Existence Beyond Conceivability

Empiricist David Hume claimed that that which is conceivable is possible and, therefore, all that is possible can be conceived by humans. This is not an adequate criterion for determining the possible, however, because humans need not be capable of conceiving all that exists. Whether it is the result of modifying the environment to suit our needs or simply a conviction we our born with, humans have a tendency to believe that we are the ruling species of the universe, and according to some, second only to a God. This arrogance often prevents us from realizing that humans are only a part of the natural order of life, and that there are forms of existence of which we are incapable of fully comprehending.

It is not necessary for humans to be able to envision something in order for it to exist. One important example to support this can be found in nature. Trees, rocks, and bodies of water all existed before human beings. Yes, humans can comprehend these objects, but science tells us that these aspects of nature existed before it was possible for a human to imagine them. A moderate solipsist might ask how we can know they existed if one was not there to observe them, but this question portrays the human haughtiness mentioned earlier. Are humans the sole determiners of existence? I would say no. Animals clearly are able to recognize real entities. On the other side of the Hume’s claim, all that is conceivable by humans is not possible. Imaginations are free to roam wherever they may in the abstract world, but in order for a possibility to become a reality on Earth, it must not contradict any of the established laws of the world, such as gravity. Even in outer space, the rules of physics and spatial matter apply.

Hume’s claim that all that is conceivable is possible is not a proper criterion for existence, for it does not address any nonhuman aspects of being. On a material level, the possible may be the same as the conceivable,