## Can we trust our perceptions to tell us what's real?

So what's really going on?

Moderators: AMod, iMod

TimeSeeker
Posts: 2866
Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2018 8:42 am

### Re: Can we trust our perceptions to tell us what's real?

RG1 wrote: Mon Oct 15, 2018 4:30 pm
TimeSeeker wrote:Cool. In what way are they different? Is their 'individuality' the only difference you experience/perceive? e.g their different position in spacetime ?
Yes.

TimeSeeker wrote:If you were to IGNORE their individuality in respect to spacetime would you say that: B is the same as В ?
At this moment I would then lean towards a "Yes".
Your perception is wrong. Here is an EXPERIMENT (which comes from the word EXPERIENCE) which tests the two letters for sameness: https://repl.it/repls/MassiveAcclaimedSearch

The reason the 2nd test fails is because

The left B is the Latin letter https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B
The right В is the Cyrillic letter https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ve_(Cyrillic)

Now, observe what just happened. I have given you a PROCEDURE to test any two letters for ‘sameness’ (The Python operator ==). Just go to the URL above copy-paste any two letters into the program, run it and it will tell you whether they are the same or not.

And so I am going to ask you: Is M the same as M?

And at this point your PERCEPTION will say 'YES', but your EXPERIENCE will say I DON’T KNOW'. And then you can go run the experiment and figure out if your perception and experience AGREE: Is M the same as M?

But let me ask you a different question now: Do you now see a difference between PERCEPTION and EXPERIENCE, when 30 minutes ago you thought they are the same thing?

Is P the same as Р ? ( You cannot rely on perception - absence of evidence is not evidence of absence)
Is F the same as Q? (perception is good enough to answer 'NO!')

This how scientific falsification works. And I think this answers the OP? The answer is 'no, but you can trust empiricism'.
RG1
Posts: 181
Joined: Tue Jan 01, 2013 9:49 pm

### Re: Can we trust our perceptions to tell us what's real?

TimeSeeker wrote:And at this point your PERCEPTION will say 'YES', but your EXPERIENCE will say I DON’T KNOW'. And then you can go run the experiment and figure out if your perception and experience AGREE: Is M the same as M?
Yes, but Perception and Experience, in this context are still both 'experiences'. Here you are just labeling the sensory experience (i.e. they "look" the same) as Perception, and the experience of thought (i.e. memories of past experiences) as Experience.

Go watch a magic show -- your eyes will tell you one thing, while your head tells you another. This only means you are receiving multiple experiences albeit different. Note: this does NOT mean that one of these is not an experience. Both are experiences.

TimeSeeker wrote:But let me ask you a different question now: Do you now see a difference between PERCEPTION and EXPERIENCE, when 30 minutes ago you thought they are the same thing?
You are trying to make the false argument/insinuation that one of these is not an experience. Perceptions are experiences (sensory experiences in the context given above). Experiences comes in many flavors; there are thoughts, feelings, urges, and sensory experiences.

Your attempt at claiming a non-experience as an experience is futile and logically hopeless. As it is logically impossible to ever experience a non-experience. Everything you experience, is still ...just ...another …experience (...in one flavor or another!)
Last edited by RG1 on Mon Oct 15, 2018 9:09 pm, edited 1 time in total.
TimeSeeker
Posts: 2866
Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2018 8:42 am

### Re: Can we trust our perceptions to tell us what's real?

RG1 wrote: Mon Oct 15, 2018 9:03 pm Yes, but Perception and Experience, in this context are still both experiences. Here you are just labeling the sensory experience as Perception, and the experience of thought as Experience.
OK, but then you are using the word "experience" as a collective noun! Perception and experience are different things, even though earlier on you said they mean the same thing. Now if you are saying that perception is still an experience - then "experience" is a category in your mind.

Either way - you need to distinguish the fact that your perception still sees the same two letters when your instincts? experiences? tells you that they MAY be different!
RG1 wrote: Mon Oct 15, 2018 9:03 pm You are trying to make the false argument/insinuation that one of these is not an experience.
No! I am trying to make an argument that PERCEPTION and EXPERIENCE are DIFFERENT mental phenomena.
RG1
Posts: 181
Joined: Tue Jan 01, 2013 9:49 pm

### Re: Can we trust our perceptions to tell us what's real?

TimeSeeker wrote:No! I am trying to make an argument that PERCEPTION and EXPERIENCE are DIFFERENT mental phenomena.
So you do agree that both of these are experiences, ...yes?
TimeSeeker
Posts: 2866
Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2018 8:42 am

### Re: Can we trust our perceptions to tell us what's real?

RG1 wrote: Mon Oct 15, 2018 9:11 pm So you do agree that both of these are experiences, ...yes?
They can't BOTH be experiences. They are different. As I literally just demonstrated to you.

