The false gap between reality and perception.
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
06-10-2012, 05:40 AM
RE: The false gap between reality and perception.
From I, perception is reality.

From we, reality is perception. Building a reality from perception in the first, assuming a reality from perceptions in the second. Thing is, these words suck. Big Grin

I like the term nature better than reality. I am part of nature, my perception is part of my nature, and shit's all natural. Thumbsup

[Image: 10339580_583235681775606_5139032440228868471_n.jpg]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes houseofcantor's post
06-10-2012, 05:49 AM
RE: The false gap between reality and perception.
(06-10-2012 05:40 AM)houseofcantor Wrote:  I like the term nature better than reality. I am part of nature, my perception is part of my nature, and shit's all natural. Thumbsup

Unless of course it isn't natural, in which case it wouldn't be natural.

[Image: 4833fa13.jpg]
Poonjab
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-10-2012, 06:09 AM
RE: The false gap between reality and perception.
(06-10-2012 05:49 AM)Logica Humano Wrote:  
(06-10-2012 05:40 AM)houseofcantor Wrote:  I like the term nature better than reality. I am part of nature, my perception is part of my nature, and shit's all natural. Thumbsup

Unless of course it isn't natural, in which case it wouldn't be natural.

Reminds me of that demotivational where the bison is trying to get it on with a statue. Big Grin

In terms of what, not natural, plastic? Toxic waste? Element 113? I thought you were an atheist. We're a natural process, we process from nature, we create nature. Just like hydrogen did once upon a time.

[Image: 10339580_583235681775606_5139032440228868471_n.jpg]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-10-2012, 09:41 AM (This post was last modified: 06-10-2012 12:45 PM by TrainWreck.)
RE: The false gap between reality and perception.
(06-10-2012 06:09 AM)houseofcantor Wrote:  
(06-10-2012 05:49 AM)Logica Humano Wrote:  Unless of course it isn't natural, in which case it wouldn't be natural.
In terms of what, not natural, plastic? Toxic waste? Element 113? I thought you were an atheist. We're a natural process, we process from nature, we create nature. Just like hydrogen did once upon a time.

I have gone over it all, and the order is as follows in the Secular Library Classification general collation:


0: Reality - all that is known and unknown
1: Nature - all that is known
2: Technology - all that is man made
3: Individuals - all that is done by individuals
4: Organizations - all that is of cooperative means
5: Ideologies - all that is abstraction and maintained by organization
6: Time - all that is related to tracking change

Humanism - ontological doctrine that posits that humans define reality
Theism - ontological doctrine that posits a supernatural entity creates and defines reality
Atheism - political doctrine opposed to theist doctrine in public policy
I am right, and you are wrong - I hope you die peacefullyCool
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-10-2012, 11:55 AM (This post was last modified: 06-10-2012 12:01 PM by TrainWreck.)
RE: The false gap between reality and perception.
(05-10-2012 11:52 AM)Vosur Wrote:  
(05-10-2012 10:37 AM)TrainWreck Wrote:  You are defining the perception for the observer.
Care to elaborate? I'm using this definition of 'perception'.

"the ability to see, hear, or become aware of something through the senses"
I meant that you are claiming that the viewer must believe that the optical illusions are not illusions - isn't that what you are claiming?

(05-10-2012 11:52 AM)Vosur Wrote:  
(05-10-2012 10:37 AM)TrainWreck Wrote:  All a person has to do is look at a specific circle and recognize that the circle in observation is not moving, and then test the next circle. It is not possible to see all of the circles moving at the same time.
That'd be a way to avoid being "tricked" in this example. Do you also have such a solution for hallucinations and the hundreds of different optical illusions out there?
Yeah, as I said before, the person needs to seek peer review of his experiences.

(05-10-2012 11:52 AM)Vosur Wrote:  
(05-10-2012 10:37 AM)TrainWreck Wrote:  What you are failing to understand is that we agree that the illustration has the qualities of what has been defined in our society as being an "optical illusion."

The person who is unaware of the possibility that optical illusions exist, may be subject to misinterpret the illustration.

I know it is an optical illusion, I enjoy how the illustration activates my visual senses, and my perception is not incorrect.
As I've said previously, knowing that what you are looking at is "false" doesn't change anything at the fact that you perceive it to be something it isn't with your eyes.
Are you sure?

I'm very confident there is something wrong with that reasoning - please direct me to any scholarly references to support that argument.

You cannot possibly expect me to believe, or argue, with some basement freak in his underwear spewing anything he can type on the Internet - do you???

