; he claimed that reason ‘provides’ order to the sense data in a certain fixed ‘categories’. It does not ‘sense’ or detect it in the meaning that we consider it in this paper. His theory restricts the great faculty of man to a rather  mechanical role, whereas in reality its role is much more dynamic, deeper and broader.      

The usage of the words ‘reason’ and ‘logic’ lately in one and the same meaning, or as the first as the source, and the second as the ‘method’ does not alter its base act of ‘sensing of the order content’ function much. Here ‘logic’ directly means ‘relation’, and this ‘relation’ is nothing but the ‘orderly relation’ and consistency content between conclusions and their premises .This orderly relation factor is what unites all causes and effects, analogies and their object of comparison, and evidences ad their conclusion. This is the chief argument of this paper.  

Definition depicting reason as an integral aspect of human nature that would always demand valid ‘reasons for his acts and conclusions’ points out towards man’s inherent ‘urge’ for ORDER, unity and consistency. Whenever such ‘reason’ is sought, the presence of a ‘sense organ’ to sense or detect such content of ORDER is well evident in man’s thought system. Scientific sense demands that no evidence is to be ignored while arriving at conclusions. Hence, the well evident presence of such an internal organ in man that detects, or senses the ORDER ( or unity) content in every conclusion, inference, and analogies should not have been ignored.

When reason is depicted as a ‘faculty’ for providing means to given ends of man, such a faculty is ‘implied’ to ‘sense’ and provide the necessary ‘order’ content ( or unity content) between such means and the ends. Otherwise, how could man conclude, what means would lead him to the desired ends ? Though the protagonists of this definition are unaware of it, the vital ‘sensing’ of the ‘order’ content between the ‘means’ and ‘end’ takes place in every such act. Ignoring this inner mechanism in the act is equal to saying that ‘I have sight, but I do not agree on having any eye like organ’. 

Lastly, when reason is depicted as a mere historical and cultural product by the protagonists of post modern era , their every reference to ‘reason’ for validating one’s stand and conclusion automatically uses our inherent ‘sensing device’: it is what  decides the ‘sense’ , or the ORDER content( or the unity aspect)  between all their conclusions and their supporting data, arguments, explanations, and evidences, though without their conscious awareness
of it !

Hence, the crux of every definition and understanding on reason that we have seen above implies a hidden element of ORDER, or consistency ( or simply the ‘sense’ content) that every party is depended upon, without realizing its actual role. Thus, this paper predominantly intend to introduce this hidden element of ‘ORDER’ (or unity) that lies between every conclusion and its corresponding argument, evidences and inference. While in the above act, the paper also intends to introduce the existence of an unknown inherent ‘sense organ’  within man, that does the above ‘sensing’, or the detecting of this mystery element of ORDER !

3)                 This paper also intends to introduce the UNIVERSALITY of man’s sense of ‘reason’. When it is understood as an internal ‘sense organ’ for detecting ‘order, unity and consistency’, it implies that reason might be capable of sensing the ultimate element of ORDER also in the entire scheme of existence, such as ‘ why’ life and existence in the universe ? If reason is capable of giving answer such a deep question, it would provide man with a MASTER PREMISE, so that he could reduce all his numerous inferences of science and social-studies out of it, relating them logically with such a master-premise, or say, the universal premise. 

The means of understanding such an ultimate order of existence if any,  is by ‘sensing’ the ultimate ‘motive’ or the base ‘emotion’ ( or the predisposition ) behind the scheme of existence.

It should be assumed here as a universal law of human intelligence that the ‘structure’ of any system is determined by an inevitable pre-disposition, or an ‘ESSENCE’ behind it. This ‘essence’ is its emotional nature, or predilection. For example, the design of an air-craft is determined by its purpose. Its structure has a certain predilection; that of something  gets started, and then gain excessive ‘speed’ in the sky. This predilection of an aircraft is different from that of a boiler machinery. A Boiler is a different system, meant for an entirely different purpose. Its predilection is different. So, it compels our intelligence to infer that any structural system should necessarily has a purpose, a functional predilection. No doubt, this ‘structure-essence’ unity deserves equal or more fundamental relevance in human intelligence system than the cause-effect paradigm. Both have similarity, as cause could be easily compared with ‘essence’, and effect with ‘structure’.  

Hence, if reason is understood as a ‘sense organ’ that could sense the existential ‘order’ , ie. the ‘essence’ or the pre-disposition behind existence, such an insight would be a base premise for every system, thought and institution of man. We must realize that our known sense-mind mechanism is capable of only observing the ‘structural’ aspect of reality. We have no known means to sense or understand the more fundamental ‘essence’ realm. This was the major lapse in mankind’s knowledge system so far. But, in reality we always had this faculty of ‘sensing’ the ‘essence’ aspect of everything that we encounter in our day today life, but as did not have it collectively recognized, no one noticed it so far. Eg. When animals in the jungle see a snake in the bush, though it has never encountered one before in its lifetime, it gets a ‘sense’ of the impeding danger from unknown internal sources. The animals gets a sense of the ‘predilection’ of the snake, and it gets away soon to safety. Young babies cry out of fear when strange figures appear before them. Even man’s faculty of perceiving collective nouns like science, cosmos, forest or army etc. should be realized as the work of our hidden internal sense organs that senses the ‘unity’ of a group of individual objects. Eyes can see only individual trees in the forest, not the forest as such. Mind is not a sense organ. It is only a processing house of sense data. So, we must accept the presence of hidden internal sense organs within, that senses the conceptual-only objects like forest, science, or mankind. So, our new knowledge may have to recognize a 3rd quality for objects of the senses beside the classical primary and secondary qualities: ie, its predilection or pre-disposition.

Kant had said man has no known faculty of knowing this realm of ‘noumena’, the realm of ‘reality in itself’. When our own faculty of reason is understood as a sense organ capable of sensing the ‘essence’ realm ( the Why realm of existence) it would be altogether a new door opened for human knowledge.  In future, if mankind could reach some unity about such predilections of nature, or existence, it could act as ‘base premise’ ( or a master premise)  on the ultimate ‘scheme of things’ in existence, and our sub-inferences in every field such as science, polity, economics and industry could be based on such ‘mother premise’, ending the chaotic paradigm of PLURALITY in the contemporary world ! Reason then could act as an all  unifying factor for the entire mankind.

