... Will he even understand what on earth you are talking about?
Actually, how do we know that the world we see is supposed to be colorful? We are assuming that a ‘colored vision’ is normal just because the majority of the population is born with it. If we stop considering ourselves a superior race, maybe, just maybe, the world is suppose to be black and white (according to dogs)? Maybe the tinted glasses do help us see the truth? Maybe the “limited vision” is the truth? It is all really confusing but… how do we know that color-blind people are not the ‘normal ones’? Black and white vision might be the truth according to many species of animals. After all, we might be limiting our vision by labeling blood ‘red’ and the sky ‘blue’. Just for the record, blood itself can be crimson, maroon, scarlet, vermilion, madder… (lets not talk about the sky) and no, they are not the same color.
The ‘Red-tinted glasses experiment’ carried out by Alberto Knox proves how we can “limit” the way we “perceive” things.
Throughout the book, Knox has constantly been challenging Sophie to think outside the box and explore the limits. Well, in order for us to view the whole picture, we must put on our rational pair of glasses as well as our empirical pair. We can relate this theory to those glasses we put on when watching a 3-D movie. If we cover one side, all we get is the world in one color. But if we use both lenses, we get a 3-D image. Let’s just say that the red side represents sense and the blue side represents reasoning. We need a balance in order to make judgments accurately and accordingly (well, to ourselves at least). One might be a 9-year old genius who completed a math degree at the best math school in the world, yet who still struggles to make friends. Balance.
There is always more than one way to see the world. We cannot be dead-on empiricist or rationalist. Imagine two people, one on each side of a room. In the middle of the room, lies a box. One side of a box is black while the other side is white. Naturally, when we ask these two people ‘what color is the box?’ the answer will not be correct. This, is limiting our vision. This, is shielding areas of our world and restricting our way to “perceive” it.
In a way, I think all of us are born with colorless glasses, perfect glasses. Through our maturation, these glasses start ‘tinting’. Both sides do not have to tone proportionally (for example, scientists and doctors might have a more opaque blue side (with their jobs resorting to reasoning)). These glasses we have on make us who we are. Although they are formed by our personal experience and knowledge, they do filter out parts of the reality we choose not to accept. From believing that ‘blondes are dumb’ to believing that ‘asians have slanted eyes’ to being a Nazi to being optimistic… all are still sifting out and recreating our own realism.
We can change sense or reasoning. We create our reality. Though it might not be correct, Rationalists, Empiricists, it is our choice.
6 comments:
Some interesting points, like how you mentioned that our 'inborn-glasses' tint as we mature. However, what about people like Albert Knox? I think he seems to still have perfectly 'clear glasses' in the book.
I agree here with you Andrea and I like how you exemplified your point with the 9 year old maths genius. However, I don’t believe that everybody needs balance to make an accurate judgement. I think people can be biased in their thinking, but as long as they're open minded enough to hear and consider another point of view then the judgement that follows is just as accurate.
This then follows on to me agreeing with your statement "There is always more than one way to see the world". Everyone has different opinions, and as a result of their background sees the world in a different light to their neighbour. But I think this is what makes the world interesting. How boring would it be if everyone had an identical perspective of the world?
Lastly, in the statement that we "filter out parts of reality we choose not to accept", I cannot agree with this fully. I believe we take in the reality and depending on our upbringing, we react differently. If you do not agree with it, then you do not filter it out, but simple ignore it although you have acknowledged it. This is affected by how we perceive reality and how we tend to ignore those with different opinions to us. That is why we need to overcome the “glasses” that we are wearing so we can more readily accept the outlook of others.
I see your point, and I agree on it. You have raised good points, and I would like to hear more from you. Keep up the good work!
I enjoyed reading your response. Though I find that not all people have to make an occurred response or judgment upon others. It is quite often that people contain their own thoughts and to overcome a sense of judgments, it simply takes time. I like how you concluded your response with the conclusion of colorless glasses. It seems to be that when we are born with no knowledge, which shows us the ability to widen our imagination as we grow old.
"In a way, I think all of us are born with colorless glasses, perfect glasses. Through our maturation, these glasses start ‘tinting’."
I personally think we never have the "perfect glasses". In other words, we will always see the world the way we perceive it and never the real, true side of it because what do we know when we're born anyway?
Wow.
I like your choices of examples, and I completely agree that we actually may not know the answer to a lot of "maybe"'s, and that we really don't know what is 'normal' and what isn't, we only say its 'normal' because the majority of people have it/seen it.
Post a Comment