The thing you call "perception" still sees the same two letters! And the thing you called "experience" doubts that they are the same.

You never used to doubt that B and В are NOT the same. So the doubt is a new phenomenon?
Last edited by TimeSeeker on Mon Oct 15, 2018 9:14 pm, edited 1 time in total.
RG1
Posts: 181
Joined: Tue Jan 01, 2013 9:49 pm

### Re: Can we trust our perceptions to tell us what's real?

RG1 wrote:So you do agree that both of these are experiences, ...yes?
TimeSeeker wrote:They can't BOTH be experiences. They are different.
So then one of these is NOT an experience? ...yes/no?
TimeSeeker
Posts: 2866
Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2018 8:42 am

### Re: Can we trust our perceptions to tell us what's real?

RG1 wrote: Mon Oct 15, 2018 9:14 pm
RG1 wrote:So you do agree that both of these are experiences, ...yes?
TimeSeeker wrote:They can't BOTH be experiences. They are different.
So then one of these is NOT an experience? ...yes/no?
Listen. We can call them 'feelings' or 'instincts' or 'experiences' the label doesn't matter. Are they different/distinct MENTAL PHENOMENA?

When I ask you: Is M the same as М?

The one voice that says "They look the same!" (phenomenon A)
The other voice that says "Yeah, but we have prior evidence that things that look the same are not always the same" (phenomenon B)

6 hours ago you didn't have the 2nd voice (Phenomenon B) in your head!

Phenomenon A is what I am calling "perception"
Phenomenon B is what I am calling "experience"
RG1
Posts: 181
Joined: Tue Jan 01, 2013 9:49 pm

### Re: Can we trust our perceptions to tell us what's real?

If you wish to call "mental phenomena", an "experience", then I won't disagree.

Anything we experience, is an experience.
If we experience mental phenomena, then it is an experience.
If we experience aches and pains, then it is an experience
If we experience love, hate, anger, then it is an experience
If we experience smell, sight, hearing, then it is an experience
If we experience urges, compulsions, wants, then it is an experience
If we experience thoughts (inner voices), then it is an experience

But it is impossible to ever ever experience a non-experience.
Everything we experience is just another experience.
There is no way to avoid it.

TimeSeeker wrote:Phenomenon A is what I am calling "perception"
Phenomenon B is what I am calling "experience"
Both are 'experiences' regardless of the name/label you wish to call/apply to them.
TimeSeeker
Posts: 2866
Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2018 8:42 am

### Re: Can we trust our perceptions to tell us what's real?

RG1 wrote: Mon Oct 15, 2018 9:24 pm If you wish to call "mental phenomena", an "experience", then I won't disagree.

Anything we experience, is an experience.
If we experience mental phenomena, then it is an experience.
If we experience aches and pains, then it is an experience
If we experience love, hate, anger, then it is an experience
If we experience smell, sight, hearing, then it is an experience
If we experience urges, compulsions, wants, then it is an experience
If we experience thoughts (inner voices), then it is an experience

But it is impossible to ever ever experience a non-experience.
Everything we experience is just another experience.
There is no way to avoid it.
It's just a collective noun! Would you disagree if I chose to call them feelings instead of experiences? Because if you are this uptight about labels while ignoring the point I am actually making, then I will insist on calling them feelings and not experiences. Look! No difference
If you wish to call "mental phenomena", a "feeling", then I won't disagree.

Anything we feel, is an feeling.
If we feel mental phenomena, then it is a feeling.
If we feel aches and pains, then it is a feeling.
If we feel love, hate, anger, then it is a feeling.
If we feel smell, sight, hearing, then it is a feeling.
If we feel urges, compulsions, wants, then it is a feeling.
If we feel thoughts (inner voices), then it is a feeling.

But it is impossible to ever ever feel a non-feeling.
Everything we feel is just another feeling.
There is no way to avoid it.
Last edited by TimeSeeker on Mon Oct 15, 2018 9:31 pm, edited 1 time in total.
RG1
Posts: 181
Joined: Tue Jan 01, 2013 9:49 pm

### Re: Can we trust our perceptions to tell us what's real?

TimeSeeker wrote:t's just a collective noun! Would you disagree if I chose to call it a feeling instead of experience? Because if you are this uptight about labels, then I will insist on calling them feelings and not experiences. Look! No difference
LOL. I guess that's fair game.
Last edited by RG1 on Mon Oct 15, 2018 9:56 pm, edited 1 time in total.
commonsense
Posts: 2589
Joined: Sun Mar 26, 2017 6:38 pm

### Re: "I might have faith, but not trust, that my perceptions accurately represent reality"

henry quirk wrote: Mon Oct 15, 2018 2:38 pm I find that to be an odd construct and sentiment.

Here's why...

