Considerations on Our Perceptions Of Reality
Beliefs Become Reality
Here in these United States, we appear to be deeply divided on some kind of gradient between alternate and verifiable realities. At least we are as much as we are defined by political parties. There actually is no alternate reality, of course, but there are those in the politiverse who cling to a long debunked ideal where fantasy lives as an alternative reality. Somehow truthful acknowledgement of factual reality can be replaced by any claim of fact without verifiable proof. Children can also accomplish this same feat with “let’s pretend games.” It’s fun to do as a kid, but adults can not be that whimsical, what with mortgages, car loans, kids and work related realities. The question then becomes, how can stable, mortgage paying, current-with-their-car-loan-parents of children, who go to work for a living, regularly be duped by some politiverse claim that reality is not real?
Maybe we need to develop a language that allows us to define the working of belief in our thought processes?
We can say that we believe we are a race of humans or a flavor of religion or even a political color. But we can not actually say why we think we are any of those things or why we identify with any given idea or any label. Even when we do, it is doubtful that we can see everything involved with any decision about what we believe, we believe. In the event that we continue down the path of belief blindness that affects both sides of the political aisle, it would be helpful to have some kind of recipe. It would help us cook up the finest of belief structures, political or otherwise.
Right to Believe
Everyone has the right to believe anything and any way they deem appropriate. What anyone deems appropriate at one point in their life does not mean that at another point in their life they will have learned to deem better than they once did. It would be safe to say that belief is bound to evolve with time and experience. For example, what one believes while one is in a co-ed experience may be quite different than what one believes in the suburban three bedroom, three bath, two car garage experience. Both experiences are real even though they each have characteristics unique unto themselves which are real even though those same characteristics can not exist in both realities.
That co-ed experience is most often experienced as a single person with a main-ish (thank you, George) squeeze. If one is actually in a relationship, the reason or reasons for the initial attraction is not based on experience, but more often on belief in some kind of co-ed existence fantasy. Normal belief behavior for that age and that environment. Meanwhile that suburban three bedroom, three bath, two car garage experience is most often experienced as a couple and with children added as a limit preventing the return to the previously perceived reality. Normal belief maturation guarantees blocking out previous belief limits. We just have too much trouble unhearing something that is true, and true or real things affect what we allow ourselves to believe.
Belief Alters What We Can Perceive
What we believe does not, contrary to popular opinion, change the reality of the world. It does, however, change what we can perceive about the reality of the world. The major difference between one set of belief structures about the reality of the world and another belief structure about the reality of the world is actually quite minimal. It may be that the only difference is found with the direction of thought for the perception of the world.
Difference in the Direction of Thought
We all can say, without fear of contradiction, that we know how we think. For most folks that is only half-true. Most of us use a top-down approach to thought. We use what we call consciousness to observe the world and to make decisions. Nothing wrong with that approach at all. It works really well and has lasted for a really, really long time. Be all that as it may, it is also true that thought can be considered as arising from the bottom up. We normally say that the bottom of thought is our subconscious. That is only half-true. We can be and are aware of our other-than-conscious thinking. We most often ignore it, but that does not mean it is inactive or that it does not exist. Thought which comes from the bottom up is more inclusive than thought which comes from the top down. Bottom-up thought will include emotional content and considerations as well as lists of priorities which are determined by what we believe is real. Bottom-up thought is characterized by action without conscious thought. Think Steph Curry shooting a three-pointer from half-court.
In the politiverse, it is often true that neither direction is considered. The only consideration is the reality the politicos want the populace to believe at the moment. Insisting that one possesses The One and Only description of reality as “that is Mine,” as Captain Hook reminded us, is really bad form. It’s difficult to say if it is the fault of the politiverse or if it is the fault of the mediaverse that we are conned into believing that an alternative reality exists to begin with. There really are not two sides to reality. Honest to god, there is more than one thing to consider in any description of reality and two different realities just can not exist in one time and place. Besides, reality just does not care what my politiverse astral sign is.
When we hear people talk about MAGA adherents as “deplorable” or some other derogatory term, the Lib who is saying it, should take care of his own image in the mirror first. That deplorable MAGA person hurts the same way you do when his loved ones pass away. That Lib has to pay a mortgage the same as you do. That MAGA guy believes in the reality he can perceive the same as that Liberal guy. They each may call the reality they are perceiving by different names but it is the exact same reality. No kidding.
If we could perhaps consider that much of the difference between us is about how we perceive the world. If we perceive the world from the top down we are likely to identify as more nearly conservative. If we perceive the world from the bottom up we are more likely to identify as liberal.
That top-down conservative is going to be likely to see himself as having beaten the odds and made it to where he is in life by following his gut or his feelings. The bottom-up thinking liberal is more likely to remember all of the painful steps he took to arrive at where he is and identify those same steps in his neighbor’s journey. Top-down will identify more often as “me and mine” and don’t move anything. Bottom-up will identify more often as “we and ours” and of course the only thing that doesn’t change is change itself.
If we can consider that both top-down and bottom-up thinking is valuable and available to all of us, it just might buy us enough time to look before we leap into never-ending arguments about who’s more outrageous, which could foment wise and careful consideration of the nation’s needs as opposed to how any individual feels about elections, abortion, voter rights, black lives and so on and on. If those issues are examined from top-down and from bottom-up in our thought processes, we will see why we think the way we do. How we think is probably just fine, but what we think about gets us into all manner of senseless squabbles about even more senseless issues. Which results in doing nothing or doing something stupid, because we haven’t thought about that action before we accomplish it. Because we haven’t thought about that action from top-down and bottom-up.
If you would like to support John, please consider subscribing to Medium using his referral link. Due to Medium not supporting mobile-based referrals, please use a desktop browser to sign-up. This ensures that a portion of your commission goes straight to John to support his work on this blog. You will get unlimited access to all of John’s blogs, plus unlimited access to thousands of other writers. Thank you!
