Dear friend.
Many speculators declair that everything that the human mind comprehends isnt what it seems, it is only due to inturpetation for our mind to comprehend, for example medical science reckognize that the human eye only senses a fraction of the light that is available, there fore we are blind in a sense.
I would appriciate to hear youre oppinion of how the human mind comprehends the world.
Well…
Deep subject. Welcome to the boards.
Fagjunk Theology: Not just for sodomite propagandists anymore.
The human mind comprehends the world radiating from the brain outward.
The closer a concept is to what a person is thinking already, the more “true” that concept will seem to that person.
in other words, “we don’t see the world as it is, we see it as we are”
Howdy from Texas (aka Hell), My Liege! I shall do my best to answer thee!
Ok, starting with the eye thing. Yes, the human eye only picks up certain wavelengths of light. “The Visible Spectrum” Roy G. Biv, in english. There’s other stuff out there, that is basically the same thing, but we can’t sense it. Ultraviolet and infrared light. One is ‘heat’ to us, one is radiation that gives us sunburn. It’s the same thing as regular light, just different flavors. And it’s completely invisible. Only science lets us even know it exists. And there is all kinds of other stuff that is basically the same. Radio, X-rays, Gamma rays… all the same ‘electromagnetic spectrum’ that we see a tiny slice of. So yes, in this sense, we are blind. We can see a tiny bit, but there is SO MUCH more out there, that we might as well be seeing none of it.
So, what do we see? This tiny fraction of the energy around us, and how it reacts to the other things around us. Light, bouncing off objects. This is all we can ‘know’ of the world around us… directly, at least. We can reason out the rest… radio works, you know why if you read a book, you know THAT it works if you turn it on.
In a sense, our world consists of two things. What we think we know about the world, and what we can actually see. Each one influences the other. I can’t see radio waves, but I know they are there. I might see a ghost, but I know that it is NOT really there. Or is it… but that’s a different thread. And I’m too tired to link. q;}
Ok, then… now what have we got? We get some light, it hits our eyes, it gets translated in the brain into ‘seeing something’. Then we compare that to what we’ve seen before… and we “See Spot Run” or whatever the heck you’re looking at.
I think it’s pretty clear that what the human mind ‘sees’ is not really what’s going on. It’s only a small fraction of it. A pale shadow of the REAL reality that’s out there.
This thought is why I love science, and those with the desire to use their minds to figure out just what the heck all that invisible stuff is.
THANK YOU CECIL and the SDMB!! I love you guys! :::drunken hugs:::
What I’ve come to agree with is the following model:
What is “seen”, for example, is not the electromagnetic signals that the eye is able to react to. These are merely raw input. The act of seeing is not mere passive intake of light. It is a very active process of interpretation and thought. Perhaps very young infants might not do this, but for the rest of us it appears to be impossible to “perceive” without immediately “interpreting”. Otherwise, how would we be able to tell a “tiny sparry” that is “far away” and “moving further away” from a “big truck” that is “not that far” and is “getting closer” in time for us to make a “reflexive” jump out of the way?