Constructing Secondary Worlds

This past fall I offered a course entitled "Constructing Secondary Worlds", a sort of complement to another course entitled "Philosophy Art Craft Science". My basic intent in both courses was to provide an examination of some basic philosophical hypotheses about the nature of reality and the way we perceive things.

Briefly, my understanding is that the Primary World is what we directly perceive. This means, in one sense, that as many primary worlds exist as there are perceivers. In another sense, it means that the primary world is that which perceivers perceive, however they may perceive it. I rather favour the latter because it moves us away from the problem of "if a tree falls in a forest and no-one is there to hear it, does it make a sound?" But even if we were free of that problem (which we really are not), we would still have to confront the problem of the relationship of the perceiver and the perceived.

I first encountered the terms "primary world" and "secondary world" in an essay by JRR Tolkien entitled "On Fairy-Stories". Since Tolkien is best known for writing The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings, and his essay is, as it says, about fairy-stories, it might not seem likely that we have here a strong ground for a serious philosophical examination. But I think the snickering that strongly characterized the academic reaction to Tolkien thirty years ago is not as loud today. And this is as well, since Tolkien offers a great deal, and his essay "On Fairy-Stories" is a real feast for those interested in language and particularly the origins of language. Not that Tolkien solves the problem of the origin of language (if anyone will in some ultimate sense). Rather, he provides some groundwork for the study.

To Tolkien, the primary world is simply the world as we encounter it, and he has a basic, practical, some might even suggest simplistic understanding of this. The primary world is known through the senses and the reason as it relates to the senses. Surprisingly, then, in some ways, Tolkien seems to be an empiricist, that is, a person who judges reality through the senses. Tolkien surely has another side, a spiritual or transcendental side, an idealist side, that believes in something more than that which is known through the senses, he is not merely an empiricist. But the Primary World, as I grasp his use, is primarily physical and sensual.

The Secondary World, to Tolkien, seems to be essentially the world of imagination and thought.

Here's where things become a bit more tricky, because it is tempting to visualize the Secondary World as separate from, as it were lying to the side of, the Primary World. But REALITY, to Tolkien, seems to be identical with the Primary World. The Secondary World is secondary in part in the sense that it is, if not UNREAL, at any rate DEPENDENT on the reality of the Primary World.

Thus, the Secondary World would seem to be PART of the Primary World.

The secondary world, it seems to me, is that aspect of the primary world which is not, or which cannot be, apprehended through the senses. It is the world of imagination, thought, and memory, of planning, of feeling, of willing. We can observe the apparent results of this secondary world in the primary world, but we cannot directly perceive with sight, smell, taste, touch, or hearing feelings, plans, thoughts, desires... so, what evidence have we for their existence? Could we not suppose that feelings, plans, thoughts, memories, desires, do not exist in the same way that a rock or a tree or a planet exist? certainly, and in my view this would be a correct supposition.

So, what is the nature of the reality of the secondary world?