Editor丨Yang Hong
About the Author:
Zhe is an independent scholar. For more than 10 years, he has been committed to the innovation, research, dissemination and development of Dongyue philosophy.
He is the author of original philosophical theories: "Theory of External Survival Structure", "Theory of Group Division of Labor"; "General Theory of the Three Origins" (including the origin of life, the origin of consciousness, and the origin of society); Basic theories of psychology "Principles of Psychology" and "Principles of Personality"; General History of Philosophy, History of Philosophy of Materialization; Basic Theory of Aesthetics "Theory of Aesthetics of Physical Evolution".
Proof of non-logical stipulations of perceptual logic
Let us briefly examine the so-called primary perceptual stage, which is generally thought to be the starting point from which the "epistemic process" takes place. [Note: The so-called "cognitive process" is a "logical process", because "feeling" itself is a primary logical process that synthesizes various non-image elements into perceptual images or representations at the sensory level and within the sensory center. Descartes' use of the word "idea" encompasses everything that arises from the moment the sensation occurs (everything from "viewing" to "thinking"), and this is quite right. As to why the "idea" has become more and more ethereal as it has become more and more distant from the senses, it is another question that needs to be discussed later. 】
Note: The so-called cognition refers to the subject's processing of messy object information into an order or normative image or sound that conforms to its own logic. For example, under the premise that there is no subject, the information released by the apple is extremely messy, so the human eye obtains the corresponding information of the chaotic light waves of different wavelengths reflected by the apple according to its own inherent visual logic form, and then processes it into a specific apple image; For example, bats, ants, etc. will obtain the chaotic information released by the corresponding apple according to their own cognitive logic form, and process it into the specific apple image or other they recognize, and these cognitive organs or tissues are determined by the existence of the subject, in order to locate and stabilize the subject; In short, whether it is the "feeling" in the feeling or the "view" in the concept, it refers to the process of the subject obtaining the chaotic information of the object, and the "feeling" in the feeling and the "thought" in the concept are to process the chaotic information of the object into images, sounds, etc. under the inherent logical form of the subject, so the process of cognition is essentially a logical process.
As a result, all intellectual and rational knowledge and cognition are based on this primary logic, and as for how ideas become more and more ethereal away from the senses, it is because the complexity of the object has become more and more weakened, and the initial logical mode alone can no longer exist stably, so it has to organize the information on a larger scale, so that it is more and more detached from the object and more and more ethereal.
Vision - it accounts for about 70~80% of the amount of human sensory information, however, vision is only a functional manifestation of the biological physiological photoreceptor system (derived from the metabolic needs of photosynthesis and phototaxis of primitive non-sensory organisms, and the "phototaxis" of primitive organisms is not for the purpose of "seeking truth"), and it can only sense light waves between 400~700 nm in a very limited illumination (so it is called "visible light waves"). That is to say, anything that does not emit light or reflect light in this wavelength range is non-existent for vision, or that anything that does not emit light or reflect its properties is non-existent for visual purposes, and how the basic composition of an object affects its relationship to light is not something that can be directly detected by the eye. Furthermore, the "sensibility" of light does not imply the "true feeling" of light, because instead of clarifying what "light" is, the perception of "light" (i.e., "light quanta" or some "unit of energy") as "bright" makes the nature of the photon completely unclean in a trance-like sense of light.
Note: The so-called vision refers to the processing of the 400-700 nanometer wavelength of light waves in the chaotic light waves reflected by the object by the eye or visual center into the corresponding "brightness". And the photoreceptor system of living things originates from photosynthesis or phototaxis of plants, why? Because light means energy, and it is precisely because it is the energy released by the sun, that is, it is irradiated to the earth in the form of "light" that all things are activated and transitioned, so the essence of the photosensitive system of living beings is to obtain the energy released by the sun. Then, the objects produced by the photosensitive system that is extended based on the nature of "survival", and then the photosensitive processing system that jumps, cannot obtain the "truth" in any way, because you can't tell you what the essence of "light" is, what is the essence of our photosensitive system, you can only say that our perceptual system arbitrarily divides the light wave as "bright", not the true "light wave" itself.
[Just imagine, if this beam of "energy units" were not applied to the retina and optic center, but to other objects such as silver bromide negatives, the physical and chemical reactions it produced might instead make the photoreceptor unconsciously "darken".] Further, if Berkeley asks: Why is it that the thing that causes the sense of "light" must be "light"? You are actually unable to provide further proof of this, because when you count the properties of "light" or "photons", your basis is still nothing more than "light". However, "seeing is believing" has always been the most reliable basis for testing knowledge, and even those scientific "experimental observations" based on the exclusion of subjective tendencies must be evidenced by "observation". It is tempting to ask the question: How can we arbitrarily assume that the singular property of light waves emitted or reflected by an object is a reliable knowledge of the object itself? And how can we prove that the so-called "scientific conclusion" that the process of causing the sensation of light is due to light is not arbitrary? Then the "process of knowing" should be put to rest before it has been carried out. 】
Note: The visual system arbitrarily distorts the photon into "bright", but it is impossible to know what the photon itself is, because you can't explain the photon itself rationally, you can't really touch the photon itself, only the arbitrary "bright" may be the clearest understanding, so even if it is not the light that causes the "light", you can't prove it? Because when you talk about light, you think it's light. Therefore, all science is based on seeing for believing, but seeing actually starts with arbitrariness, not with seeking truth, which shows that this is the reason why science cannot pursue the truth. If, on the one hand, the arbitrariness of the sense of light is regarded as reliable cognition, and on the other hand, it is proved that the sense of light is not arbitrary, this contradiction certainly makes the process of cognition itself untenable.