4 ) Lastly, after reason is understood in its UNIVERSAL application, this paper also intends to touch the much debated problem of mind’s ability to connect with, or at least ‘sense’ the ultimate reality of existence ! ( the metaphysical connection)  When the said matter is discussed, a lot many unidentified mental inputs other than sense inputs that mind experience and encounter in day today life is also touched. The newly identified ‘sense organ of order’ is explored thoroughly, in order to probe its metaphysical connection, if any !
The mystery feeling of ‘sense’ that every thinking man experience in life and existence in general, can not be ignored. This lingering feeling of ‘sense’ about existence compels the thinking ones to conclude that existence can not be a senseless affair camping in the intellect of man as an absurd dream.

The paper also touches the possible duel entity of man; first, as a member of the human community under which this writer-reader interaction takes place here, and the other as each person a metaphysical being under the sun, mauled by the intensity of involuntary signals around his ‘sense of being’ that often gets landed in his thought system.

Now, let us take-up the above four questions of our faculty of reason one by one, for further analysis:   

1)  What is the real genus of human reason ?

As mentioned in the above introduction, the presence of a hidden common factor, uniting all the definitions of reason above, is evident; every definition above, though the ones who defined it may not have noticed, implies an element of ‘ORDER’, ( or unity) what ever it may be, between the conclusion and inference with its respective evidences, explanations, premises and the corresponding arguments; an analogy with its object of comparison, an effect with its cause, an end with its means. What reason doing was to determine the ‘orderly’ relation ( or unity factor) that connects conclusion with its evidences, explanations, or arguments, inference with the provided premises, effect with cause etc.
In classical logical process that involved syllogism, the above unrecognized role of man’s faculty of Reason was always felt a missing link.

Bertrand Russell, one of the greatest minds of modern age, who could also be considered an authority on matters regarding science of logic, had detailed the above referred un-solved problems of modern logic, in his ‘second lecture at Cambridge’ (1914) viz. ‘ Logic as the essence of philosophy’.  This is a problem around logic’s main purpose of arguing on the basis of ‘observed facts’ to prove some ‘un-observed facts’. He admits that this could be “ done only by means of some known ‘relation’ of the observed and the un-observed”  ( page 291, essays in Philosophy, Russell, Edited by Houston Peterson- Washington Square Press, New York-1974)

“ but the un-observed, by definition, is not known empirically, and therefore its relation to the observed, if known at all, must be known independently of empirical evidence” [8]

After listing Mills’ remedies to solve the above problem one by one, Russell proves them all inadequate and fallacious. He concludes: (page 293) “Thus logical knowledge is not derivable from experience alone, and the empiricist’s philosophy can therefore NOT be accepted in its entirety” .

“ We must therefore admit that there is general knowledge NOT derived from sense, and that some of this knowledge is not obtained by inference but is PRIMITIVE” (page 309) [9]

When Reason is understood and recognized as an internal sense organ, the source of such MYSTIQUE knowledge in logical exercise referred by Russell could be explained and solved permanently. That ‘ general knowledge NOT derived from the senses’ whose source who called ‘PRIMITIVE’  is in fact provided by the ‘sense organ of reason’. It is the much required sense of ‘order’, or UNITY provided by our sense organ of reason, that exist between every cause and effect, every instance of inferring a conclusion from a set of evidences or arguments, and every analogy and its object of comparison. This is what fills-up the gap that Russell had named as coming from ‘non-empirical, primitive’ sources !

Though Russell had later clarified that the source of such 'primitive' knowledge is 'intuition', at closer look, we would realize that whatever we call as 'intuition' is nothing but the work of our mysterious ' faculty' of reason.

Reason and intuition

Intuition simply is every knowledge that derived from sources other than our sense-mind apparatus. Even hard-core scientists agree that man often receives knowledge, or at least 'tips' of knowledge from such sources. Charles Sanders Peirce, the US philosopher was sure that 'hypotheses' often land-up in the mind from sources 'above'; ie. intuition.

From whatever we have so far discussed about reason, and its 'sense organ' role in every inference paradigm, it is well evident that the 'orderly relation' between causes and effects, analogy and its object of comparison, and conclusions and their respective evidences is an 'alien' category that our mystery sense organ captures, or senses. Though we used to call it 'intellect' or 'understanding', from whatever we have already discussed , and whatever we will discuss further in this paper, it is evident that what we really does is the detecting the 'mystery' sense/order/unity/consistency content in all the above inference events. Though the source of many such 'relation' is our past experiences, there are equal instances of them that are independent of past experiences, ie pure a priori.

Take the example of Einstein's discovery of the relativity theory of time and space. It was a never heard proposition. It all said to have started with his imaginary travel alongside a wave of light, when he was 16. Here we must recognize the two distinctly different functions of our faculty of reason: one, its usually attributed role of detecting true from false function at the every inference paradigm, and the second, its 'prismatic' function at the pre-hypothesis stage of thinking. (this dual function of reason is explained in detail, also at some other part of this paper) Every ray of thought or idea submitted before 'reason' gets split into its all possible sub-idea and possibility in a 'spectrum' like function of reason. Every scientific researcher is well aware of this mystery function, but it skips his active attention as he always wish to attribute it to his own intellectual prowess ! It was this 'prismatic' function that helped Einstein to form the hypothesis that time-space and matter are interrelated, and none has independent existence of its own. The orderly relation between what he hypothesized was not sourced from any of his, or the world's previous experiences. It was the purely an a priori function of his sense organ of reason. Once reason sensed the logical link, and when the scientist is satisfied with the veracity of his finding, the next step is at the realm of LOGIC, the science and form of presenting the finding to the world.

Such 'prismatic' function of reason can not be attributed to any other source but to the  unverified source called 'intuition', because man has yet to collectively recognize such usual role of our faculty of reason ! With every question put forth to reason involving man's origin and meaning, a splitting of the question always takes place, resulting in the arrival of a new 'spectrum'. This is the routine activity of our faculty of reason, but due to lack of deeper research and studies into this important field, we stick on with our unverified sources such as 'intuition' to account such regular source of human knowledge.

In a way, what our every external sense-organ provides us too are 'intuitions' ! We have no knowledge of what our world of phenomena is, except the reality creating criterion of constant 'familiarity' ! To the ego, who gets born from 'worldly' sources, is unrelated metaphysically to everything around him. Only the 'familiarity' makes him feel at home in the world. But unlike inputs from eyes, ears, skin, tongue and nose, the inputs from the sense organ of reason is unfamiliar, hence he calls it 'intuition' !

The existence of a faculty within man that is linked to ethereal realm of existence is a plain fact. 

It is time for our modern age to add-up this important understanding on faculty of reason to our knowledge system. Time is now ripe to accept the newly found role and function of the sense organ of reason !  

