The "Red-Tinted Glasses"
The meaning of the metaphor, “red-tinted glasses”, given through the book was that we are restricted to only one view of life and can never see the real image. As Albert Knox says, they “limit the way [we] perceive things” and yet we are unable to take them off.
If we were to put on these red lenses, everything we perceive would be red but we would know that they in reality are not. As Sophie says in the book it is not the world that has gone red but just that the things she see around her is red. However, what if we were born wearing the red lenses? According to what Knox said, we are “not able to off the ‘glasses’ of reason” so how would we know that not all the things we see are supposed to be red? After considering the contradiction between rationalists and empiricists, between our mind and our senses, I concluded that we cannot survive with just one. Our senses are what we use to collect information and our mind is how we decipher it. Because of the slight difference in the way each of us individuals receive and decipher information, our ‘glasses’ should all be different and personalised by the way that we were brought up and by the experiences that we go through.
The glasses that rationalists and empiricists wear are bound to be different. Similarly, the glasses that you and I are wearing are different as well. These glasses are what make us have our own views on the world, which eventually leads us to have our own answers to the questions in life. Even if they are initially inspired by another’s answer, our mind will alter them to suit us best. As I have learnt in Psychology, our previous experiences may lead us to generalise the outcomes of later ones. For example, if one has had several bad experiences on a boat, he/she may become reluctant to go on one in the future. The glasses of this particular individual will show the boat as a bad thing. However, not all of us are scared of boat rides and perhaps on the contrary, loves them. This proves that we build up different points of views and alter the way we see through the glasses as we grow up.
As a last point, I personally interpreted the glasses as what kept us from seeing what we cannot explain. This relates back to the first assignment and it raises the question whether we try to see only what we want to see.
If we were to put on these red lenses, everything we perceive would be red but we would know that they in reality are not. As Sophie says in the book it is not the world that has gone red but just that the things she see around her is red. However, what if we were born wearing the red lenses? According to what Knox said, we are “not able to off the ‘glasses’ of reason” so how would we know that not all the things we see are supposed to be red? After considering the contradiction between rationalists and empiricists, between our mind and our senses, I concluded that we cannot survive with just one. Our senses are what we use to collect information and our mind is how we decipher it. Because of the slight difference in the way each of us individuals receive and decipher information, our ‘glasses’ should all be different and personalised by the way that we were brought up and by the experiences that we go through.
The glasses that rationalists and empiricists wear are bound to be different. Similarly, the glasses that you and I are wearing are different as well. These glasses are what make us have our own views on the world, which eventually leads us to have our own answers to the questions in life. Even if they are initially inspired by another’s answer, our mind will alter them to suit us best. As I have learnt in Psychology, our previous experiences may lead us to generalise the outcomes of later ones. For example, if one has had several bad experiences on a boat, he/she may become reluctant to go on one in the future. The glasses of this particular individual will show the boat as a bad thing. However, not all of us are scared of boat rides and perhaps on the contrary, loves them. This proves that we build up different points of views and alter the way we see through the glasses as we grow up.
As a last point, I personally interpreted the glasses as what kept us from seeing what we cannot explain. This relates back to the first assignment and it raises the question whether we try to see only what we want to see.
5 comments:
Very interesting and well constructed. You use interesting examples. Let's explore that baby example. Would the baby discover that it was wearing glasses and that the world was not red? If so,how? How do colour blind people work out that they have that condition?
I think your points are intresting and backed up with good examples. However, if you were born with the glasses of reason on you and could not take them off, how do you know that you are wearing them?
i like your answer to this question, they are very intresting and smart. It makes me think alot! But as jeffery said if you were born with the glasses as a baby, and you can't take it off- how do you know you are wearing them in the first place?
i like how you have joined rationalists and empiricists ideas together. it provides a more thorough explanation and the examples are more clear than the ones in the book.
I enjoyed reading your answer!
The examples were well thought out and explained. I liked how you mentioned that "glasses that you and I are wearing are different as well".
I guess thats why they say each one of us is a unique individual!
Post a Comment