Do our senses blind us?

[Rakthor]

Here's an interesting concept that I heard somewhere. Now, what are our senses. Do they help us perceive, or do they in fact prevent us from perceiving the ultimate truth? Does someone deprived of all sense truly "see"? If they indeed do, it seems like a cruel trick from up above that they cannot communicate. Anyways, I thought that was interesting. Your thoughts, if you will.

[NikolaiI]

Senses are how we know the world-- now, they don't blind us so to speak, but they can control us, have a big influence on us-- the important issues here are consciousness and environment. If you live in a temple, for instance, it's a very good thing. . . if you want to live there. . . but if you live in a flop house it isn't a good thing, and whether you want to be there doesn't change that. Both situations will affect one-- through the senses-- and affect one's consciousness. Hm, I don't really meant to change the topic, though. . . senses are the lowest way we know the world-- soul or supermind being the highest. It seems there are two main occupations for ordinary people-- knowledge or sense gratification. Sense gratification definitely has a numbing effect, whereas if you search for knowledge it is much better. Getting rid of the senses is not the way to avoid attachment to desire, for sense gratification, because there's nothing wrong with the senses, just if we use them wrongly. So they don't blind us automatically, but if we focus our consciousness on numbing/exciting stimulation, they will become dull, but if we apply them to better things, such as helping others, learning, or meditating. . . then they are used in the betterment of life.

So I hope this helps answers whether they blind us or not-- they don't blind us, it's how we use them. If we study, pray, sing, dance, associate with good people, we will develop auspicious qualities, make spiritual advancement, and yes, the ultimate truth is one of the ends along this path; but if we dint ourselves in pursuit of gratifying our impulses, we encourage and increase our attachment for desire, which is never satisfied and ultimately leads to separateness and unhappiness. I hope this wasn't too preachy. :|

Ah, I just thought of a nice way to summarize my thinking on this: our senses don't blind us, they bind us. Thus they lead us towards the ultimate truth if we meditate on objects along that path, and they lead us into darkness if we do the opposite-- either way, they bind us, for good or ill.

[prowesse]

I think that senses sometimes function improperly especially when put under concentration, i.e. to twst them.

[chasestalling]

Knowledge is not only knowing but knowing what one doesn't know. Lucky they who lack the sense to pretend that they know all and in the process confuse what they know from what they don't know.

[ShoutGrace]

Now, what are our senses. Do they help us perceive, or do they in fact prevent us from perceiving the ultimate truth?

I think that on certain schemes of things we have good reason to doubt that our senses are reliable truth gatherers. Donald Hoffmann, a cognitive scientist at UC Irvine, has written:

“I have changed my mind about the nature of perception. I thought that the goal of perception is to estimate properties of an objective physical world, and that perception is useful precisely to the extent that its estimates are veridical. After all, incorrect perceptions beget incorrect actions, and incorrect actions beget fewer offspring than correct actions. Hence, on evolutionary grounds, veridical perceptions should proliferate.

I now think that perception is useful because it is not veridical. The argument that evolution favors veridical perceptions is wrong, both theoretically and empirically. It is wrong in theory, because natural selection hinges on reproductive fitness, not on truth, and the two are not the same: Reproductive fitness in a particular niche might, for instance, be enhanced by reducing expenditures of time and energy in perception; true perceptions, in consequence, might be less fit than niche-specific shortcuts. It is wrong empirically: mimicry, camouflage, mating errors and supernormal stimuli are ubiquitous in nature, and all are predicated on non-veridical perceptions. The cockroach, we suspect, sees little of the truth, but is quite fit, though easily fooled, with its niche-specific perceptual hacks. Moreover, computational simulations based on evolutionary game theory, in which virtual animals that perceive the truth compete with others that sacrifice truth for speed and energy-efficiency, find that true perception generally goes extinct.”


If you are using “ultimate truth” in a theological or spiritual sense, I myself tend to think that both human sense perception and human cognitive faculties are useful for determining truth. This, however, is more of a theological conviction than a scientific one - I don't find much to disagree with, principally, in Hoffmann's comments above.



Ah, I just thought of a nice way to summarize my thinking on this: our senses don't blind us, they bind us. Thus they lead us towards the ultimate truth if we meditate on objects along that path, and they lead us into darkness if we do the opposite-- either way, they bind us, for good or ill.

On your view, then, are senses responsible for receiving divine revelation (if there is such a thing)? And by divine revelation, I mean knowledge of or from the supernatural, i.e. an earthly beatific experience.

[NikolaiI]

On your view, then, are senses responsible for receiving divine revelation (if there is such a thing)? And by divine revelation, I mean knowledge of or from the supernatural, i.e. an earthly beatific experience.

Well, somewhat indirectly perhaps. Our senses and our activities create our consciousness. Supposing there is a necessary type of consciousness for receiving revelation, this would also be brought about by the objects we attach to, the objects of our senses, as well as our activities, which create our consciousness. Then if we can have a spiritual consciousness, we can become qualified to receive such an experience.

[blazeofglory]

This is a matter of mystery and of course we all collectively find out. Of course senses are sources of information, as said in the Vedas they are gates through which ideas and information enter.

However what I wonder at is or the fact I fail to arrive at is what is that inside us that assembles all information and experiences that come through sensation organs.

Maybe somewhere there is a point at which science meets with spirituality.

Or this truth is yet to be arrived at. The Vedas say Neti, Neti or this is not the end.