Perception is
a very tricky topic.
If we are
talking about the material world (physical realm) I believe that the reality of
a situation is based upon the correspondence view of what is true (real).
Metaphysically
speaking, as I suppose we should be engaged in doing within this forum,
perceptions could be described as, “what is there?” and “what is it like?”
This topic
could encompass volumes of writing, but within this forum there is a need to be
brief.
I have used
the following many times to illustrate how perceptions can differ, but reality
is static. If I say, “The grass is green,” I have offered my perception of what
I believe the grass to look like. That perception is based on light emanating
from the sun (or some artificial source), reflecting of off the grass, enters
through the cornea, passes through the lens which bends the light, which then
passes through the vitreous gel, and then is focused on the surface of the
retina which contains the rods and cones. From there it travels via electrical
impulses to the brain through the optical nerve. Is my perception accurate?
That depends
on several factors. Is the pathway the light travels through my eye healthy and
“normal?” Does my brain process the electrical impulse correctly? Do I have the
cognitive ability to decode the information? Finally, is the grass, in fact,
green? If the grass is green, and I am healthy and/or at least functioning
correctly, I am accurate in my assessment. At that point, the grass being green
makes the content of my perception true.
However, is
it a true statement to say, “The grass is green,” if I am blind? Not only is it
an accurate statement, it would an accurate perception even if I did not
believe it to be true. It is reality that makes our perceptions true or false.
I posit that it is through evidence that we determine if our perceptions are in
tune with reality.
No comments:
Post a Comment