Perception

[Lightkeeper]

I believe that we perceive the world based on what our experiences have been. Therefore, no two people will perceive alike. What is reality to one is not necessarily reality to another. What do you think?

 

[Rex]

Well in order to experience something one has to assume that we can exist first. Once you have taken that step then the things you experience are only from that one angle therefore you only percieve what the world is through that medium.

The only "thing" you can truely experience is yourself, b/c you are yourself. You will never be a chair or a car or a house so you can't ever truely experience that.

Geese I hate Philosophy Class it has me all weird...

 

[Lightkeeper]

Too funny, Rex. So are you saying, the only thing you can perceive is yourself perceiving something?

 

[Rex]

No the only thing you can truely perceieve is yourself. Everthing else you percieve is just a peice of what it really is.

 

[Ceridwen018]

I think that we all perceive things the same, as in, people's sense of sight, smell, etc. work the same, but that it's a matter of how we interpret what we recieve. I think that reality is an objective constant, and it is people's unique personalities and ways of thinking which bring variety.

 

[Lightkeeper]

Not everyone's senses work the same. Some have dulled senses, some have lost the sense of taste and smell, some have sharper hearing, some are legally blind. Plus not everything you are perceiving is constantly the same. The only constant is change.

 

[Ceridwen018]

Hhmmm, yes good point about people's senses not being the same...ok, I think I have an analogy:

Reality is a buffet line. People move through and get the items they like best, things they want to try, etc.--everyone's combination of items is pretty much unique from everyone elses, and yet the actual buffet table stays the same for everyone. Regarding change: items can run out and new items can be added, however when something runs out, it runs out for everyone--not just one person.

This is reality--everyone lives in the same reality..it just depends on how they interpret their perceptions of it or how well they are able to percieve it. Just because a painting makes me feel sad and someone else feel happy doesn't mean it is two different paintings, but rather one painting which has been interpreted two different ways.

 

[Lightkeeper]

Who or what determines reality? Nothing stays the same and that may be the only reality.

 

[Ceridwen018]

I would say that science determines reality...science at least created reality, and it now acts in it's own natural patterns.

I don't understand how you think reality changes...could you elab. a bit?

 

[Mr Spinkles]

no two people will perceive alike

We should do an experiment to test this. Get a few dozen people, and ask them all how many fingers you are holding up. If they all say the same number, looks like they are perceiving things alike.

 

[Lightkeeper]

The problem with this test is you are telling them what you want them to see. A true test would be to just ask them what they see? You will get different answers.

 

[Lightkeeper]

I would say that science determines reality...science at least created reality, and it now acts in it's own natural patterns.

I don't understand how you think reality changes...could you elab. a bit?

How did science create reality?

 

[Lightkeeper]

I would say that science determines reality...science at least created reality, and it now acts in it's own natural patterns.

I don't understand how you think reality changes...could you elab. a bit?

This sounds like you worship science.

 

[Mr Spinkles]

The problem with this test is you are telling them what you want them to see. A true test would be to just ask them what they see? You will get different answers.

How am I telling them what I want them to see if I ask "how many fingers do you see?". They could say five, four, one and a half, a billion...whatever their perception tells them.

 

[Ceridwen018]

Lightkeeper,

Lol, I don't 'worship' anything. I guess it has to do with trust. I trust the rules of logic and the scientific method. I trust data garnered through observation and experiment.

When a sperm and egg join to form an embryo and then eventually a baby, that's science, It could be said that science created that baby--do you see where I'm coming from now? I'm not proposing that science is a 'thing' which 'decided' to create the universe. Science is the universe and science is reality, in the sense that both the universe and reality follow the laws of science.

 

[Lightkeeper]

Lightkeeper,

Lol, I don't 'worship' anything. I guess it has to do with trust. I trust the rules of logic and the scientific method. I trust data garnered through observation and experiment.

When a sperm and egg join to form an embryo and then eventually a baby, that's science, It could be said that science created that baby--do you see where I'm coming from now? I'm not proposing that science is a 'thing' which 'decided' to create the universe. Science is the universe and science is reality, in the sense that both the universe and reality follow the laws of science.

Science is the study and exploration of our experience of reality. It is a way of knowing about the physical universe which requires measurements and controlled experiments. You talk about science like it is a living being. As for trusting science we can to a point. Science has a long way to go. There were probably people in the 1600's that felt like you do and look at the advances since then.

 

[Ceridwen018]

I totally agree, Lightkeeper. Science will never have all of the answers. What I meant more, was that I trust the way science gets the answers or 'theories' that they have.

 

[Runt]

My dictionary (Websters) defines perception as "a)Recognition and interpretation of sensory stimuli based chiefly on memory."

Thus, with this definition in mind, there are two aspects to perception: sensory and psychological. For the most part, the sensory perception is the same from one person to another, with only minor variations occuring when one person has better (or worse) sensory capacities than another. However, the psychological recognition and interpretation of sensory stimuli... well, that is where we get so many different understandings of reality.

Example: Three people see a pure black piece of paper (sensory perception). One person looks at that black paper and thinks "gee, that's a depressing color!" (psychological perception). One person looks at the black paper and thinks "that's such a comforting color!". The third person looks at the black paper and thinks "that is an evil color".

 

[Mr Spinkles]

You talk about science like it is a living being.

Lightkeeper is right, Ceri, you did kind of deify science back there lol.

Science has a long way to go. There were probably people in the 1600's that felt like you do and look at the advances since then.

I would think that the progress of science only affirms their convictions.

Runt-- Of course, all three perceptions are technically accurate. The color did in fact make that one person feel depressed, another feel another way, etc--their perceptions were an accurate representation of the emotions (brain chemicals) stimulated inside them.

 

[Lightkeeper]

I would think that the progress of science only affirms their convictions.

The problem are the ones who think we have learned everything we need to know and stake their whole being on it. Science is still in the infant stage.