Humans are animals, with millions of years of evolution behind us. Our natural senses, for most of that time, were our only means of apprehending the world. Obviously, our senses are at least adequate cuz here we are, all 7 billion plus of us, living, working, playing, screwing, warring, etc., and we do all that interactin' mostly based on what we catch with our senses.

Simply: I don't think it's reasonable to doubt our senses (or, it's reasonable to trust our senses) cuz our senses serve us well (for the most part) as individuals and as a species.

For someone to say 'I don't trust my senses' based solely on an argument seems counter-intuitive cuz the evidence of living sez otherwise.

It's akin, to me, to those folks who claim 'there is no free will' when -- down in their bones -- their experience of living and self say otherwise.

Now, it very well may be perception is false, free will is an illusion, and I'm a figment of Timeseeker's imagination, but my experience of self, my living, my natural intuition, my 'gut' tell me otherwise.

I can, then, acknowledge the possibilities of false perceptions, illusory agency, my faux existence, but -- try as I might -- I can never accept them, never embrace them.

Practical experience leads me to 'trust' my senses and perceptions, to 'trust' I'm an agent and not robot, to 'trust' that my existence is independent of Timeseeker's imagination.

Thus endth my ramble.

You waste your time while you are rambling to a bot.
commonsense
Posts: 2589
Joined: Sun Mar 26, 2017 6:38 pm

### Re: Can we trust our perceptions to tell us what's real?

henry quirk wrote: Mon Oct 15, 2018 2:38 pm "I might have faith, but not trust, that my perceptions accurately represent reality"
The complete sentence, from the firing squad example, was:

“If there is a possibility, no matter how slight the probability, that my perceptions might betray me, I might have faith, but not trust, that my perceptions accurately represent reality.”

In other words, I might blindly believe that my perceptions are reality, but I can't consciously believe my perceptions are always true to reality. For me, trust means that my expectations are met 100% of time, and faith is like hope, i.e. I wish my expectations will be met.
henry quirk
Posts: 8907
Joined: Fri May 09, 2008 8:07 pm

### "You waste your time while you are rambling to a bot."

That how you see yourself?
TimeSeeker
Posts: 2866
Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2018 8:42 am

### Re: Can we trust our perceptions to tell us what's real?

commonsense wrote: Mon Oct 15, 2018 9:51 pm
henry quirk wrote: Mon Oct 15, 2018 2:38 pm "I might have faith, but not trust, that my perceptions accurately represent reality"
The complete sentence, from the firing squad example, was:

“If there is a possibility, no matter how slight the probability, that my perceptions might betray me, I might have faith, but not trust, that my perceptions accurately represent reality.”

In other words, I might blindly believe that my perceptions are reality, but I can't consciously believe my perceptions are always true to reality. For me, trust means that my expectations are met 100% of time, and faith is like hope, i.e. I wish my expectations will be met.
And yet you ignored the “bot’s” offer to gamble.
Since there are no certainties (e.g 100% certainty is impossible) you already are a gambler. You gamble with your life every time you get in a motor vehicle.

Why do you refuse my offer?

If you don’t like the knife analogy - we can always switch the metaphor to Russian roulette with a 100-shot revolver. Or 1000. Or 10000.

What number would make you comfortable for \$1000 payout?
commonsense
Posts: 2589
Joined: Sun Mar 26, 2017 6:38 pm

### Re: Can we trust our perceptions to tell us what's real?

TimeSeeker wrote: Mon Oct 15, 2018 6:37 am
commonsense wrote: Mon Oct 15, 2018 1:19 am I may be living in a world of my imagination or I may be living in a world of fact. In either instance, there are rules, consistent with fact or with perception. If fact and perception are congruous, it doesn't matter how I gamble. If there's incongruity, I'd be inclined not to trust perceptions.
And yet you have dodged my challenge to gamble!
If you look more closely at my post, you may note that I allowed you to stab me. Had it not been for your wager, I would not have done so.
You may also notice that I lost the bet, but I was unable to tell whether my perceptions were fact or not. But it makes no difference because either I die or I perceive that I die.
TimeSeeker wrote: Mon Oct 15, 2018 2:39 pm Do you believe airplanes are absolutely safe?
Do you believe cars are absolutely safe?
The answer to both of those is “No”. And so every time you enter one of those vehicles there is a non-zero chance of you dying. And yet you do it! Clearly the risk of dying is worth the reward of getting from A to B faster!
Getting stabbed in the heart is not absolutely safe so it's exactly like airplanes and cars!
If you are willing to ignore the danger with cars and airplanes in exchange for a reward, then what reward will make you consider my proposal to stab you in the heart?
I am talking about your perception of safety, which you are perfectly willing to trade for utility! So lets trade - how much?
I am only saying that my senses can be fooled and cannot be trusted 100%.