TUS-A. Perception Intro: Seeing is Believing, or is it?

Discussion in 'Human Science' started by Xenu, Jul 11, 2003.

  1. Xenu BBS Whore Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    706
    The Unscientific Sciences

    ***************************************
    Note: This is a multi-threaded discussion. Please read the *Introduction* thread, if you haven't already, so that you know the main topic and format of these threads.
    ***************************************


    A. Perception Intro: Seeing is Believing, or is it?

    Within the sciences, perception is very important. Science itself is based on observations and measurements. If a person isn't sure of what they are seeing or that they are viewing their measuring instruments correctly, then how can they make accurate claims about the world? Within this chapter of threads, we will be discussing many physiological processes humans use to perceive the world, and how perception can be influenced by different sources.

    The sub-threads of this chapter, below, will be taking a Human Science look at the nature of human perceiving, showing how perception "errors" result and discussing how sciences can be affected by such flaws. Here is a list of the current sub-threads:

    A1 - The Amazing Disappearing Finger
    A2 - What's With the Hole in Your Chest Doc?

    Right now, in this chapter thread, you can discuss the topic of faulty perception and/or the above sub-threads, but I am also curious about misleading perception experiences in your lives. Have your perceptions always been reliable to you?
     
    Last edited: Jul 16, 2003
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. moving Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    139
    In light of Enron, World Com, Iraq’s WMD, SARS, the Lottery solving our school budget problems, etc. I think most of the crap I perceive on TV and in the newspapers is faulty. On second thought that’s not a perception error it’s more like deception. Or perhaps an induced perception error?
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Xenu BBS Whore Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    706
    I was thinking more in the line of directly perceiving something, but yes I see your point. The media, just by what it portrays, can affect what the populace thinks about the country and the world. Which in turn affects how we approach the world.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. SkinWalker Archaeology / Anthropology Moderator

    Messages:
    5,874
    I think that accuracy in the ability to understand what we perceive is directly proportional to the quality and quantity of data as well as the methodolgy used to evaluate it.

    As a 7-year old, I have a vivid memory of seeing an Unidentified Flying Object. I was about to feed a rabbit in a hutch just after dark and leaving my back door when a bright, circular object appeared traveling from 180 degrees to 0/360 degrees compared to my direction of travel. The object appeared to be high in the sky, large, moving relatively slow, and glowed very brightly.

    Being the type of observation one doesn't normally make, I remember my initial fear being that the "object" would land/fall in the forrest behind the house and burn down the rabbit's hutch. This was in the 1970's and the UFO craze was hitting one of it's peaks. I also lived near a NASA base (Wallops Island, now Goddard), so there were rumours of secret projects about UFOs. For years aftward... well into adult-hood, I was convinced that I witnessed some sort of alien craft.

    While serving in the military at an "undisclosed location," I had an almost identical observation of an almost identical event. This time, I didn't settle for not knowing what occured. I was an MP on patrol, so I "patrolled" until I located the object which had landed.

    It turns out that Harrier jets, when their nozzles are pointed down, create just that effect when they are landing. For some reason, the sound of the jets themselves is dampened during this effect. But there sat a Harrier, on the tarmac, just a few meters from where I had been, and taxiing back to the flightline of the small airfield.

    New information, fresh data, and an improved method to evaluate it. I checked with my father, who worked for NASA at the time, and it turned out that the Harrier was being tested at Wallops Island at that period in my youth.

    I think my new hypothesis about the event when I was 7 is accurate. I don't have precision with it, since I can't verify the exact date/time with actual flights, which would certainly be on record somewhere, but the hypothsesis is accurate.

    I don't think precision is necessary in order to explain observations, but accuracy is important when evaluating data. As science progresses, the accuracy of a hypothesis should increase to the point of being precise or nearly so.
     
  8. Xenu BBS Whore Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    706
    That's a good example, Skinwalker.

    I had thought I saw a UFO in my childhood too. Mine was around the time the movie E.T. came out.

    In this chapter I hope to explore further that our perceptions can be misled by our expectations (placed by ourselves or by society), as your UFO story illustrates, and also just by the nature of the brain.
     
  9. moving Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    139
    Yes our expectations could be one of our biggest stumbling blocks. Perhaps I’ve never seen a UFO because I never expected to. We see what we want to see, hear what we want to hear (or so I’ve been told), believe what we want to believe. I think our opinions, beliefs and expectations play a major role in how we perceive things. Our emotions also can unduly strengthen our beliefs and really set us off course. Even the language we use to communicate cannot be trusted to be interpreted the same way by everyone.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    ohmygod everything I know could be wrong. I plead insanity
     
  10. Xenu BBS Whore Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    706
    I like your post. When you start thinking about this stuff, you really start to question your reality.

    I suppose something can be said about an agreed upon reality, where if you get enough people perceiving the same thing, then it must be more likely real. But then there is something to be said about mass hallucinations too.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    Kind of like we discussed with the media, manipulating peoples beliefs.

    Sometimes I wonder if we humans just make everything up. Maybe we are just brains in a vat with overactive imaginations.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  11. Marigny Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    186
    ....

    I’d like to contribute something though slightly hesitant to. After reading SkinWalkers post, in which he as a 7 year old saw a UFO then later found out that it turned out to be Harrier jets, and due to their nozzles when pointed down, creating the effect of a UFO when they land. And what for instance, an observation that was done before a child could decipher language or walk? In most cases, as a child grows, he/she is flooded with influences from adults, the media, beliefs and observations through their eyes. What about when a child sees something that is inexplicably impossible? Could hallucinations be contributing because of the process of growth? This is related to memory since perception and observation connects to our brains. Does a baby create hallucinations? I know it sounds ridiculous because most of us don’t even remember past kindergarten. But supposing those who do recall memory before they could walk or learn speech, see the world around with clear solidity? And suppose a child less than four sees things as clear as a person in front of you, something that isn’t exactly a ghost, which could be explained as projective left overs from strong memory of those absent now. But something with solid form that does not come from this world. Maybe it’s alien.
    Can enough information from the world around you create such an impact to child that it can become labeled as an overactive imagination?

    That’s the thing about science, since it’s based on theories/assumptions, and not facts.
    Still, some say it is one of the most common misconceptions in science. Theory is a way that something is explained and supported by evidence, used to predict the future.
    A "theory" used to interpret how things are the way they are biologically. How could anyone deny it as fact who examined the supportive evidence? Simply not a chaotic thing. Since science is deduced with classification, how can we as humans conclude or theorize something that is perceptively within our own personal observation, something that is imagination?
     
  12. moving Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    139

Share This Page