Nothing determines me from outside,
not because nothing acts upon me,
but on the contrary, because
I am from the start outside myself
and open to the world.
Maurice Merleau-Ponty
| Summary: for those that do not care to read on and on and on This research paper discusses perspectives on human perception that show how biases and limitations are qualities of brain function. According to numerous brilliant scientists the brain makes up a lot of what is perceived and has the propensity to perceive certain traits over others due to inherent biases and limitations within the brain. The intention of this discussion is to create awareness of the biases and limitations of perception to inspire more humility and respect amongst people. The logic of this approach is that if we acknowledge how erroneous our perception is we may become more humble, gracious, and forgiving with one another. A very Jesusy thing to do. Some of the central points are: ~The brain functions to perceive what does not exist ~Ideas and beliefs are meme-like and spread like viruses ~Free will is contested by scientists, defined as “intention invention” ~Less is known about how the mind works that what is known ~A separation between the perceiver and what is perceived is fallacious _____________________________________________________________________________________ excerpt from a research paper Two questions form the motivational core of this paper. Firstly, what the hell is wrong with people that so much pettiness and evil exists amongst us? Secondly, what frame of reasoning can be used to get people to be less sure of themselves; thereby being more humble, respectful, and potentially reverent toward all that is perceived. The above quote by French philosopher Merleau-Ponty defines exactly what needs to be understood about human perception, if we are to appreciate what the hell is wrong with people. Merleau-Ponty states that the existence of a separation between ourselves and the world around us is inaccurate. It is inaccurate because what is known about human perception from a science-based perspective shows a complex integration between the perceiving subject and the object of perception. The binary of conceiving of self and other as separate is a flawed form of logic. Such logic has evil consequences, ranging from the banal egoist attachments to one’s own perception as accurate and superior to another person’s, to the horrifically megalomaniacal socio-political and religious wars arising from the assurance of one’s own cultural view. How can we appreciate this complex and mysterious unity between ourselves and what we perceive? The first step, as advocated in ancient Greece is to know thy self. Humans however are characteristically bad at this through all sorts of denial mechanisms, brain traits, and the fact that you cannot completely see yourself. Setting ourselves apart from animals has also in some measure blinded us to embracing some of our species’ limitations. All species are defined by perceptual and physical qualities, and humans are no different. Take for example the qualities of a cat. A creature capable of climbing high, leaping distances with precision, along with the capacity to detect ultraviolet light. This is a marvelous array of traits. Human traits are also constituted through our physical and perceptual capacity, though the awareness of how we construct the world around us is often not fully considered. Humans have many limitations and acknowledging them is the first step in knowing thyself. It also hopefully would encourage us to acknowledge that the brain is not a truth generating apparatus, as well as appreciate how truly incomprehensible and amazing the world is. Our species-specific traits are essential to get a handle on if we are going to move forward without killing each other and destroying the planet. How little attention is given to the dynamics of perception in the mainstream media circus that so much public discourse is hinged on. Humans are a perceptually fractured animal and there are numerous examples to help us understand this and expand our comprehension of how vitally linked we all are. Merleau-Ponty’s assertion that unity exists between ourselves and what we perceive is supported by science perspectives on perception. A science-based approach to support the existence of an indivisible unity between self and other is as interesting as it is complex. The complexity is due to the brilliant depth of ideas put forth by scientists that convey surprising details about perception, and how vast the terrain of what is not known about the mind is. The ideas to be discussed show how biases and limitations are functional features of the brain. Concepts are also discussed that expand commonly held perspectives on core traits of humans. Due to the limitation of my science and math background I shall not digress far from a near quotation from the sources of these brainy ideas published by cognitive scientists, neurobiologists, and the like. Prior to the discussion of the exemplary scholars of science, I will discuss a few perspectives on humanity that that provide a framework to build the science based on ideas on. The first concept is from the work of Ernest Becker in his book The Denial of Death. According to Becker humans are paradoxical animals. The paradox is due to the capacity of imagination to conceive limitlessly while at the same time being constrained within a body that exudes stench and dies. The corollary to this concept is that all humans live out a hero complex to make their lives