Color vision – the world is inherently colorless, and the so-called "color" is nothing more than the sensory transformation of light waves of different wavelengths in the visible spectrum acting on the visual system. [Mixed light produces white light, a single wavelength of light waves as long as the difference of 5 nanons, the human eye can produce different color vision, so from the light wave between 400 ~ 700 nm can be transformed into more than 150 different "colors", mainly: red (700 ~ 610), orange (610 ~ 590), yellow (590 ~ 570), green (570 ~ 500), blue (500 ~ 460), blue (460 ~ 440), purple (440 ~ 400) and other seven colors. As for the light other than red and ultraviolet, it suddenly became the "light of ideas" without any "color". Note: The so-called "color vision" is that the human visual system processes the chaotic 400-700 nanometer wavelength light waves reflected by the object into 7 specific colors, and how to process the continuous change of light waves into static and arbitrary main 7 colors can only be said through hundreds of millions of years of genetic variation, because the simple classification and processing of them can be more simple and efficient to discriminate.
Hearing - the world is silent, the so-called "sound" is just 16~20,000 Hz mechanical vibration wave stimulation of the auditory organs caused by the "illusion". [The mistake is that the "sound" itself does not reflect "what is sound", but instead makes the listener mistakenly believe that "sound" is directly an objective sound even outside the ear. This error is caused not only by the eardrum, cochlear hair cells, and auditory nerve center, but also by the external auditory canal, causing smaller frequencies to become loud sounds, but deaf to higher frequencies: "According to the principle of resonance in physics, a pipe sealed at one end can have the best resonance with sound waves with a wavelength four times larger." The average length of the human ear canal is 2.7 centimeters, and it is quadruple 10.8 centimeters, which is similar to the wavelength of 3000 Hz sound (11.4 centimeters). Therefore, the resonance frequency of the human external auditory canal is around 3000 Hz. Due to this resonance factor, when a 3000 Hz vibration wave reaches the eardrum, hearing can increase by about 10 decibels. (Quoted from "Physiology")]
Note: The so-called hearing is that our ears process the vibration waves of 16~20,000 Hz wavelengths in the chaotic mechanical vibration waves emitted by the object into the illusion of order, in order to judge whether the object is conducive to its own stable existence or to make a judgment and judgment, but this "order" sound is only the comprehensive effect of the human auditory system, and for other organisms, it is the comprehensive effect produced by its auditory system and its corresponding frequency band. In short, the subject's processing of the vibrational waves generated by the "object" into the corresponding sound is only for the survival of the subject, and once it does not conform to the survival of the subject or does not conform to the simplicity principle of the subject, it will be gradually discarded.
In other words, there were no bright colors or pleasant sounds in the real world outside the body, and if the human eyes and ears were directly composed of spectrometers and oscillators in the first place, then the world we see or hear now must have been a different scene. It can be seen that "sound and color" is just a specific way of sensing that a certain class of natural beings (such as some animals) has to distort the "alien class" (that is, all dependent objects) in order to maintain their existence, but for these animals, it is an unreasonable necessity to arbitrarily judge the world as a stage of existence with "sound and color".
Note: The so-called sound and color world is the subject's processing of all things according to its own visual and auditory system, and comprehensively rectifying it into a sound and color world that conforms to the subject's survival. However, what we call the world of sound and color is only aimed at the carrier of human beings, and it is a specific way of sensing that has to distort the "alien class" (i.e., all dependent objects) in order to maintain its existence, rather than objective existence;
Moreover, even if we close our eyes and ears to avoid being "fooled", the world that the sense of touch is traditionally nothing more than a "collection of sensory elements" (Mach) with differences in shape, volume, temperature, and hardness, and the process of turning "sense" into "sense" still has to be done with the help of arbitrariness, for example, the actual hardness of various solid substances, from copper, rock, iron, steel, to diamond, varies greatly, but the sense of touch shows little difference; For example, heat is an energy released by the irregular movement of atoms or molecules inside an object, and the biological sense of temperature translates it into the sensation of cold or heat to recognize it.
Note: The so-called sense of touch is nothing more than hardness, temperature, shape, volume, roughness. The hardness is judged by squeezing the object with different forces, if it is easily deformed, the hardness is "soft", if it is not easily deformed, the hardness is "hard", but it is impossible to distinguish between stones, iron, steel, etc., which are very hard; If the object releases atoms or molecules in your body to move quickly, you will feel "heat", and if the object is absorbing the energy you normally release, making your body move slowly, you will feel cold, which is measured by the speed of the movement of molecules or atoms in your body at normal temperature; But this kind of temperature perception, you can't know it exactly, you can only say cold or hot, as for the specific temperature, you can't categorically; As for the shape, volume, and roughness, relying on the sense of touch itself can only be qualitatively arbitrary, not quantitative. In short, hardness, temperature, shape, volume, and roughness are all based on the arbitrariness of the body feeling.