Let us attempt to understand the above role of the sense organ of reason in all the above paradigms, ie. in cause and effect, evidences and inference, and analogies. When a doctor attends a patent with symptoms of frequent cough, and other regular symptoms of TB, he forms a diagnostic hypothesis that it could be case of TB. What faculty in man helps in relating those symptoms (causes) and the diagnosis ? (the effect) Of course he had memory of what he had learned during his medicinal studies, but the act of linking cause and effect cannot be attributed to mere memory faculty. The role of a distinct faculty that detect, or ‘sense’ the unity ( or order) between the two factors is undisputed. Doctor now is compelled by an inherent ‘urge’ of the same faculty of reason to ensure the certainty of his conclusion: he orders a sputum, or other clinical tests to reinsure his initial hypothesis before starting treatment.

Here one may say that it was the doctor’s pre-knowledge about symptoms of TB that helped him to arrive at the cause-effect relation. Take up a syllogism with only symbols to prove otherwise:

All A’s are B’s, All B’s are C’s, Therefore all C’s are A’s.

Here, even without any pre acquaintance with such relations, man is able to detect the logical link involved in such syllogism and pass its correctness. Example of : if 2+2=4, 2 million+2 million=4 million also could be sited here as another proof Reason’s ability to ‘sense’ the unity involved.

Same role of ‘reason’ can be seen in any instance of ‘evidences and inference’ and also that of analogies. When the murder weapon has been recovered from the convict, and blood stains of the victim and that taken from the weapon tallies, the Judge is able to detect an initial logical link. When the hypothesis is further supported by the matching of the finger print taken from the murder site with that of the convict, the ORDER or unity between the evidences and the conclusion is complete.

Cases of logical conviction by analogy is also similar. Scientist has no hesitation in concluding that when earth, stars and all other observed heavenly bodies in space are spherical, even unobservable heavenly bodies at the far corners of universe must also be spherical in shape.
Here, besides the ‘order’, unity and ‘sense’ detecting role of Reason, the SPECTRUM like function of Reason also deserves very special mention. When any ray of idea or thought is fed to our faculty of reason, it splits such idea or unit of thought into all its sub-ideas and possibilities, in a not yet recognized role ! In most of the scientific inventions, this role and function of our faculty of Reason was involved. This was the missing link that Russell might have failed to observe. Hence he attributed it to ‘primitive’ factors, and ‘factors beyond empirical’ involved in man’s logical process.

Many of us might have heard about the young Einstein’s imaginary journey with, and at the speed of light, that had paved for his theory of relativity. Charles sanders Pierce was certain that ‘hypotheses’ always and suddenly dropped in the mind from sources ‘up’. Some faculty of our mind, most evidently Reason in its newly found role, might be the culprit behind the ‘original’ creation of ideas and possibilities that saw humanity steadily progressing in its journey of knowledge ! Such created ideas and thoughts have no empirical source to claim its certainty from. These men toil  later to link such discoveries to some already existing theory or finding in the world, and establish their mainstream acceptability.     

Now let us attempt to eliminate our first described definitions above that do not comply with our above observations.

The first definition ( Wikipedia) that depicted ‘reason’ as a capacity of the mind that ‘consciously’ make ‘ sense’ of things…..appear valid here, except that, instead ‘making’ sense of things, it actually ‘detect’ the ‘sense’ of things, or to be more clear, the ORDER content in things and observed facts, in order to ‘ establish and verify facts, and change or justify practices, institutions….’.  ‘Here ‘sense’ in the noun form obviously is some kind of an ORDER content.

In the forthcoming portions of this paper, we are going to discuss this sensing of the ‘order’ content in things, observed facts etc in more detail.

The second definition ( as process) also automatically gets eliminated here, as the first and foremost function of reason was found as a ‘sensing’ faculty of ‘ORDER’. When eyes see, or ears hear, man gets data free of any conscious ‘process’. They are fully automated landing of observed data in the mind. A conscious ‘processing’ is undertaken only when he is required to ‘relate’ any newly observed data to something already known to him, using the ‘sense organ’ of reason. This relating is, as seen earlier, is nothing but detecting the element of ORDER between the ‘universal’ ( the already known fact/truth) premise and the current data. Hence, the process aspect is a step ahead of the actual using of reason, for sensing the order, or sense content.

As a process, the verbal use of the term, ie. ‘reasoning’, has already been established in human society as an art, or even a science. It is the method of ascertaining a relation between some one’s newly found subjective observation, or assertion of a fact, by interaction with fellow human beings, by explaining it in common factors familiar to both parties. This process too is highly or even absolutely depended upon usage of the sense organ of reason for such ‘relating’ exercise. When a statement of ‘ order’ is presented, no one’s ‘sense organ of reason’ can refute it, as it is exactly similar to the truth of an object before the eyes. The truth of  tree in front of the eyes should automatically a truth for the other person also, as what is seen by the eye has universal applicability ! But we may find it difficult to answer what is the category of ‘ORDER’ that  reason senses, as it is difficult for us to define what is the category of ‘sight’ that eyes senses !

For example, when the famous syllogism;

All men are mortal
Socrates is a man
Hence, Socrates is mortal…. can not be refuted by any one, as there is a mathematical kind of ORDER between the universal fact and the conclusion. It is this ORDER (or unity) content that can not be refuted here. This order is sensed by the sense organ of reason, like the reality of a tree sensed by the eyes! Man is the passive receiver of both kind of categories, and the difference here is that what eye senses is more familiar to us than the ‘order’ category in existence that ‘reason’ senses, as it is not yet widely recognized.

Here, few very interesting and central facts about what constitute as object of the external senses, and an object that far away from the range of these sense organs would be appropriate. Reasoning is never needed for something in the immediate sense range of the external sense organs. It is a reality for every man, irrespective of culture or history. They are simply ‘empirical’. A tree in front of the eyes doesn’t need any syllogism to establish its reality,( atomic proposition) because the distance from the observer from the object is within the sensing range of the sense organ. Russell specifically mentions this aspect of syllogism (ibid, p.306) “ in the first acquisition of knowledge concerning atomic facts, logic is useless” ….an atomic proposition such as ‘this is red’, or ‘this is before that’ is to be asserted or denied can only be known empirically.. .pure logic and atomic facts are the two poles, the wholly a priori, and the wholly empirical” [10]

The necessity for depending on the ‘sense organ of reason’ comes when the object or the fact is in a distance, NOT in the immediate range of the external sense organs. Such objects are away from the observing subject; man - in time and space. Mostly such distant objects and relations would be ‘conceptual’, means, away from the direct range of the external sense organs, but in the direct realm of REASON, the sense organ of ORDER.
Reason automatically senses the (‘order’) relation between some or other already established inference/conclusion of the past with the newly observed fact, and then pass it as a theory.

