Perception and Logic

Perception is what our mind makes from senses. We can artificially expand our senses, we study other elements in the universe. Some questions come to mind:

1) Is our logic a reliable tool to understand this extended perception? Probably not, at least not right now at this point since everything seems so solid.

2) Are there elements that we can't possibly reach artificialy? If so, then laws we would reach might be false.

3) perception is perception. Can it really explain truly reality? Or is it that we see reality and experience it the way our perception sees it, so everything we conclude, even reality, is a perception. So in a sense, even reality is created by our perception, not something out of our perception.


Seems 3 contradicts 1&2

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LouaiB

1) Is our logic a reliable tool to understand this extended perception? Probably not, at least not right now at this point since everything seems so solid.

---

As you say, it is a tool. It is the way to organize perceptions within our minds. So, whenever extended perception occurs, logic has to cope that with our mind. Then, logic occurs to make some sense of that extended perception (which is always alien to our regular mind and perception).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LouaiB

2) Are there elements that we can't possibly reach artificialy? If so, then laws we would reach might be false.

3) perception is perception. Can it really explain truly reality? Or is it that we see reality and experience it the way our perception sees it, so everything we conclude, even reality, is a perception. So in a sense, even reality is created by our perception, not something out of our perception.

---

This is a problem which physicists since Einstein have to face. I believe that yes we are seeing the Truth, or some parts of it through visionary means. But we have this mania to translate that to something plausible and that makes sense to our regular cognition. Instead of making ourselves adapt to the Truth we are trying to adapt the Truth to ourselves through the stupefying comfort of technology and so on.

Quote:

---

3) perception is perception. Can it really explain truly reality? Or is it that we see reality and experience it the way our perception sees it, so everything we conclude, even reality, is a perception. So in a sense, even reality is created by our perception, not something out of our perception.

---

Since our reality is understod through our own perception, then it means that we can only make sense of this universe with those few senses. Sure there are a lot of machines that can notice and mesure other powers like gamma rays, infrared, x-rays and so on. But even if we can mesure them and know some of the potential those forces holds. We cant say what role they have in the universe. We just know that they are there, and that we can use them for certain things.

The thing is, that we dont even understand our self. Because if we did. We would all be living in perfection, and probably in peace as well. So how could we possibly make any sense of the whole universe on top of that? We also notice that we have feelings. But there is such a wide range of intensity of those feelings, that we never truly even know the higest potential of those feelings. Even if we live with them inside our self every single day. And thats just one tiny aspect of all the things there is to discover and understand.

So, if we would try to solve every piece of the puzzle about the universe. What should be needed to do that? We simply would much likely need to understand the beginning of the universe. Just as we learned to follow the process of how a baby is born.

With logic ressoning wich is what we call rationality. When that rationality is going through our perception of the universe. Then it's just like a filter, so that the universe has to be adapted to us. So if we with a sane and rational mind, ask the question. Where does the universe begin? And the answer to that is big bang. So if everything started out with a bang. What did create that bang? and if there was another bang that created the big bang. Then what did create the bang that was creating the big bang? You get the point.. There is simply no end to this. So if we come to a conclusion that the universe never had a start. Wich makes perfect sense, then how are we ever going to solve this mystery with how the universe works with the same rational logic that contradict itself?

If we just asume that the big bang is the beginning of all this. Then we can never be totally open-minded to what really is. Sience is great when it comes to material understanding of how to make other things to make our lifes more comfortable. But when it comes to reveling the mystery of the universe. I dont see how that's possible from our current life form as humans. So we probably know pretty much nothing, except how to enjoy our self from time to time. And that's probably on of the most important thing to realize too.:)

There is no way to really know if your brain was just making up everything you see. However, if you are going to accept that idea then you can't really even begin to attempt to explain anything in the world because it is just your brain messing with you. So it seems fair to accept that what we commonly see as perceptions, in which everyone around us seem to agrees to experiencing as reality. There is probably actually some slim chance that we are all really part of a computer simulation or something and are not really experiencing anything that is reality, but that is slim.

Since we are talking philosophy here it is okay to say we are most likely experiencing reality as it is, with the understanding that there is some slim possibility of reality being something very weird.

pfcalles and Dreamybear, I couldn't have put them in better words myself! :D

Alric, I agree with you about the slim chance of us being in a computer simulator, and I also agree that we might see reality as it really is, at least partially until we fully advance (assuming this case being true). We are experiencing physical reality and expanding to involve more elements than our own senses (artificially), but since it seems that our perception evolves through the years, our logic is adapting to our new expanded perception (pre-artificial expansion). So, since there is adaption, it could be just that, or it could be improvement (too). First indicates change in reality, and the second indicates only expansion (advancement).

Truly we cannot say.