truth and representation...
There was a program dealing with 'truth' on BBC
Radio yesterday, which I was only half-listening to as I was doing other things.
The program was the usual thing, arriving at the truth, etc, what is true and
what is meaningful.
And although I know it is a trite concept and it was been dealt with a lot, I just don't know most of what has been said about it,and I was thinking.. when we see something, something concrete like a stone, we are not seeing the stone. We are seeing the result of a process in our brain, interpreting the variances in light, shade and colour in the representation that our mind constructs out of the image reflected in our eyes. We are also seeing the fact that we 'know' it is a stone, we expect it to have certain features, to be hard and to interact with the world in its rather passive, inert stone-like way.,.
and everything in our minds is a representation. This is easy to forget (and perhaps for the purpose of every day and dealing with the world, best forgotten), as are the many layers of representation involved in our processing the world and making sense of it. Now, a representation is, by definition, not the original object and does not contain all lcharacteristics of it. The word 'universe' does not contain the universe, any concept we may have of it cannot contain all the properties of the original thing. But equally so, any word or concept (and any word is really a concept) is shorthand representation for something and cannot contain all its qualities. Our direct physical perception of it is already a representation. We see the world through a maze of fairground mirrors.
Worse: the gap between reality, perception and interpretation is bound to be different for each of us, since we have had different experiences and influences, a different mix of both perceptions and tools with which to make sense of the world. And this means there is not only a gap between what there is out there and what we 'see' of it, but also between our interpretation of something and that at which another person arrives. What we mean by the same concept or idea is bound not to be identical but for there to be a variable degree of difference.
and in these muddy waters we sit in front of each other in a cafe and think we are communicating and understanding each other and one of us says "That's just what I was thinking, I know exactly what you mean...."
I'll have to revisit all the muddle I've just written....
(haven't arrived to the truth bit yet. To be continued..)
And although I know it is a trite concept and it was been dealt with a lot, I just don't know most of what has been said about it,and I was thinking.. when we see something, something concrete like a stone, we are not seeing the stone. We are seeing the result of a process in our brain, interpreting the variances in light, shade and colour in the representation that our mind constructs out of the image reflected in our eyes. We are also seeing the fact that we 'know' it is a stone, we expect it to have certain features, to be hard and to interact with the world in its rather passive, inert stone-like way.,.
and everything in our minds is a representation. This is easy to forget (and perhaps for the purpose of every day and dealing with the world, best forgotten), as are the many layers of representation involved in our processing the world and making sense of it. Now, a representation is, by definition, not the original object and does not contain all lcharacteristics of it. The word 'universe' does not contain the universe, any concept we may have of it cannot contain all the properties of the original thing. But equally so, any word or concept (and any word is really a concept) is shorthand representation for something and cannot contain all its qualities. Our direct physical perception of it is already a representation. We see the world through a maze of fairground mirrors.
Worse: the gap between reality, perception and interpretation is bound to be different for each of us, since we have had different experiences and influences, a different mix of both perceptions and tools with which to make sense of the world. And this means there is not only a gap between what there is out there and what we 'see' of it, but also between our interpretation of something and that at which another person arrives. What we mean by the same concept or idea is bound not to be identical but for there to be a variable degree of difference.
and in these muddy waters we sit in front of each other in a cafe and think we are communicating and understanding each other and one of us says "That's just what I was thinking, I know exactly what you mean...."
I'll have to revisit all the muddle I've just written....
(haven't arrived to the truth bit yet. To be continued..)
Posted: Tue - December 2, 2003 at 03:03 PM
Quick Links
Calendar
| Sun | Mon | Tue | Wed | Thu | Fri | Sat |
Categories
Archives
XML/RSS Feed
Statistics
Total entries in this blog:
Total entries in this category:
Published On: Jul 08, 2005 02:13 PM
Total entries in this category:
Published On: Jul 08, 2005 02:13 PM