Those who have found such remote object or fact by personal and independent use of his PRISMATIC function of reason, and then the sensing  the ORDER and consistency between such object and any universal fact already known to the other men too, undertake the exercise of communicating such truth to the fellow beings by the ‘process’ of reasoning, or logic. It is bringing forth the subjectively observed or ascertained fact into the experience range, or before the ‘sense’ range of the faculty of reason of the other person. The ORDER content between the universal premise presented, and the conclusion must be evident to the sense of reason. This is the crux of any reasoning, or logical process.

The task of this paper is to ascertain and show the central and universal role of ‘reason’ ( as a sense organ of the ORDER, or unity content) in every exercise of inference.

Definition of reason as a ‘mirror’ of the mind of God:

As this is an old and important concept of reason held by the Greek Masters, and held valid for many centuries together, let us accord a special place, and have a detailed discussion.

Here we may have to take-up in very brief, a bit ‘sociology’ of philosophical development, to understand the shift of the world from the above old belief about reason. 

If Darwin’s theory of organ development and extinction on account of use and disuse’ is to be believed, this writer dares to propose that the mind organ of those lived in those earlier ages was much different from that of modern man, and even different from men in much older age.

In the beginning, when men used to live a herd-like life in the thick jungles, like it was among the animal species, the entire herd used to have only one collective mind. It was very late in the human development that individual members of the society started gaining independent minds. When the Greek had the mastery over human intellect and thought for many centuries in their part of the world, every branch of science and thought had taken birth and flourished. Human mind was at its creative best. No powerful of external authority was there to check its development. It was man directly under the sky, as a universal entity. The canvas of man’s ‘self’ was just the infinite universe.

Like we have it today, they did not have a ‘highly virtualized’ concept of an external mainstream world, and a global media for catering to its constant maintenance. Today man has a specific external social entity, or identity, viz. his social ego. Its every one’s ‘virtual identity’ in society. It is produced by ‘others’ around man, by nature’s highly imaginative existential principle; ‘You are, hence I am’. ( as against Descartes’ I think, so I am’ ) This self identity is born out of the certainty of me as a reality, on account of the fact that, as an object, I am well perceivable by others around me ! So for the other man too on account of my perceiving him as an entity like me ! In short, more than my spiritual, or ethereal entity in the cosmos, like that of those Greek masters, my primary self identity is that of an entity among similar entities around me.

This distinct shift of man’s self identity from an ethereal self to that of a corporeal self has its strong sociological foundation. When the 16-18th century enlightenment took place in Europe after the collapse of the Church authority, what immediately followed was the industrial revolution, and the establishment of the market capitalism. The entire globe had suddenly become a market place for the new industrial community. Their entrepreneurial enthusiasm and related creativity was such powerful that each and every aspect of human life, especially and most importantly that of the political realm also had been completely taken over by them. Nations become primarily and predominantly economic nations. The story of how the small East India Company in Britain, who had come to India for trade, finally becoming part of the British empire itself is the best example of this phenomenon. Finally, the combine of the political leaders from the so called ‘peoples’ form of government –Democracy- and the industrial class had taken over the lives of people at every nook and corner of the new world for bringing forth ‘development’.

Cosmos, which was a grand enigma for the old Greek masters had suddenly become a grand object for the new masters of the world to explore and plunder: Francis Bacon had used the following phrases as to how to undertake this exploration of nature:
Ø       Nature had to be haunted in her wanderings
Ø       She should be bound into service
Ø       made her a slave
Ø       put in constraint
Ø       to torture the secrets out from her
Anything ethereal had become an anathema. A wall of solid matter had been constructed around the mind of man in the new age. Any other self identity has become unknown to the new man than his member-ship in the society as an EGO. He, with his mind was another manifestation of matter. An object among other objects. For all practical purpose, we must believe that the old kind of the mind of man, in line with that of the Greek masters, had become extinct, and the new mind of new man was in place ! Where the Church authority was before, the industry and neo-politics was there  in the new world.

If during the time of Church Her control over the minds of man was a reality, the same fact had become true there too; there was this real control over the minds and very entity of man by the new masters of the world, the industry, and their partners for development- modern democratic states. A thinking man is an anathema for the new socio-political system. It needs men only as loyal workers in the factories and offices, and as law abiding citizens in the state.

Mind, as in the technique of Hypnosis has been established, is highly susceptible to external suggestions. It gets affected by any strong external suggestion, or sense input. Subjects under hypnotic trance ( induced exclusively by verbal suggestions) tastes sugar as a bitter pill under the spell of such a suggestion ! The influence of advertisements on the mind of man is undisputed. Mind organ is primarily made up of eternal inputs only. So, the entity of man today, especially those who are researchers, is a ‘manufactured- product’ of the external world ! His other canvas, as an entity in the much wider cosmos, is unknown, or considered irrelevant by him. Reality is defined as what is immediate in space and time. A firm line has been clearly drawn against anything beyond the empirical. The impact of the value system that kept by the mainstream institutions upon the minds of citizens, hence, is an undeniable fact. How Hitler could transform a nation-full  of men into hate-mongers through propaganda alone, was the best example of this claim.  

Science, though it does not claim its territory beyond plain matters of physics and other exact sciences, its  chief value, ie. ‘nothing is true beyond what is empirical and measurable’ has attained wide spread influence in the modern world. World took to this belief as a ‘vengeance’ against the many centuries of Church’s authority over the free mind ! This new value of science has become an equally powerful dogma in the new world.

 Veteran scientist Sir Arthur Eddington had said once about the limited realm of science; ‘The external world of physics has been formulated as an answer to a particular problem encountered in human experience….as he might take up a cross-word problem encountered in news paper. His sole business is to see that the problem is correctly solved.’ [11]

 Science has no business to take-up anything beyond its firmly drawn boundary lines.

Above assertions have not been made to speak in favor of idealism discarding materialism, but to bring it into the close attention of the men of philosophy, the only strata in society who could withstand the mass propaganda of the  mainstream socio-political agencies, the utter need of keeping our minds free of all external influences, minding only the sanity of mind of the age that we live in.  Modern man, with his highly influenced entity on the above lines, can not ever be considered as a universal, objective observer of reality in the world ! The role of the observer is what does impact the outcome of the finding, as has been clearly found in particle physics.

So, when taking up the ‘sense organ’ role of reason, the observer has to come out free from the ‘matter wall’ around him, and shift to his position to the other canvas, as an ethereal entity. Both canvas are equally real, as it involves only changing the background material from the canvas of the world.   

When the new mind is accustomed only with the sense inputs of the external sense organs, he may find it difficult to agree with the mystique content provided by reason, as no physic centered argument could explain the presence of such an ORDER and UNITY providing organ within man!

In the sub-atomic particle physics, it is now fully established that matter, or even any of its multitudes of sub-atomic particle could be observed, studied, or any independent identity established, with out involving the reference point of an observer.

Fritjof Capra, a senior scientist himself, writes : ( His book ‘Tao of Physics’ , The Chaucer Press, UK, p. 71)

“ Quantum theory thus reveals a basic oneness of the universe. It shows that we can not decompose the world into independently existing smaller units. As we penetrate into matter, nature does not show us any isolated ‘basic building block’, but rather appears as a complicated web of ‘relations’ between the various parts of the whole. These relations always include the observer in an essential way…
. . .the properties of any atomic object can only be understood in terms of the object’s interaction with the observer”. [12]

In a way, what these findings have completely destroyed was the fundamental certainty of the CAUSE AND EFFECT principle of matter physics. In the world of atomic particles, electrons jump beyond all predictions of causes and effect principles ! Cause and effect relation is applicable only at various sub, or surface realms of reality.

Here the primary ENTITY of human being also seems to have been devised by nature on the above base principle, ie. every unit gets its entity from the entity of the other units around it. 

Therefore, we are bound to give some credit to the finding of the Greek masters that Reason indeed is some kind of a ‘mirror’ to the ultimate scheme of existence. When we have already seen that its role is ‘sensing’ some kind of an ‘order’ ( or unity )content in every act of our inferences, this definition has close resemblance to our finding.    

Definition of reason as part of human nature that always insist on valid reasons

 As once said above, it is more an inherent urge of REASON, than reason itself. The difference is that between an object or a phenomenon, and its properties, Reason is a phenomenon, and it always exhibits an inherent URGE for seeking ORDER, or truth ( truth, obviously is the embodiment of ultimate order)

Emmanuel Kant also says about this peculiar URGE of reason for truth and order. ”  (‘Critique’.. preface)
“ Experience ..never gives us any really general truths; and our ‘reason’, which is particularly anxious for this class of knowledge, aroused by it rather than satisfied [13]

This urge for ‘ORDER’ , the base energy that moves our scientists and philosophers for their inventions and discoveries, deserves special attention here. This ‘urge’ is an empirical evidence that should be counted as a central premise for our scientific conclusions about life and existence. Even our external sense organs exhibit similar urges, peculiar to each organ. When our eyes shows preference for beauty and order, nose shows its preference for fragrances than bad odors. Ears prefer harmonious audio-inputs than cacophonies. Skin, as we all know, prefers smooth and warm touch. These inherent preferences of our sense organs, including the urge for ‘order’ ,and even justice of the sense organ of reason, should contribute much towards understanding the ‘essence’ aspect of reality.

To summarize, REASON is not a process, not merely an urge for valid reasons, not a strategy towards achieving means for given ends, not a byproduct of history and culture, but a universal, internal, not yet recognized SENSE ORGAN, meant for ‘sensing’ or detecting the central existential category of ORDER,(or UNITY ) in line with the category of sight that eye senses, category of sound that ear senses, category of smell that our nose senses !

1)     More evidences and arguments to show that Reason is an internal sense organ that senses the category of ORDER in the scheme of existence

We are now taking up the 2nd purpose of this paper; to show that reason indeed is a sense organ that senses the much central existential category of ORDER and unity that exits between sense observed data, or that between the mind processed or analyzed conclusions and inferences. Without this central sense organ, human intellect would have no meaning.

We have already seen a base introduction, some base arguments and some direct evidences in the 1st portion of this paper. This 2nd portion attempt to line-up further evidences and related arguments.  

Animals also have this faculty of reason in a rudimentary form, as a means to achieve their Biological, and self-protection needs. Capuchin monkeys said to have shown such improved sense of reason, that they climb up mountains and roll down heavy stones to scare away, and even injure predator leopards ! They routinely break coconut like hard shelled nuts on specially kept flat stones, hammering it with other specially kept special stones ! The collective strategy adopted by the wild dogs in Botswana jungles of Africa,  for running after prey-animals in relays, is another wonderful example of animal reason. But it is restricted to their peculiar life needs.
Man is found to possess his peculiar reason organ, that might have been devised for his nature destined particular existential purposes ! His existential purpose, in all empirical evidence, stands above the mere biological realm, as he has no known biological need to think after the mystery of nature, distant galaxies, sub-atomic particle world, or his elusive SOUL ! Nature seems to be bestowing each living being with such faculty of reason, so that it enables it to achieve its particularly given ends. The sense of smell of some animals, especially that of Dog, is much more powerful than that of other members of the species. Here, man is blessed with an excessively powerful sense of reason. Therefore it sharply points towards the ESSENCE related purpose of man in the scheme of existence !

Here the central difficulty would be to take reason in the new perspective by our old minds, which was always familiar with an opposite concept and image of ‘reason’. For many of us, reason stands as a ‘quality’ opposite to ‘emotion’. Among the above varied definitions of reason, the most layman concept was as something pitted against emotion, or blind belief. A ‘rational’ man was supposed to go for explanations, observations and analysis, whereas the opposite camp was known for blindly believing in the dogmas and dictums advised from the seats of authority, like it is among the various religious sects. Those who go for actions and behavior lead by emotions without caring for their outcome are also known as irrational. But we have seen that considering reason in such narrow dimension and perspective is doing gross injustice to our above mystique faculty.

Here, if we attempt to differentiate mind and reason into two different entities, or two different organs –function-wise-, half of the confusion about the real GENUS of reason would melt away.

Differentiating between mind and reason :
 It is more sensible to consider mind as a ‘processor’ of various inputs and data. The primary source of inputs remain the external sense organs itself. But the old schools tradition that advocates; ‘there is nothing in the mind that was NOT there in the senses first’ may be a gross error. The ORDER inputs from the sense organ of reason is another vital ingredient that enters mind, helping it in the function of the processing of data. Sense inputs are the most ‘impure’ data inputs as certified by Kant. According to him, Reason is the structural devise that provides these impure inputs some ‘sense’, and later, an orderly ‘knowledge’ form. It ‘categorizes’ these inputs on the basis of set natural laws, and help man to have orderly knowledge forms.

The automated reasoning function of mind

According to our observation, at every ‘conscious’ sense intake by man, the ‘automatic’ reasoning function takes place, thus choosing the most ‘orderly’ inference automatically out of the options put before it by the mind. Note it again; reason does not provide any absolute truth automatically. It auto-choose the most ‘orderly’ inference out of the available inputs, evidences, and data available for the act. When a man attempts to choose between a suicide by hanging, or jumping before a train, reason may advise only the most convenient option to the unit man. But if the man opt for further thinking, using the Prismatic function of reason, a non-stop thought input will start pouring in ! Here, an important player emerges between mind and Reason- the entity, MAN ! How does it emerge, and what his role is ?

Why the EGO entity ?

Here, we should briefly touch the most central of philosophical question; why man is
here ?  Answering this question will greatly help us in our task of understanding Reason. So, we attempt it here:

We have already seen above that ENTITY of every man has been emerged on the principle of ‘you are, hence I am’. I get my entity on the strength that the other can see me, hear me and sense me ! I too sense him the same way. Here, with all respect to the anti- Bishop Berkley group, we must infer that perceiving by someone is an essential condition for gaining REALTY of an object, or phenomenon. Something that NOT perceived by you might be definitely existing, but it is immaterial for you, like the NOT yet observed millions of galaxies in the remote corners of our universe ! Its existence of non-existence is irrelevant to you by plain ignorance. But this does not alter the base theory, that your own reality for you (not for any other) is ensured only when some other entity perceives you, and you are required to be aware of it !

The ego ( or his base entity as a person) of a new born child takes birth when he identify himself as the owner of his experiences; as an object before the first person in his life-the mother-, his sensations like touch, hearing, and sights, his actions like regular excretions -- - all these are the foundational material for his mind. Indian spiritual Guru Osho writes

(  Book ‘Beyond the frontiers of mind’- p.7)  “when a child is born, the first thing he becomes aware is not him self; his eyes are opened out-wards, the hands touch others, ears listen to others…all these senses open outwards…the ego is an accumulated phenomenon, a bye product of living with others”. [14]

The moment the child identify himself as the sole owner of all his unique experiences, his entity as person is born ! He is now an EGO, a phenomenal entity among other entities. The ‘external’ is the base of his identity. In other words, a potential KNOWER is born.

The mind produced its own owner, a new entity, exclusively from materials gathered from the external world ! He has become one of the mind’s important occupier, along with other external signals, inputs and other individuals like him around !

Nature’s most profound existential need is being achieved when each Ego takes birth. At birth, only the baby’s body and inborn urge system are in place. This ‘synthetic’ self identity is born when he starts intake of external material for the mind from the world. Existence is invisible to itself with out having KNOWING entities. Ego was the smartest of devices that Nature had found to achieve this end; without them, existence would have remained invisible, and hence, VOID !

The ego was provided only with external sense organs initially. Man had become aware of his sense organs millions of years after his regular use of them. Only very late in his journey through self knowledge that he had become aware that it was eyes that see, and ears that hear ! A knower of the STRUCTURAL realm of existence ! The ESSENCE is still unknown to him, as his internal sense organs for sensing its signals have not been developed yet !

When man grows up, rich with infinite data poured-in from the external word, and equally rich data and inputs seeped-in from the internal source such as emotions, natural instincts, inputs of automated reason, and pure reason from the sense organ of ORDER, he turns a full fledged unit with universal consciousness !

Conclusions on the difference between mind and reason:

We have been attempting to differentiate between the realms of mind and reason. As we have seen, when mind is only a processor of all external and internal inputs, the chief aid of man in dealing with the world is reason, an  internal sense organ that provides mind with signals and inputs from beyond the typical external world, such as the mystery ‘order’ element in his mundane day to day inferences. It also helps mind with ORDER element in ESSENCE related questions on existential issues. While mind is a mechanical organ, reason is a sense organ providing necessary inputs for its wholesome functioning, in line with the external sense organs that provide mind with inputs from external world.

We have also found that though reason is active in the functioning of mind organ in its automated mode, its conscious use is depended upon the willful call of the entity- man-for his special usage such as for science, and any other form of formal thinking, including philosophy and metaphysics. When one formally uses sense organ of reason, unknowingly the entity shifts from its mode of empirical world as its canvas, to a different canvas or background, in an act of ‘transcending’ the self. When the canvas alters, the entity of picture drawn on it also alters. The picture becomes altogether a different product.

Other inputs that reaches mind in its routine operations are EMOTIONS, INSTINCTS and the already worked-out products ( already arrived at conclusions, well established scientific theories, other social convictions, beliefs, decisions, hypothesis etc.) of the sense organ of reason. These existing items and concepts already in the mind ( memory) make  man a unique ‘aggregate’ at every moment, and makes him a unique receiver of ‘fresh sense inputs’ in a corresponding unique quality and manner. For example, a scientist does not use his routine sense organs similar to that of an ordinary man. He had rich data already stored in his mind, in the form of the store of his exceptional knowledge.

A brutish man, who had bitter and cruel experiences in the past, would be a very different aggregate, and the way he uses his reason too would be equally negative, ie. for destructive inferences. Reason provides ‘orderly’ inferences only over the ‘presented’ or available ‘spectrum’ of thoughts ( provided by the prismatic function of reason)

It helps the seeker with higher knowledge and insights when he works deeper and deeper into the given subject, analyzing the ‘spectrum’ non-stop, till he reaches the limits of one’s thoughts ! At these bottom limits, as Kant had rightly assumed, the inherent morals and ethics of nature lie hidden. Those who reach up to that level of intellectual search always find these bottom treasures, and this could be considered the end goal of nature for every human being.  

Other unusual features and functions of the internal sense organ of Reason that may help us to identify it as another ‘sense organ’.  

The inherent universal ‘senses’ : American revolutionists, when they drafted the ‘bill of rights of man’, had found the ‘inalienable rights of man’ as ‘self-evident’ in nature ! No kind of syllogism can be formed to ascertain the universal rights of man, hence we must attribute such origins of universal ‘sense’ to the sense organ of reason ! As we have already mentioned in one of the above paragraphs, what is sensed by external sense organs too doesn’t require any syllogism to prove its truth. They are simply self evident to one and all.

During the now famous funeral (of Pericles the great) address by  historian Thucydides on democracy, he too mentions a similar ‘universal feeling’ : “and we are also taught to observe those unwritten laws whose sanction lies only in the universal feeling of what is right....”
Such was the  power and acceptability of such  sense of  ‘rights’ of man, that the entire world population had adopted it as UNIVERSAL, and even now follows these principle as the foundation of any civil society. Such universal values could never emerge from empirical sources !
We have no option but to believe that the real source of such ‘universal sense’ was nothing but man’s then unknown sense (organ) of reason ! Like similar pre-disposition, or predilection of other sense organs, ( as once seen above ) we have already referred to similar pre-dispositions exhibited by sense of reason too. The universal urge for justice and freedom that every human being experience, and even ready to fight fierce wars for achieving these ends must be attributed to the above predilections of the sense of reason of man !
The very scientific spirit of man that emerged in the human society during the enlightenment period was indeed a wild spirit, similar to the above universal urge, towards seeking out the ultimate ORDER of nature. It compelled man to seek ‘sense’ or ‘reason’ or ‘order’ in everything around. We have already seen above the power of such pre-dispositions of the sense organ of reason. When human mind was under captivity of the Church, this wild spirit was in check.  