Humanism - ontological doctrine that posits that humans define reality
Theism - ontological doctrine that posits a supernatural entity creates and defines reality
Atheism - political doctrine opposed to theist doctrine in public policy
I am right, and you are wrong - I hope you die peacefullyCool
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes TrainWreck's post
06-10-2012, 12:14 PM (This post was last modified: 06-10-2012 12:39 PM by Vosur.)
RE: The false gap between reality and perception.
(06-10-2012 11:55 AM)TrainWreck Wrote:  I meant that you are claiming that the viewer must believe that the optical illusions are not illusions - isn't that what you are claiming?
(06-10-2012 11:55 AM)TrainWreck Wrote:  Yeah, as I said before, the person needs to seek peer review of his experiences.
No, that's not what I've been saying at all. I claimed that whether or not a person who is looking at an optical illusion is aware of the fact that it's an illusion is irrelevant to my argument, because knowledge of that fact does not alter their perception.

(06-10-2012 11:55 AM)TrainWreck Wrote:  Are you sure?

I'm very confident there is something wrong with that reasoning - please direct me to any scholarly references to support that argument.
I'll answer that question with two counter questions.

1. Do hallucinations disappear when you become aware of the fact that you're experiencing them?
2. Do optical illusions no longer work when you become aware of the fact that they are merely illusions?

In the first post of this thread, I and I suggested that subjective perception and objective reality are inseparable. Throughout this thread, using the examples of optical illusions and hallucinations, I have shown that they can be seperated with ease.

"An optical illusion (also called a visual illusion) is characterized by visually perceived images that differ from objective reality. The information gathered by the eye is processed in the brain to give a perception that does not tally with a physical measurement of the stimulus source."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Optical_illusion

[Image: Grid_illusion.svg]

[Image: IcJnQOT.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-10-2012, 12:15 PM
RE: The false gap between reality and perception.
(06-10-2012 06:09 AM)houseofcantor Wrote:  
(06-10-2012 05:49 AM)Logica Humano Wrote:  Unless of course it isn't natural, in which case it wouldn't be natural.

Reminds me of that demotivational where the bison is trying to get it on with a statue. Big Grin

In terms of what, not natural, plastic? Toxic waste? Element 113? I thought you were an atheist. We're a natural process, we process from nature, we create nature. Just like hydrogen did once upon a time.

I am just fucking with you. Unless of course I am serious, in which case I wouldn't be fucking with you. Smartass

[Image: 4833fa13.jpg]
Poonjab
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-10-2012, 12:44 PM
RE: The false gap between reality and perception.
It seems that you are concluding that perception is always incorrect; and I think that cannot be right.

Humanism - ontological doctrine that posits that humans define reality
Theism - ontological doctrine that posits a supernatural entity creates and defines reality
Atheism - political doctrine opposed to theist doctrine in public policy
I am right, and you are wrong - I hope you die peacefullyCool
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes TrainWreck's post
06-10-2012, 12:46 PM
RE: The false gap between reality and perception.
(06-10-2012 12:44 PM)TrainWreck Wrote:  It seems that you are concluding that perception is always incorrect; and I think that cannot be right.
Actually, I'm talking about illusions specifically. Our perception conforms with objective reality most of the time.

[Image: IcJnQOT.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Vosur's post
06-10-2012, 01:09 PM (This post was last modified: 06-10-2012 01:17 PM by GirlyMan.)
RE: The false gap between reality and perception.
(06-10-2012 11:55 AM)TrainWreck Wrote:  You cannot possibly expect me to believe, or argue, with some basement freak in his underwear spewing anything he can type on the Internet - do you???

And yet you continue to do so. Big Grin ... Note to self, turn off the webcam when I'm not wearing any pants. ... And how the fuck did the Sidewalk Cynic know that was my basement. Dodgy

(06-10-2012 12:44 PM)TrainWreck Wrote:  It seems that you are concluding that perception is always incorrect; and I think that cannot be right.

The fuck it can't. Perception can never be correct is more tenable.

(06-10-2012 12:46 PM)Vosur Wrote:  
(06-10-2012 12:44 PM)TrainWreck Wrote:  It seems that you are concluding that perception is always incorrect; and I think that cannot be right.
Actually, I'm talking about illusions specifically. Our perception conforms with objective reality most of the time.

It may correspond to a tiny sliver of an objective reality (if one exists at all), Vosur, but it certainly doesn't conform to reality. 1,000 bits per second from the tongue, 100,000 bits per second from the nose and ears, 1,000,000 bits per second from the skin, 10,000,000 bits per second from the eyes. And the conscious mind can process on the order of 50 bits per second. If anything I force a false reality to conform to me by filtering the relevant from the irrelevant. I am a product of my reticular formation and the properties of my transducers inherently warp reality. They can't help themselves. Big Grin

I am us and we is me. ... bitches.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes GirlyMan's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: