21 April, 2005

Perception As Reality

Getting back to something I mentioned earlier, what I say doesn't matter. What is important is what you will understand from what I say-that is, what you think I am saying. The world is what you make of it; if you think that it is a scary place where everyone is out to do you harm, then you operate from that premise and it is true...for you. Every perceived slight weighs on your mind and confirms your opinion, whereas all contradictory evidence is discarded. I think that many will recognize this person, who says "I can't do anything right, everyone hates me!" Conversely, you can go through your existence with the opinion that everyone likes and respects you, so that no matter what anyone says you think of it as a compliment. However we demonstrate it, what comes from this argument is true for all: what you think of as the truth, becomes the truth. But only for you! Thinking something does not make it so for others; for instance, we can believe that some deity caused a tsunami that killed 100,000 people. However, that belief doesn't change the fact that it was a natural phenomenon caused by verifiable and observable actions and reactions. Putting aside how insulting it is to the survivors of the catastrophe who we-supposing for the moment 'we' support this "explanation"-who we would have accept that their loved ones died on the whim of some "superior" being that they may never even have heard of before. Further, that those who died somehow deserved it, because that is what we would be conveying to these people by saying some being had killed them and it has a plan that we believe in. Leaving out the fact that these people were living their lives that day much as they had unmolested for many years before this event, even disregarding all the subjective information, we cannot support this argument. This claim is no different than if someone were to come forward and claim that they had, through 'mental powers', caused the tsunami. This person can believe it, even be completely certain that they were responsible. That conviction does not mean that they are correct. Indeed, it is often the case that after some major event has happened many people will come forward with explanations. Whether it be alien forces (the God of the East Wind, those "dirty Commies", a mutant virus, etc.) or something more mundane ("Little Bobby knocked over the fence on accident."), there are numerous possibilities to blame it on, with varying degrees of plausibility. People have a basic need to understand things, we call it "curiosity", but it can be dangerous in that it leads some to seek excuses or explain these events with very unlikely things. Since there isn't an easily-understood, directly human-based agency to blame for it, these people will concoct involved and far-reaching "reasoning". It is difficult for these people to believe that there requires no external or extraordinary explanation for events, that things happen for certain, predictable reasons-whether we understand those mechanisms or not. It seems strange that a person with so much faith in one explanation has so little left to give the benefit of the doubt to any other. Yet this may be the key, that some peoples' beliefs require them to remain doubtless; as a result they cannot accept the reasoned arguments of others if they would throw the smallest doubt upon the believers' faith. It seems that this system would create many problems, however, and seriously delay and retard the progress of understanding the natural world. For each new bit of information would need to be weighed carefully against established beliefs to see if it conflicts and if it does, the new is rejected for the old. Until the microscope, it was thought that there were supernatural reasons for diseases and death. An entire world was discovered and its previously unseen inhabitants were finally linked to infections, illnesses, and decay. Before, people had believed that the afflicted had either displeased, offended, or not supplicated a deity or demon and that presence had "struck them down". How many hundreds of people had to die before belief caught up with science and allowed physicians to treat illness with something other than parlor tricks and humbuggery? Nowadays, I like to think that the great majority of people realize what actually causes a disease, a tsunami, locust swarms, and the like. Still, there are those who will continue to proclaim that their own personal god was responsible, either directly or ultimately. It is that inability and need to understand that drives people to seek solace in faith, however limited an explanation it may offer. Whatever name you choose to give it, belief is not fact, it is opinion, and cannot change the facts of what happened, except in the mind of the believing individual. To insist that we must all accept one explanation as "The Truth" without question-or even factual basis-is irrational, unfounded, and runs counter to known human behaviour.

No comments: