Separation Of Perception

Plato’s Theaetetus aims to answer the question, “what is knowledge?”. Throughout the book, we get some potential answers, but none of these answers passed Socrates’ investigation. Could this be a message from Plato stating that knowledge cannot be defined? Or did Plato leave all the information necessary to answer the question, but left the work of figuring what knowledge is to the reader? I think that the latter is true. In this paper I argue that an account must be an explanation which shows a deep level of understanding of understanding of the object or subject relative to the true opinion stated.

Perception is a crucially important way for most of the organisms to observe and react to the environment. Its definition in Oxford Dictionary of English is “the ability to see, hear, or become aware of something through the senses” (“Perception”). However, for human, the most intelligent organism on earth, perception has an another meaning: “The way in which something is regard, understood, or interpreted” (“Perception”). People can not only be aware of the environment through senses, but also gain new knowledge by interpreting the observation.

The average human is born with the five common senses: touch, hear, smell, sight, and taste, but there are a few individuals who are born with a supernatural sense. One of the rarest supernatural senses that a human may be born or diagnosed with is a psychic ability. Psychic is defined as a supernatural or magical power that is viewed as extraordinary. Television broadcasters, scientists, and other skeptic individuals will interview the people who possess these psychic abilities. The public questions these individuals’ abilities for true or false answers; therefore, they can provide evidence such as an experience or encounter. Psychic abilities take on many forms such as telepathy, synesthesia, and telekinesis.

First what is perception and ignorance? Let us define perception as one’s view of life through rationalization of the external world and ignorance as an assumption without proof and contemplation. In the “Allegory of The Cave”, Plato uses Socrates to explain different types of people, one who sees the physical realm accepting ideas as they form and one who lives in knowledge realm by questioning those ideas. People of the knowledge realm are obligated to helps those in the physical realm by removing what Socrates refer to as ignorance through questioning. This is shown as prisoners of the cave look to the walls as their perception of their world which relates to people’s limited perception of the world such as people who grown up religious deny anything outside of God, in addition, people in higher state of perception are obligated to help those in lower states; this relates to real world as people seek mentors for advice.

* We leave the world of belief and accept conceptual perceptions in a move toward understanding the “intelligible realm”.

ABSTRACT: The aim of this paper is to defend a broad concept of visual perception, according to which it is a sufficient condition for visual perception that subjects receive visual information in a way which enables them to give reliably correct answers about the objects presented to them. According to this view, blindsight, non-epistemic seeing, and conscious visual experience count as proper types of visual perception. This leads to two consequences concerning the role of the phenomenal qualities of visual experiences. First, phenomenal qualities are not necessary in order to see something, because in the case of blindsight, subjects can see objects without experiences phenomenal

Perception in Hamlet Essay “There is no truth. There is only perception.” a knowledgeable quote by French novelist, Gustave Flaubert, discussing how humans perceive things versus reality. Perception is how one views the world and its individuals through their own knowledge and experiences; therefore, there are a diverse amount of viewpoints on the same subjects and people. As a result, those who are capable of perceiving situations accomplish more than those who are incapable.

In philosophy the distinction between truth and knowledge is effectively highlighted in Plato’s allegory of the cave, which illustrates the great limitations faced by philosophers in discovering the ultimate nature of reality. Nevertheless regarding the theory of knowledge, the parable itself is highly symbolic and asserts that any knowledge gained through perceptual awareness is an illusion and are mere reflections of the highest truths. This allegory can be interpreted in many ways; however in the context of platonic epistemology it flawlessly conveys Plato’s “Theory of forms” of an immaterial realm of abstractions considered to be the highest reality in which upon all natural phenomenon is based on.

After taking the implicit attitude test my perceptions change slightly. Sometimes people have inherent miss conception that you think that are minor, but they are inside of you without probably not being aware. While I was taking this test in many instances I was neutral, but I made decisions according to what I was seeing at the moment. This test has assisted me in being more self-aware about other cultures that sometimes you have not provided services to such as Muslim or Arab. Memories came into my mind when seeing different pictures. There were moments that I could not relate to due to that I had to stop to think. The test results slightly surprise me. This was because it never cross in my mind that somewhere around my head there is some

Realism is the form of perception in which it is believed that there is an external world outside of our own minds. It is the belief that regardless of what we may belief is true of false, the external world is independent of these beliefs. There are two forms of realism which are direct and indirect. In this essay I will argue that direct realism is a more plausible theory of perception than indirect realism by refuting the main arguments against direct realism. I will begin by briefly describing direct and indirect realism and follow with countering two of the main arguments indirect realists use against direct realists.

In the essay “Epiphenomenal qualia,” Jackson introduces the mental experience of “qualia” as an objection to physicalism – the idea that all true information is physical information. Beyond this conclusion, Jackson further argues that qualia are epiphenomenal by rebutting three possible responses. I believe that Jackson’s objections are valid but unsound, and that epiphenomenalism of qualia is more plausible than its counterargument. As for the knowledge argument which proves that physicalism is false, I agree with Churchland that it is unjustified, but I concur with Jackson’s conclusion that physicalism is false.

Only when the man gains his sight does he truly see the truth and the reality. Plato uses a similar type of explanation to show how truth and knowledge are pure and anything else is an imitation. Plato believes in truths of everlasting and all powerful nature, ideas that are because they are. Knowledge is one of these ideas, it is something that just is and cannot be changed. His theory is that knowledge is a certain immovable object, that ultimately some people can find and others won’t.

Walker Percy, in his article “The Loss of the creature”, presents the case how preconceived notions vary the way we, “creatures”, may perceive certain circumstances and experiences. He expresses his concerns for blind conformity, which can create a symbolic complex in each “creatures’ mind”, causing them to lose the true essence behind it. As a matter of fact, he emphasizes that we are biased without even knowing. For instance, Percy introduces in his ideas with the help of an example. He describes the renowned landmark the Grand Canyon. He explains how the Gran Canyon; or, in my case, Bolshoi, have already been lost just because of the set of predetermined ideas in the mind of the sightseer or visitor. According to Percy, in his article “The Loss of the creature (work)”, he points out that “the highest point, the term of the sightseer’s satisfaction, is not the sovereign discovery of the things before him; it is rather the measuring up of the thing to the criterion of the preformed symbolic complex (Percy 2)”. The pre-formulated concepts in the sightseer’s mind produce a loss of sovereignty, that the own sightseer is not even able

The analysis of knowledge as, “ S knows that p if and only if (i) p, (ii) S believes that p and (iii) S has adequate evidence that p” is subject to a platonic objection for it to be true. Because when “has adequate evidence” does not entail “know of adequate evidence” problems with the analysis arise that defeat its claim of producing knowledge. The problem entails the inability to actively utilize evidence for verification. Verification is necessary, because if not provided no knowledge can be produced.

A perpetual conflict emanating throughout all mankind questions the significance of knowledge to human nature, regarding knowledge’s definition, acquisition, branches, and value. Major role models in the foundation of philosophy - specifically, in this essay, Plato and Aristotle - obsess over the significance of knowledge and its importance to and relationship with the development of human beings and their mindsets. Although Plato’s view on knowledge describes the internal predisposed essence of all Forms and the need for a superior being to extract them from the student, Aristotle’s outlook resides as more reliable and realistic due to his beliefs in the premise of knowledge in the sensation and perception, with continuing development in memory, experience, art and science, and, ultimately, true wisdom.