When we perceive the external world, it is difficult for us to justifiably claim that what we have perceived is exactly the reality or “how things really are”, because the existence of certain filters has created uncertainties and distortions. The “filter” here is actually a term coined to represent everything that impacts upon the process of perception; it can be either physically existent, distorting the appearance of the original objects, or mentally existent as another cause of our knowledge claim. For example, a stick that is placed in water appears to bend; a colour appears to be different when put against different backgrounds; dishes in a dark restaurant seem to be more delicious because attention is diverted from looking to tasting. “When we see, the mind actively organizes the visual world into meaningful shapes” (Visual Expert 2003), so expectation and emotion can act as filters. An ancient Chinese fable tells such a story that after a man found that his neighbour got a new axe on the same day he lost his, every action of his neighbour seemed like that of a thief in his eyes. He held the belief until he found his axe back in the forest, and from then on his neighbour’s behaviour was no longer like that of a thief. The man’s expectations formed his biases and hindered him from seeing the objective reality. As Emerson observed, “People only see what they are prepared to see.” (Woolman 2000, p40)
Culture is another filter that can affect one’s perception of realities and this can become an acute experience for those residing in a foreign country. For example, in any Chinese food market, there are sellers who would like to kill the animals such as chickens, dogs, and fish in front of the consumers. Considering it the freshest food, most of the Chinese like it, and this way of selling hardly invokes any emotional reaction. In contrast, there are no such things in Australia; people view killing animals openly as cruel and inhuman. However, it is hard to be certain whether it is too cruel or not because emotion, which is the major way of knowing in this case, grows out of one’s cultural background.
In my home country of China I was raised by a conservative mother who was shocked to discover that I had a taste for Rock music, specifically Guns ‘n Roses. Her almost inescapable view was that such interest could only lead to corruption of the youthful me, plus a slide into Western decadence and immorality. Her association of Western Rock music with undesirable values is still part of her filters, her perception, but at least I have had the opportunity to experience Western education.
Since our perception, as it might seem from the above examples, is always distorted by filters, understanding the filters becomes a necessary part of understanding what we have perceived. If an individual were able to identify that one or more filters exist, such identification would be an important first step in a process that might lead to an acceptable knowledge claim. There is, of course, an assumption here that identification of a filter, knowing that it exists, will lead to an understanding of its operation and impact upon the process of perception. Such understanding might well lead an individual to adjust or make allowance for the existence of the filter, or perhaps to remove it.
Further knowledge can enable one to identify and understand and hence overcome one’s individual filters. There is such an example in history of mathematics, when Bernhard Riemann first built a completely artificial geometry in which no two lines can be parallel, people considered it totally useless or impossible, because the standard geometry from the Greek mathematician Euclid has an ingrained influence on people’s thinking. However, after studies on the universe, Albert Einstein finally proved that Riemann’s strange curved space is the true shape of the Universe. Though people can only see a tiny part of the whole Universe, Einstein used reason and logic to overcome this limitation, and consequently, he helped people to realise their limitations of knowledge and changed their perception on Reimann’s theory. On the hand, we can see that sure knowledge needs sufficient and convincing justification and verification; though it was Reimann who first found out the truth, he didn’t adequately prove it which was a problem of his knowledge. However, development of an area of knowledge is to identify the filter which alters correct perception and then remove it or overcome it to better one’s knowledge. (Useless Mathematics 2002)
However true, it is only one side of the story, sometimes, even the perception through filters can see how the world really is, which is hard to detect in other ways. Alamdar Bukhtiyari, a 15-year-old boy who has spent three years living in detention in Australia, now have seen how cruel the world can be through his experience. As the most controversial asylum seekers in Australia, this boy’s family was detained in Baxter detention camp in Port Augusta, but later torn apart. What Alamdar has experienced, the turmoil among detainees, the so-called help from strangers that led him to isolation punishment, and the competing forces in Australia’s immigration debate, has greatly shaped his perception of the world. He hates Australia, he fears of the outside world, and he has such a strong desire of “freedom” that he gouged the word into his forearm. (Skelton 2003) He is not allowed to have any education, he has no ability to think logically or understand what others are really saying to him, so emotion is the only way he uses to have knowledge of the world, and that’s how he knows that the world is a trap and fearful. Although it seems extreme, and prejudiced, it is true; at least to some extent, such perception reveals how a society really is. While some people may argue his perception is limited and distorted, they should also keep in mind that their own perception is limited or even distorted also. In fact, the different perception of people with different experience as filters compose the whole truth of how things really. This boy’s experience is quite contrary to that proposed by Rousseau for his natural child in Emile. Here the attempt to remove all civilising influences, to in effect exclude the possibility of many of what we would normally accept as filters, was doomed to failure.
When I look back over the above examples, I am immediately forced to speculate as to not only whether or not identification of filters would necessarily lead to an understanding of ‘how things really are’. In addition, I do not consider that any particular individual, even given such identification, would see things differently in the future. My own observation suggests that many people are inclined to prefer to see their world through rose coloured glasses or some other type of filter.
Reference
Cornman, J. W. & Lehrer, K. 1974, Philosophical Problems and Arguments: An Introduction, 2nd edn, Macmillan Publishing Co., Inc., New York
Laurence Urdang Associates Ltd, 1979, A Dictionary of Philosophy, Pan Books Ltd, London
Magee, B. 1998, The Story of Philosophy, Dorling Kindersley Limited, London
Skelton, R. 2003, ‘I hate Australia. I am not a criminal, I have done nothing wrong’, The Age (Melbourne), July 29th
Useless Mathematics, Class notes in The Kilmore International School, 2002
Visual Expert 2003, Perception Depends on Experience, [Online]
[18/07/2003]
Woolman, M. 2000, Ways of Knowing: An Introduction to Theory of Knowledge, IBID Press, Victoria