meaningful through attachment to ideas and practices that deny death and make one feel heroic, referred to as a hero complex. The denial of death according to Becker causes all sorts of malaise for humans due to the grandiose and contorted actions taken to cover over the fear of death. On an individual and cultural level, it is easy to see the denial of death and heroics at play. Accepting the finality of life in Becker’s terms leads to authentic caring of oneself and others as the knowledge of time being limited generates value. Another interesting perspective on humans that I learned of was through a summer course on Indigenous spirituality. This perspective was shared with the class by the Mohawk professor. As far as I can recollect the story goes something like this. It is set in the fall months in nature. A dog gathers all the animals of the forest together. The dog easily gathers all the animals together because the dog is a fascinating storyteller. The animals listen intently to the dog, appreciating the humour, the surprise, the wit, the irony—all the many qualities of the dog’s story. While listening to the dog all the animals became distracted from the work of preparing for the coming winter. The winter came and was unusually harsh on all the animals on account of a lack of preparation because the animals were too busy enthralled in the dog’s story. The animals then banded together and kicked the dog out of the animal kingdom and that is how the dog came to be humanities so called best friend. What can be construed from this story is that humans like the dog are also narrative based creatures that construct endless varieties of stories and theories to explain life. Many amazing thinkers expound upon the centrality of storytelling as a defining feature of humans, whether that be in literature, science, or even mathematics. One entertaining analysis on this topic is described by Edward Chamberlain in his book, If This Is Your Land Where Are Your Stories: Finding Common Ground. Chamberlains discusses the categories of fact/fiction and reality/imagination from a multi-disciplinary perspective. Chamberlain advocates for an inclusive way of seeing life that integrates fact/fiction, as distinct from a logic of either or. The range of disciplines he discusses is very wide to show how life processes and our understanding of them are embedded in both “the real” and the imaginary. A fun analysis of the rhymes and riddles of childhood and metaphor are discussed to show that the strange and the familiar, just like fact and fiction are interwoven rather than opposites in how we construct meaning. As he states: Every tradition of stories and songs in both the sciences and the arts has allegiances to both reality and the imagination including that most apparently uncompromising of them all mathematics nobody walks the borderline between what is and what is not with more elegance than mathematicians.” (P 125) Chamberlain’s discussion of how we create stories and theories to make sense of life includes ideas in hard sciences that are fluid and change over time as new perspectives are discovered. Viewing humans as possessing a limitless imaginative capacity and the propensity to tell stories, along with an abject fear of death is a wonderful vantage point to integrate science-based ideas on the dynamics of perception with. Visual Perception and the Blindspot Firstly, let us consider visual perception. In doing so we shall soon appreciate the perspective of Merleau-Ponty through a basic review of our perceptual abilities. The starting point of visual perception is light, obviously. The eye is essentially like a camera that sends signal to the brain to represent what is perceived. An image is created through light that is projected onto the back of the eye onto a sheet of photoreceptors. Photoreceptors as the term suggests are the cells that receive light to produce an image. There is a whole in this sheet where the optic nerve head carries information from the eye to the rest of the brain. This hole is referred to as the blind spot and is literally an area in our receptive field where we cannot see. The reason we do not detect this in our usual perceptual processes is because our brain makes up what we do not see. Yes, our brain makes up what we do not see. There are simple processes to follow if you want to experience this. (https://synergycommons.net/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/the-blind-spot.pdf) This feature of perception shows clearly that the apparent separation between the object of perception and the perceiving subject is little more than a convenient descriptive term with no basis in the actualities of perception. It also lends credence to the idea that perhaps we are best to not be so sure of ourselves since there is an actual hole in our perceptual apparatus. How marvelous it would be if we could all acknowledge that we literally have a blind spot. By acknowledging the blind spot, we acknowledge that we are all making stuff up. Could we extrapolate and apply this idea as a tangential bit of wisdom that could transform the Venus and Mars theory that John Gray wrote about to describe gender differences? Yeah, yeah, he was talking about the social construction of gender. Nonetheless, the brains and perceptual apparatus are the same in both genders, as well as those claiming no gender or a multi-gender or reverse gender. Whatever the case may be, the human brain is similarly constituted amongst all humans and even some monkeys, which I shall discuss further on. |