[Veltzeh]: 39.Essays and Non-fiction.Theory of Knowledge

7) "In order to find out how things really are, one must understand the filters through which one perceives the world." Discuss and evaluate this claim.

      Filters are means by which we perceive and organize different things. There are two basic kinds of filters: physical and mental filters. The physical filters limit the information we gain through our physical senses. The mental filters we learn during our lives help us mainly by organizing and interpreting the received information in a certain way. Thus, the filters limit the information we can get from the world surrounding us and can help in getting certain information.
      It is not entirely sure whether we can know if there is a way to find out "how things really are" in the first place. We have been continuously finding more information about everything, and it seems like the more we find out, the more things we find that we do not know about. The amount of information in the world could be like a fractal function: no matter how much we zoom in to see more detail, there will always be more and more detail to be seen. It could also be that there is no definite truth, considering the several debates going on about things like death penalty and abortion.
      The physical filters are rather simple, giving us direct information about the surrounding world. For example, humans see only visible light, so we cannot see the shorter or longer wavelengths of the electromagnetic spectrum, like infrared, ultraviolet and X-rays. However, we can sense infrared through the sense of warmth, so there are other means of acquiring information. By realizing this, we understand the filter for human sight. Then we would start to find ways to examine properties of the other wavelengths of the electromagnetic spectrum, thus gaining more information that will lead us further. Understanding a filter can also lead us to wrong tracks, like with the early models of atom. It took many different models during several decades until the current one was found. So, even though it seems like the real model has been found, we always tend to begin to understand only one filter at a time. That is, when the information is proved wrong, we can start to understand the filters that led us to error. Thus, at least understanding the physical filters tends to eventually lead us to truthful information. We can, however, misinterpret the information we receive and thus lead ourselves to wrong tracks, and we will have no idea about it, as we simply cannot know what is wrong until it is somehow proven wrong.
      The mental filters are more complicated. There are different ways in which the filter can be learned. It can be learned from all surroundings: culture, upbringing, religion, language, environment, experience, observing, teaching and previous knowledge. I will assume that mental filters develop in humans as time passes and that humans are equal in the sense that they do not have any mental filters when they are born. For example, it seems like many are taught to believe that preferences, intelligence, points of views and other mental traits go according to gender and there is no other way. This tends to lead to the often-mentioned "war between genders", as people will believe that traits depend on gender. This is of course due to not understanding the filter into which the genders have been raised. I was raised without a filter for gender, to not think that way; instead I was taught to go with what I really preferred due to my true personality and not gender-specific traits. Due to that, I was often considered weird by all those who were raised into a gender-filter. Through a long time of observing and experience I have now understood that the reason why I was considered weird is mostly due to this gender issue. Understanding the filter has led me to understand that the genders are raised in different ways and what are the different ways of raising. If I am correct, understanding the filter has indeed led me closer to finding out how things really are. However, I cannot know if it is only I who has been raised into a filter of neutral gender, to believe that humans are equal and are only raised differently for some reason. If that were the case, at least I would have proved that understanding a different filter is very hard.
      People have different kind of mental filters. What kind of filters the people learn depends on the culture and surroundings they are raised in. Often society requires learning a certain filter so that a single person can live in it. Many culture shocks are due to the different filters we have learned from different cultures. For example, in the previous example – assuming my initial observations are true – people are grown into two basic filters, one for each gender. It is also possible to not have a certain filter, as in my case in the previous example, or in the following example.
      Different areas of knowledge can function as filters through which we gain new information. When encountering a new species of a plant, an artist will study the colors, symmetry and composition of the plant in an artistic sense to later paint it, while a scientist will study its structure, surroundings and similar to decide if it is a flower, tree and so on. In this case, having a filter increases the amount of specific information, for a person with no filters would likely look at the plant, state that it is or is not pretty and move on without closer examination. Even if the person without a filter started to examine the plant, it would take much longer to find out for example the biological facts of the plant than if the scientist would have started to study it, since the scientist has the filter to scientifically study the plant. The scientist also has already more information about the subject and can fit in the new information with the already existing information. Understanding the filter is not required to gain this kind of new information, but then again, understanding it does not hinder the gaining of information.
      Having two different filters acting on the same subject tends to increase the amount of information. An artistic scientist might notice how the different colors and other artistic values of a plant help in the plant's way to attract insects to fertilize it. However, it is very unlikely that a person would be able to learn all kinds of filters there are. Again, understanding the filters is not required for new information and understanding the information.
      When dealing with for example ethical issues and the like, there tends to be no definite truth. For example, in a case when a person has murdered another, a person who supports death penalty might think that it is more beneficial to kill the murderer because otherwise the murderer will create many unnecessary costs to the society and the murderer might even murder more, as a person against death penalty might think that killing the murderer would drop the judging system to the level of the murderer. Understanding why the two persons think in a different way, that is, understanding the filters through which they make their decisions, does not help in deciding whether if death penalty is right. However, if the truth is that there are different points of views and no definite truths, understanding the filters has helped us.
      What results from the filters depends on the filter and the issues from which information is ought to be gained. Once the filter is learned, it is very difficult to get rid of it, as the human mind tends to assimilate to the choice that it considers the simplest. Also, the people learn to like their filters and do not wish to be rid of them, as in they generally prefer different kinds of things. I got used to eating simple meatballs and I certainly do not wish to start eating any other kinds of meatballs, that is, my meatball-filter is set to simple meatballs with no spices and so on. Often people are utterly oblivious of their filters and happily receive and process information without considering any other views. The filter can help understand better a particular thing, like in the example of a scientist and a common person studying a plant. However, equipped with a filter, people will ignore and not understand the points of views through other filters. Thus, a person with a different filter will either not understand, misunderstand or get an entirely different message. For example, when an economist and an artist read a description of the Second World War, the artist deals with it through emotion, trying to catch that emotion into a piece of art. The economist considers what kinds of benefits and losses the war caused from an economical point of view. If the artist and the economist showed each other what they have done based on the basic description of the war, they would likely not understand what the other has done, unless they are explained the reasons behind the different interpretation, that is, they begin to understand the filter.
      Considering the original claim, it seems like understanding the physical filters will lead us to more information. However, we might not initially know if the information is in fact true, and understanding the filters tends to only prove us what is wrong, one issue at a time. Furthermore, understanding the mental filters and reasons behind different points of views tends to only prove that there is no definite truth in the first place, which may well be the truth.