Reason’s routine inputs considered as ‘intuition’ by many past philosophers
Albert Einstein once quipped; “ quantum mechanics is very impressive. But an ‘inner voice’  tells me that it is not the real thing “
Descartes says in his ‘Discourse on Method-part 1V’ : ‘ that the philosophers of the schools accept as a maxim that thee is nothing in the understanding which was not previously in the sense, in which however it is certain that the ideas of God and soul have never been; and it appears to me that they who make use of their imagination to comprehend these ideas do exactly the same thing as if, in order to hear sounds, or smell odors, they strove to avail themselves of their eyes….neither our imagination, nor our senses can give us assurance of anything unless our UNDERSTANDING intervene’ [15]

He has used the word ‘understanding’ in the same sense that Einstein has used ‘intuition’, as an extra sensory source for gaining knowledge, or at least some signals about it. Other than ‘sense organs’, nothing in man had ever heard giving any direct information from outside. Mind, as we have seen, is only a processor.

Hence, we have to infer that both had indirectly hinted to some hidden sense organ
within ! This sense organ was always there in man, but he is yet to realize its real role and function. Many scientists found admitting that ‘hypotheses’ always land in the mind from unknown sources. Charles Sanders Pierce was one of them.

Like sensing of order, reason detests ‘disorder’ too

Despite the splendid achievements of science in understanding cosmos and its smallest of particles, there is this lingering feeling within every true scientist that something very vital is still missing in their understanding ! From where do such a sense of incompleteness landed in the minds of scientists ? We have to infer that it is the sense of ‘DISORDER’ generated by the sense organ of reason. When there are three elephants before the eyes, and when some one insists that there are only two, it is the same sense of falsehood that we feel. Similar sense of disorder grips us when a clear evidence in front of us is not taken into account by someone for arriving at conclusions.  

Man is a passive user of the existential categories of sight, sound , touch etc, as in the case of reason too, without any ‘in-itself’ knowledge as to what they are !

As once said above, though we use all our sense organs since the emergence of our species on earth, we do not know much about the ‘categories’ or qualities of existence they reveal. We know eyes, but we know much less about sight. There could be many other hidden similar or different ‘categories, or ‘qualities’ of existence that we are not sensing because we do have been provided with appropriate sense organs for sensing them! Hence, we feel that what all we sense are the final form of existence !

We are now aware that our existing sense organs give us only that much limited inputs within their ‘allotted’ range ; for example, eyes can see only objects within its allotted range, nothing smaller ( microbes) or nothing far away ( a distant star, or even a distant mountain), ears hear only what has bee destined to be heard for preserving life ( nothing below, or beyond its allotted range).. so forth and so on.

Very similarly, we do not know much as what is the ‘order’ content, or ‘sense content’ that Reason provides us. We may have to simply assume that what ever it provides must be adequate and appropriate for achieving man’s existential purposes and destiny.

Finally, what man forgets often is that we ourselves are grand sense organs of nature; we are exclusive sense organs of NATURE for experiencing the miracle called LIFE !

Impaired ‘sense organ’ of ORDER could be the reason behind mental disorders !

This claim may prompt men of psychology to raise instant objections; but it makes serious sense to attribute causes of many a mental illness to one’s impaired ‘sense organ’ of reason ! Our existing bundles of knowledge in every field, including psychology are many centuries old, and a major shift in the fundamentals is due any time, as the door of knowledge should never remain shut.

Man has the free-will as to how to utilize our sense organs

When eye is routinely used, it is just for casual look at objects. When it is used with a view to observe an object very closely, we observe more than what one gets from a casual look. One could turn around the object in the hand if it a handy object, or look from various angles if the object is too big or far away. Similarly, while using reason too, the same usage principles apply; the more concentrated attention is accorded upon an object, event or phenomena, the more wider would be the spectrum of knowledge it reveals. When ever conclusions are drawn, reason gives out only the ORDER content between the available spectrum before man, NOT the absolute truth all the time. The input is always decided by the entity, man, and his freewill.

When individuals, communities and nations refer to reason and logic in their routine conversations and speeches, it simply appeals to their own very particular past experience based knowledge, values and axioms. When a criminal appeals to reason and logic before his gang-members, he appeals to reasons and logic that pertain only to their particular profession, like, say, when to injure or kill an opponent and when to set him free un-harmed. Similar is the case with thieves and robbers. A doctors appeal to reason would be based on the tenets of his profession. In all these examples, sense-organ of reason simply ‘senses’ the order content between evidences and past experiences before it, and helps the mind to take quick decisions.

 Every human-being gets frequent signals and pangs for going further and further using his reasoning faculty, but very few accept such calls. Reason respects the FREE-WILL of the individual, and it lets him go by his own sweet-choices.

Whatever presented in the above paragraphs have been certain evidences, signs and analogies to carry home that man’s faculty of reason indeed acts and functions like a typical sense organ, that senses one of the central category in existence, ie. the ‘ORDER CONTENT, or the ‘sense content’, or the UNITY content between premises and observed facts, so that inferences and conclusions could be drawn. These were the out come of the PRISMATIC function of a single mind, ( that of this writer) but when  hundreds of creative minds together work on the idea in the world, it would add-up an array of more evidences and relations, and human knowledge gains new, unprecedented directions to move on !

2)                   Now we have come to the 3rd purpose of this paper, ie. to touch the need of making reason a single paradigm, with UNIVERSAL applicability. We have seen above that the post modern understanding on reason is that, it is only a relative product of particular cultures and their history. No compromise on any universal paradigm on life and social principles is possible on the basis of the strength a single, UNIVERSAL REASON.

If reason could be understood as man’s sense organ for sensing existential and universal ORDER on life and society, mankind could always put efforts to arrive at on such principles, and finally abide by them for unity of ‘vision’.

We have noticed above that reason when applied for localized issues, it gives out only conclusions on such given issues. When Hitler applied his reason on ways and means to restore the lost honor of German people after the 1st world war, the means that come to his mind have paved way for Holocaust and 2nd world war ! If he had applied his reason further and further, keeping in mind the single phenomenon called LIFE of human beings on plant earth, it would have provided him with a better SPECTRUM of means to achieve peace among people of all nations, including restoration of the honor of his own people. At the end pinnacle of man’s sense organ of reason, there lies life preserving ideas and means for the entire world and mankind. The great philosopher Kant had found it as the tenets of PRACTICAL REASON in his writings. He believed that man has inherent propensities towards morals and ethics. He just missed by inches on recognizing the ‘sense organ of ORDER’ role of reason !

