We humans are convinced that we see the world as it really is, but that’s complete rubbish. We don’t. We see things filtered not just through our fallible senses, but also then interpreted by our ridiculously pliable minds.
The Universe is not trying to fool us. It doesn’t need to; we do an astonishingly good job of that ourselves. But as long as you’re aware of it you can see through the illusion, and, if you’re sufficiently willing to, you might see everything a bit more clearly.
Ok .. so I'm convinced ... but the message (for me), is to take on everything science makes available, in order to not be drawn into believing the illusion.
For me, excluding any area of legitimate science, only results in not being able to see through some of the illusions.
There was a very interesting BBC reports about perception of colors. The eye is capable of separating millions of colors and captures the right information but the brain interprets it in a different way and make you see want it wants you to see. The topic was about illusions and 'magic' tricks designed to alter sense of reality. That's why it always makes chuckle when I hear people commenting too red, too green, etc.. in pictures when most of the time if you actually use the color picker in PS and put the color sampled on top of a white background it might turn orange or even blue.
WHAT a con, notice the lighting difference between the 2 positions?.
To extrapolate that to "We humans are convinced that we see the world as it really is, but that’s complete rubbish" is trite,arrogant BS and utterly meaningless.
WHAT a con, notice the lighting difference between the 2 positions?.
To extrapolate that to "We humans are convinced that we see the world as it really is, but that’s complete rubbish" is trite,arrogant BS and utterly meaningless.
Nothing like seeing red through a bottle of southo hey?
There was a very interesting BBC reports about perception of colors. The eye is capable of separating millions of colors and captures the right information but the brain interprets it in a different way and make you see want it wants you to see. The topic was about illusions and 'magic' tricks designed to alter sense of reality. That's why it always makes chuckle when I hear people commenting too red, too green, etc.. in pictures when most of the time if you actually use the color picker in PS and put the color sampled on top of a white background it might turn orange or even blue.
All of that is intellectual BS too. Viewing colours in pictures invokes a scene that conveys a meaning that I think overall is the same for everyone based on a lifetime of conditioning. A "nice" landscape looks like a nice landscape to everyone, because everyone learns what a nice landscape looks like, regardless how the colours are actually represented in yr brain. Perception of colours in isolation in a totally different context doesnt indicate anything of the variation of perception between ppl. We would all see them as "odd" in a similar way. Thats a neat party trick that with a bit of thought would make everyone say "doh", not be a reason to think we are all perpetually decieved of reality, whatever that means.
The disk in the middle is the same colour as the surrounding light squares - and the bottom right swatch. Contrast. The darker square is the shadow. Interesting human factors problem.
I was thinking about how difficult it is to define reality..apart from our personal filters etc..but we see so little (relative to the information out there) in the first place..the visable spectrum is only part of a greater strip of information we never process (well we can get more than most animals with equipment)...
AND here it is clear our brains can be fooled very easily.
Thanks Craig.
alex
What does that mean?. Why "fooled". The brain sees a 2d drawing, knows its 2d, imagines the subject in 3d and alls fine. Why "fooled".
Hi Fred..why "fooled"?... maybe too harse or too stupid a comment to draw attention to the fact the brain can process a 2d image such that the brain is enabled to visualise the subject of the 2d drawing..
alex
All of that is intellectual BS too. Viewing colours in pictures invokes a scene that conveys a meaning that I think overall is the same for everyone based on a lifetime of conditioning. A "nice" landscape looks like a nice landscape to everyone, because everyone learns what a nice landscape looks like, regardless how the colours are actually represented in yr brain. Perception of colours in isolation in a totally different context doesnt indicate anything of the variation of perception between ppl. We would all see them as "odd" in a similar way. Thats a neat party trick that with a bit of thought would make everyone say "doh", not be a reason to think we are all perpetually decieved of reality, whatever that means.
Well maybe BS to you but all major advertising companies sank millions of dollars in researching colors, shapes and other things that will influence people watching their commercials on TV. If a person's brain can be tricked with such simple things as colors, you can do that with sounds, shapes, words, motion... anything. So yes, although it can be a neat party trick it does 'deceive reality' as you say.
Well maybe BS to you but all major advertising companies sank millions of dollars in researching colors, shapes and other things that will influence people watching their commercials on TV. If a person's brain can be tricked with such simple things as colors, you can do that with sounds, shapes, words, motion... anything. So yes, although it can be a neat party trick it does 'deceive reality' as you say.
Yes, but the only deception is the add. It doesnt change the reality of the subject as we would see it live. The whole point of an add is to attempt to squew reality, thats a totally different issue, it doesnt change whatsoever the percieved reality of the subject without the add. ............Well, I guess adverse preconditioning can change perception of the reality of a subject, ill give you that.
Ok .. so I'm convinced ... but the message (for me), is to take on everything science makes available, in order to not be drawn into believing the illusion.
For me, excluding any area of legitimate science, only results in not being able to see through some of the illusions.
Interesting snippet, eh ?
