perception and evidence: forum for week of 10 Oct
Mo schmo…
Some time ago a man who many people think of as one of the greatest thinkers of all time endeavored to restructure his entire knowledge/belief base by asking what he could prove and still he arrived at the conclusion that God exists.
Descartes’ plan was to question everything and in doing so he believed he would arrive at only true beliefs. Doubt everything was the idea he started with. Everything but the existence of God that is because when he broke down all his knowledge and questioned everything his perception told him (as perception is merely the brains interpretation of external stimuli which we cannot know anything about beyond what our brain constructs) he still found God – because he perceived that there was something more perfect than himself. His problem here is in his idea of perfect. He talks of being deceived but says that God would not deceive him but says that God is perfect because he is infinite. However, to be infinite God must have everything that exists within him and deception being a thing which was already discussed and therefore in existence must also be a quality of God. Logic failed Descartes because the belief in God was so strong that it was rooted in his very perception of the world. Beliefs and biases are like this – if you believe strongly enough in something you will always find evidence for it. Furthermore, you will always deny anything which refutes your belief or attempt to explain it in a way which can work within your belief structure.
Schmo, as admirable as his stance is, really is a schmuck. He said, “Nature has a way of giving evidence that cuts through the firmest convictions.” This is his best argument and is complete and utter tripe. I personally know people who live surrounded by people who do nothing but use and abuse each other yet they continue to hold to the belief that humans are universally good at heart. Having this belief about humanity they will find any explanation they can for the actions of those around them. I am not saying people are naturally evil, only pointing out that there are people who hold to beliefs despite being surrounded by evidence to the contrary rendering Schmo the schmuck’s statement wrong. The “most prejudiced perception” will always find excuses for contradictory events or evidence which are either explained by their beliefs or biases or, at the very least, up hold them. Such as the invocation of something being “God’s plan” when asked why a supposedly good God allows bad things to occur.
Though I’d defend Mo’s side in this I wouldn’t fully agree with Mo either. True our perceptions can never be free of prejudice. And I am saying this as a person who has tried to shed himself of all biases and look at the world as logically as possible. Most of our beliefs are things which we take for granted and do not know they are there. That’s the thing about cultural views and beliefs; they are so common we barely know we have them. No matter how hard we try we will not be able to arrive at incontestable truth through our perceptions – not as individuals anyway. But when many people have the same perception then we can start to believe in something as really being a real description of the real world. Scientific evidence in support of a theory, for example, isn’t presented by one person based on their perceptions and then become accepted as fact. Findings must be first be verified by other scientists repeating the experiments and arriving at the same conclusions. When perceptions of a thing are in agreement among many people who perceive the thing then I think it is safe to take it as “evidence that settles all issues” concerning at least that thing. Therefore, knowledge cannot be attained by a personal search by an individual but by a collaborative effort of groups of individuals.