I always daydreamed that the nature the human mind influenced reality itself. We perceive the world around us, I think we can all agree that we don't perceive reality 100% perfectly. So if we were to take away the flaws of human perception what might the universe be like? Would it be any different? Would it exist? 

I think we can all agree that we don't perceive reality 100% perfectly.

Posted By Noodle on 14 Nov 2009 03:40 PM

I always daydreamed that the nature the human mind influenced reality itself. We perceive the world around us, I think we can all agree that we don't perceive reality 100% perfectly. So if we were to take away the flaws of human perception what might the universe be like? Would it be any different? Would it exist? 

 

I think it pays to think about what perception is... When our brain gets information from our senses it processes it to find meaningful patterns, to evaluate what we see and hear. It points out "important" patterns - like the sound of a voice, the shape of an animal, pain - a burning sensation perhaps, bitter tastes for food we can't or shouldn't eat - unripe berries or tainted meat, the smell of smoke. We base our search on our past experience - our learned habits and behaviours and our understanding of our environment - and we compare it to the live information we receive from our senses. This sort of processing takes place as much in our society as it would in the wild - we recognise faces in the crowd, detect subtle traces of emotions in peoples voices - even in writing, we notice the smells around us - a hint of perfume. All the time we are scanning our environment according to a preset series of values. These patterns are viewed as important because we link them to things that affect us, and a lot of the "filters" that identify are developed in the first few months of a baby's life. This results in our perception - how we see the world around us.

The same ideas can be applied beyond the example of the senses - it can be applied to our thought processes, our beliefs, our emotions. Just as we look for patterns in our examination of the tangible "real" world around us, we also look for patterns in the intangible - the non-concrete world of abstraction and ideas. When we undergo the process of creation, the way our creation (what ever it may be) changes and evolves is caused by the interaction between our preconceptions, and the ideas that occur to us as we go along. As I write, I edit as I go along, moving sentences and changing words to better make what I write convey my ideas, incorporating and changing my ideas as new realisations occur. What I write depends on the patterns I see - the links I can make between concepts. Everybody percieves things in a slightly different way, so no two people have the same ideas when they write, or mean exactly the same thing when the write the same same sentence, or even find exactly the same meaning when they read the same sentence. Everything we think, feel, and believe, depends on the filters that we use to view the world around us (internal preconceptions), and of course the place from which we look at the world around us (external factors, independent of us).

So when we say we don't percieve reality 100% correctly, what we really mean is that the patterns we highlight as important - the ones we concern ourselves with - don't comprise of all the information that there is. What we see of our external environment is true (to a given value of truth) but the way we process what we take in, each with our slightly different set of values and our unique filters, leaves us all with a different perception of the world around us, so that even if two people were able to see something from exactly the same angle (which is impossible), they would still attribute different layers of meaning to what they perceive.

But here's the thing: If we take our limited perspective (our incomplete view of our external environment), and our biased set of filters (by which we process and evaluate information), as flaws in our perception - because they serve to isolate "important" information, and as such reduce the breadth of our perception - then the only sensible conclusion is that "truth" consists of reality viewed from every angle, in it's entirety, with no filters. No definition of right or wrong, good or bad, more important or less important. No value can be attributed to reality without limiting perception - or at least, not by any human mind. Without our filters, the world around us is reduced to mere information - mindless, pointless, meaningless, abject reality. It's only through our filters that we ascribe any worth to what we see.

I should probably start wrapping this up, but I'm damned if I know how. I guess I'll make one final observation. When I started writing this there were an infinite number of possibilities for what I could write, but only a mere handful of relevant ideas had occured to me. As I continued to form sentences, to link ideas together, and to put my concepts into writing, new ideas occured to me, some previous ideas slipped away - discarded, while others were refined and written down. What I ended up with was different to what I had started with, different to anything anybody else has ever written, or will ever write. I went from and infinite number of possibilities, to just one reality. I got there by using my filters, trying to write down what's most important. I won't have of course - that would be impossible, but because I processed it I gave it meaningful. This isn't just random scribblings, nor is it all there is that could possible be said. It is instead a refined selection of the most important ideas that occured to me, and that processing is what makes it valuable.

Wow - I just realised I wrote an entire post without using a single smiley. Something must be done!

People will distort reality for their own reasons.

People will search for truth, and to do so many times is a luxury or simply a lifestyle.

My friend once said to me, what if everyone told you that the room is blue. When you can clearly see that the room is white. But over and over, everyone tells you it is blue, what would you do?

I said " Well, what if I pretend to agree on the outside so they leave me alone? And I don't believe deep down inside?"

She said " you can't do that, they can tell you either do or you don't"

I said " Well, obviously I can't make myself believe it. And I'd rather die than live a life like that".

If I had to make believe a lie, such as "My gf really loved that ex more than she loved me" and believe that she didn't actually when she really did. I just wouldn't want her to let me know. And if she did, then I would leave and make myself not found until she tries to get me back more than humanly possible so I can feel satisfied.

anyways. im rambling. lolz

WOW. "the deepestblue" I may just be in love with your mind......WOW!!!! People actually think like me. Hey I'm Saffy, I'm new to MBTI but I suspect to have been a life long ENFP, who now may have just found her home. I may only be new to MBTI but i've already devoured google search results for "ENFP".lol