Cheers
How do you know that science isn't an illusion as well??. If our minds are so pliable and we shouldn't believe what we see (or even sense with any of our senses), then does anything we think or create have any more cogency than a whole lot of smoke and mirrors??. How can you even trust anything and what does that really say about us...as a species.
We are, therefore, all a mob of self delusion, fantasy prone beings. Nothing is real. I'm not even typing this. You don't exist. This physical reality is a fake. Science can't tell us anything different because it is a part of the illusion. It's not even very good at helping us clarify our delusion because it can't even answer some of the more important, yet simple questions of existence. Which makes it even more deluded because we're conning ourselves into thinking we have the answers, or will have them given enough time.
See where this existentialist, philosophical circular argument is heading.
You don't know what is real and what isn't. Nothing you have can tell you that. Nothing that is tied to this illusion, at least. And even then, how do you know that what you perceive isn't another illusion??.
What determines reality. What determines the truth. What allows you to perceive reality and truth through experience.
A simpler explanation is that we are not perfect and illusion is a product of imperfect perceptions. Having said that, illusion is also used by animals and the military for camouflage. The mistake is believing that we can be perfect, or perhaps, humiliated that we are not.
If we perceived absolute detail, that is every shade presented itself with acuity, the world would be a stranger reality yet, and possibly a jumble, less coherent than our present perceptions create.
The moth could not hide itself from the bird. The tiger would starve, robbed of its cover. Good would not prevail against evil. There would be no place to hide when the need arose.
There are distinct advantages of illusion that permit survival. We do not see things clearly, as through ground glass and that is just as well in some cases. However, our senses can be trained to spot the difference.
WHAT a con, notice the lighting difference between the 2 positions?.
Don't like the example eh Fred ? That's Ok ..I have no particular attachment to the example ..there are plenty of others able to make the point .. which is the real issue.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bassnut
To extrapolate that to "We humans are convinced that we see the world as it really is, but that’s complete rubbish" is trite,arrogant BS and utterly meaningless.
That you didn't see the irony behind these comments and then went on to the following one, is heartening though … ...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bassnut
Well, I guess adverse preconditioning can change perception of the reality of a subject, ill give you that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by renormalised
Nothing is real. …. You don't exist. This physical reality is a fake ...
… how do you know that what you perceive isn't another illusion??.
What determines reality. What determines the truth. What allows you to perceive reality and truth through experience.
… all valid perspectives, but ya gotta live with yourself (and us), man !
… And a terrific answer from Rowland, anyway …
Quote:
Originally Posted by rcheshire
However, our senses can be trained to spot the difference.
I don't think there can possibly be any right or wrong answers to this .. but anything which serves as a pause between our intuitions/perceptions and the establishment of reality in our minds, surely brings us closer to reality!?!
Science is the best thing I know of, which can do that.
(Mathematics, more specifically).
My new signature then is a reminder for me about how to distance myself from the misperceptions inherent in Science.
The true illusion comes from beliefs … and opinion.
The true illusion comes from beliefs … and opinion.
I think the true illusion comes from perception. A machine will collect true data. We don't. We have far too complicated and refined senses to remain objective. That's what makes us adaptable. Can't replace millions of years of evolution. That's a big baggage. It's a matter of opinion.
I think the true illusion comes from perception. A machine will collect true data. We don't. We have far too complicated and refined senses to remain objective. That's what makes us adaptable. Can't replace millions of years of evolution. That's a big baggage. It's a matter of opinion.
Maybe it goes all the way 'up the (protocol) stack', at each level with the eye/optic nerve at the lower levels and religion/politics at the top level ?
That BBC doco you posted looks like a good one too, Mark .. thanks for that .. I hadn't seen it before .. but what's to say the bees can't also smell the honey ? How do bees navigate at night ?
PS: QUOTE (from Wiki):
Quote:
there are three types of receptors in the honey bee eye: 1) UV receptors, 2) blue receptors, and 3) green receptors. The three receptors are dominated by three rhodopsin-like pigments. These pigments have maximal absorbance at wavelengths corresponding to 350 nm, 440 nm, and 540 nm.
Well all I'm saying is we can't trust our senses. The 'hardware' in our eyes might be accurate to the 16th million shade of color and our optic nerves flawlessly transmit the correct data to our brain but the 'decoding' part of the brain is flawed by too many variables.
To illustrate my point see the picture attached. The straight middle band is a solid color across the whole surface. Even with me telling you that I bet you'll still have a problem believing it because your brain is assessing it in context. So it takes into account other variables which are the gradient in the top and bottom bands as a reference and obviously will compensate so you see a gradient in the middle also.
In the same line of thinking when you read this message your brain register patterns. It doesn't analyse words letters at a time.
If there is such a strong discrepancy between what our eyes see and what our brain 'sees' who's to say the same doesn't happen with our other senses and can't be exploited?
..apart from our personal filters etc..but we see so little (relative to the information out there) in the first place..the visable spectrum is only part of a greater strip of information we never process (well we can get more than most animals with equipment)... 