What is required is the spread of healthy premises world wide, among nations and people, on the possibility and utter need of living together in peace. Such premises would naturally lead to natural conclusions on world peace and shared prosperity.
Now men, societies and nations think on short and narrow terms, living on the platforms of egos, and attempt to impose one’s beliefs and norms on other men and nations, whether it is economic , cultural or religious. It terrifies the other men and nations, and they cling to their own such narrow beliefs and norms with increased strength, for fear of losing their identities and self-hoods !

Nations and other collective organizations must ensure that each of their policy and programme for people must conform with the tenets of ONE base UNIVERSAL principle of civilizational progress that the world has identified and established. ( those located at the bottom layers of reason ) The existing norm of inventing stand alone logic by communities and nations that suits a particular situation must see an end.

If not every single individual, the collective reasoning of public institutions and their leading men must use their reason till its bottom levels, and act as per the inferences that derive from that deep level. It is like the act of swimming into the ocean. Those who reach only till the mid depths could infer from the middle level, incomplete premises, whereas only the ones who reached the bottom could form wholesome inferences on the phenomenon of the sea. Here reason is exactly similar to a sea. At the bottom of it, there is universality. What disturbs world peace is middle level truths and inferences.

Unfortunately, there is no agency in the contemporary world to undertake such bottom journeys. Political and media institutions are partisan in vision and goals, hence, they tend to thrive on the now popular PLURALISTIC traditions, instead of trying for universal reason to unite the mankind. The philosophic class could come forward and fill this great vacuum in the contemporary world, instead of remaining in silence in smaller pockets ensuring their own ‘survival’ need. We always had played our role in every society in every age, and if there is a grave need of our light and wisdom, it is now and here !

3)       Now we are at the last purpose of this paper; the metaphysical connections of Reason: The ‘sense’ content, or the ‘order’ element is not something that derived from the external world through the senses as we have observed in the above portions of this paper. In symbolic syllogisms like:
A= B, B= C, there for A= C, the ‘orderly’ relation is purely conceptual, with no pre-experience content from the external world. The entire science of mathematics is based on similar orderly relation between symbols, and the ‘order’ content between its  equations is always caught and approved by reason. 

Hence, it is an inherent mystery faculty of man. While what eyes and ears observe are reflections of real objects in the world, this ‘order’ (or the ‘unity’) content is not the reflection of any external relation. What it reflects is a mystery category in existence, whose source is unknown to man. It might be belonging to the ‘essence’ realm of reality as against the ‘structural’ realm. Therefore, the metaphysical connection of ‘reason’ is obvious. As once mentioned above a ‘universal sense of reason’ is shard by every genuine seeker of reality. It indicates towards the possibility that nature has kept a door open in man for  knowing the ultimate reality, or at least the ‘sensing’ of its ‘essence’ content. This essence may not be a chemical or physical formula that could be perceived by our external senses. It could be an all engrossing predisposition of nature that determines the structural aspect of empirical reality. As we have discussed above once, our basic sense of reason always resist the notion that what ever that exist is mere a structure for its own sake, dead and inert in every respect ! Such a stand evidently negates our very notion of ‘SENSE’ about life and existence, and shifts our every recognized rational faculty into the realm of absurdity.

Here, this open minded hypothesis need not be packed into any tenet of divinity. When science gets ready to shed its obsession towards NOT touching any subject beyond the structural aspect of reality, it embraces the real scientific spirit ! With out an understanding on essence, no structural analysis would be correct and perfect. It would be only ‘middle layer’ relations of reality- merely solving of the Sunday cross word puzzles- as quipped by Sir Arthur Eddington. If science opens its heart towards accepting ‘reason’ basically as a sense organ that detects ‘order’ content in inferences and evidence-conclusion decisions, it could confidently receive premises of social sciences, and even spirituality for helping to arrive at sensible conclusions. The realms of science and beliefs could easily merge.

What this paper dealt with was an empirical subject, not any highly speculative philosophical theory. It was aimed at dispelling all the confusions around man’s superior degree of intellect over other living beings. We used to attribute it to vague faculties like ‘understanding’, ‘intellect’ and ‘intuition’. Hope this paper helped to throw more light and clarity on man’s such hidden faculties and justified our distinct position among other living beings.

It is hopped that this paper has also succeeded in clarifying that reason is not a magical organ that gives traces of ultimate truth about any thing and everything to man at call. Instead of exploring its vast and unlimited potential, individuals, communities and nations feed only ‘chosen’ premises to Reason, and arrive at half-baked conclusions based on half-truths and even no truth. Reason gives out conclusions based only on premises available in-front of it. So, in order to make use of the wonder sense organ, individuals, communities and nations are required to go to pinnacles of any given issue to arrive at the full spectrum of the problem, and then letting reason to arrive at the most wholesome conclusions.  

------------------------------------end -------------------------------------------------


[1] wikipedia link:, starting sentence

[2] Catholic encyclopedia : link:, section ‘Discursive thinking, para 2.
[3] Prof. Carlo Cellucci, Sapienza University of Rome, in his forthcoming book  ‘Rethinking Logic’

[4] Prof. Carlo Cellucci, Sapienza University of Rome, in his forthcoming book  ‘Rethinking Logic’

[5] Prof. Charles Brown ( State Emporia UniversityUSA) paper: ’Democracy in Dialogue’,

[6] Will Durant, book-‘Story of Philosophy’ , chapter; ‘Kant and German idealism’

[7] Paper ‘ Kant’s account of Reason’, by Prof. Williams G. of Lancaster University; Link: , para 2, last sentence.

[8 Essays in Philosophy, Russell, Edited by Houston Peterson- Washington Square Press, New York-1974, page 291

[9] ibid, page 309

[10] ibid, page 306

[11] Essay ‘reality, causation, science and mysticism’ by A.S. Eddington, chapter .’reality’.

12] Fritjof Capra, Book ‘Tao of Physics’ , The Chaucer Press, UK, 1974, p. 71)

[13] Kant, Critique of pure Reason, preface

[14] Osho ( Rajneesh) Book ‘Beyond the Frontiers of  mind’, Rebel Publishing House, Pune, India, p.7.

[15] Descartes, ‘Discourse on Method’ -part-IV
Author: Abraham J. Palakudy,an independent mind, philosophy and Polity seeker and researcher.
Contact me at :, or
Twitter: Voice of Philosophy, @jopan1