Three factors can be imagined that heavily influence our critical thinking skills when we try to sense or perceive the world around us. These are the thing sensed, the senses, and the mind. The first of these factors, the thing sensed, is often a physical object we can see, but it can also be a sound or a sensation derived from the presence or absence of acoustic or electromagnetic radiation such as thunder, heat, or cold. These events are beyond our influence in the sense that they have a reality outside of our own existence. For example, we may be deaf and unable to hear distant thunder, but that does not mean the thunder is not real.
The second factor is the senses. How they perceive input depends heavily not only on what is perceived, but also on the mechanisms of the sensing organs and the mind which interprets the inputs. To perceive these external events, we rely on our 5 senses which we use to touch, taste, hear, smell, and see. Unlike the external stimuli which are real and beyond our remote influence, we can manipulate our senses either consciously and voluntarily, or unconsciously and involuntarily. We may be color blind, or we may have unusually acute hearing, or we may have other enhanced or defective senses relative to other people. We may hear a noise and think it is thunder, but it may very well be something else. The mind is the last factor which has the difficult task of integrating and interpreting the world around us.
The mind must process many things all at once. The mind must take into account not only current sensory inputs, but also past sensory inputs which may be of use in interpreting the current situation. Our senses are very good and can’t be faulted because barring defects, they merely report to our mind the fact that some photons have impinged on our retinas, or our skin is getting uncomfortably hot from leaning on a lit stove. The mind, however, sometimes comes to the wrong conclusion for various reasons. Perhaps the object sensed is too far away for a positive identification, or it is too dark, or we have a cold and can’t smell very well, in which case we might say that the mind has insufficient data. Often, however, the mind is overwhelmed with too much data. In this case the mind has a defense mechanism which is comparable to a firewall.
Our minds very frequently use a firewall through which data is sifted and either allowed in or blocked, that is, kept out. For example, we normally filter out what we are not focused on. Either we filter out background noises while on the phone, or we ignore our peripheral vision while avoiding a pothole in the road. This would be an example of how we use our built-in firewall to filter data. Another example might be that people under a lot of stress sometimes cannot handle too much sensory input and so again, this time unconsciously perhaps, information is blocked out. Most of us do this when we feel “burnt out”. This natural firewall, whether it operates subconsciously or deliberately in a conscious manner, is one of perhaps two factors which can lead to errors in thinking, or errors in processing information.
The second factor almost always operates actively and in a conscious and deliberate way. This mechanism has to do with the quality of the information we choose to accept, whether we come by this information directly or indirectly. One example of indirect inaccuracy is if we allow hearsay, gossip, or rumors to influence our perceptions and conclusions. Another example is in accepting uncritically statements made by an authority, whether that authority is a medical dictionary, a history book, or a religious or scientific authority. This is indirect because you are getting the information second hand. Direct inaccuracy is more difficult to recognize and handle. It is a very serious problem with deep social roots and causes and I will be writing about this in future articles.
An example of direct inaccuracy is when it is getting dark outside and we cannot see things such as color accurately. I can say the sky is blue, and you can say it is red and we can both be right, but the objective truth is that the sky scatters light of wavelength x and the perceived color is independent of that fact. In this sense we cannot create our own truth as claimed by the many spiritual philosophies that seem to be popular today.
Another example deals with optical illusions such as mirages. Almost everyone who has been in a vehicle driving down the highway on a hot day has seen water covering the highway that disappears as you approach. This is real in that your eyes perceive a reflection from the road which looks like water. An example of a mental processing error is the perception that the harvest moon on the horizon is very much larger than when it is high in the sky. It seems almost impossible to believe that it is exactly the same size as when it is high in the sky. Yet we know the full moon large on the horizon is an illusion. You can probably find illusions for all your senses. For example, if you hold one hand in hot water and another in cold water at the same time, then place both hands in lukewarm water, one hand will feel the water as cold, another as hot. Yet the water is neither, it is lukewarm. The water temperature is independent of what you think it is.
The ability to use our minds and think clearly is therefore dependent on at least three important variables, the accuracy of our senses (which are affected by environmental conditions), our firewall (which limits our multitasking and focus), and how we process the information in our minds (incorrectly concluding the physical properties of objects or of misinterpreting events). The common saying that “seeing is believing” might be true some of the time, but certainly not as often as we might think. To illustrate how we can easily be fooled simply find a book on optical or sensory illusions, or do a search on the Internet for this topic. So how does all this help us to achieve critical thinking skills in our search for the truth?
It helps us by showing us how easily we can be fooled. Once we realize how we perceive the world, we can then monitor and manage as best we can how we interpret it. It also helps us to realize that there is no other known way to perceive the world other than by our physical senses. There is no such thing as extra-sensory perception (ESP) or supernatural senses.
Note that although I find it highly unlikely that there is a God, I do not say that there is not a God in the Judaic, Christian, or Islamic sense. I am saying that if there was, God would communicate with us via the 5 senses he gave us and not in some mysterious, 6th sense sort of way. In other words, investigating and searching for God with only the 5 senses he created in us should be sufficient to find and communicate with him and would be consistent with his creation. Nothing else should be required. Occam’s razor.