── Volatile gas mixtures such as ammonia and indole act on the yellowish olfactory epithelial cells at the top of the nasal cavity, so we have to frown and hold our breath at the unpleasant smell of feces, and we cannot directly conclude the relationship between smell and molecular structure from the sense of smell, but everything that is not good for the human body will always be experienced by us as not a good stimulus, and the beauty and unbeauty are purely subjective and arbitrary, just as flies must think that the smell is delicious. Note: Stinky and not, beautiful and unbeautiful are purely subjective arbitrariness under the maintenance of the subject's survival, and they are all based on whether the object is more simple and efficient in line with the subject's survival, rather than directly touching the object ontology;
-- The various appetites given by the taste buds of the taste receptors are only formed by the cooperation of the four basic tastes of sourness, sweetness, bitterness, and saltiness, and their relationship with the substances that produce the taste sensation has not been clearly explained by any expert, for example, the "sour" taste is caused by the hydrogen ions ionized by the hydrogen in the solute in the liquid, that is, the protons, so what are the other elements or other ions? Or why is there no taste? Such a question is clearly beyond the scope of all perceptual consciousness that is "arbitrarily known". In fact, the "sweetness" and "aroma" in the sense of taste are nothing more than the subjective settings for the identification and acquisition of available energy, such as fruits (containing fructose, that is, bimolecular glucose, 1 gram of glucose can provide 4 calories of energy for the human body) or meat (1 gram of fat can provide 9 calories of energy for the human body), and the "bitterness" and "astringency" in the sense of taste are also just a protective mechanism established by animal systems in the long-term evolution process to identify and reject toxic or harmful substances, nothing more.
Note: The relationship between taste and the substance that produces taste is beyond the scope of all perceptual consciousness that is "arbitrary", and we can never fully figure out what kind of taste receptor is related to the corresponding substance, we can only know how long the substance is beneficial or the energy is considered sweet or fragrant, and if it is harmful, it is regarded as bitter or astringent. Therefore, the "bitterness" and "astringency" in the sense of taste are the protective mechanisms established by animals to identify and reject toxic or harmful substances, and it is by no means the sense of taste to explore the truth and inauthenticity of substances.
-- Human beings' perception of spatial position and self-movement comes from the vestibular organs hidden deep in the inner ear, and even when the eyes are closed, the slightest tilt of the human body cannot hide it, but the sensitive vestibular semicircular canal is unaware of it as the earth flips at high speed, so that humans have lived for millions of years without knowing that the earth under their feet is actually a sphere that rotates on its own. Copernicus, who opened the curtain on the history of human science, was to a large extent only filled in the disability of a small vestibular organ, but if we had been in the accurate perception of the rotational motion of the celestial bodies all day long, I am afraid that the vertigo and confused human beings, if they had not been willing to lose the above transcendental arbitrariness, would have been doomed. （1）
Note: Human beings' perception of spatial position and self-movement comes from the vestibular organs hidden deep in the inner ear, which is only applicable to the earth, that is, even if the earth is flipped and rotated at high speed, the people in it will not be aware at all, because the vestibular organs of the inner ear directly turn the earth at high speed and operate arbitrarily into a stationary state, and arbitrarily judge being upside down on the earth to standing on the earth, of course, this must be the case for any animal, if the high-speed flip of the earth is felt all day long, animals and humans may not exist at all.
However, human beings have effectively established the identification system necessary for their survival with this kind of senses and sensations that have transformed the state of things, and for all animals, only this distorted sense of truth can maintain the weak existence of life in the most economical and harmonious way. In a word, our perceptual system is not set for "truth-seeking", but for "survival".
Note: Therefore, whether it is vision, hearing, touch, smell, taste, spatial sense, etc., these intuitive senses are determined by the inherent tissues or organs of the human body. Therefore, the perceptual system is not set for truth, but for survival.
[In his book "The Analysis of Sensations", Mach said that the "economic principles of thought" are not only embodied in the simplification and refinement of rational derivation, but also in the unconscious seriousness of the process of sensation and the integration of sensations, which is a unique insightful insight. In my opinion, the deeper significance of this is that this blindness and ignorance, which originates from the depths of human or animal nature, is a necessary survival protection mechanism. Imagine what a terrible situation it would be if human beings were constantly in a state of hesitation that they could not be sure whether their gifted recognition system was reliable or not! (This mainly refers to the immediate behavioral response based on the perceptual and intellectual basis, which is the basic way of life for all living things, including humans, to survive, and the lag behavioral response of rationalization is another matter.) In fact, "reliability" has historically been irrelevant to "truth-seeking," because "truth-seeking" (whether possible or not) inevitably complicates the process of dealing with objects, and all the potential for reliable and agile survival behavior is presumably nullified. (As for the principles of natural simplicity that govern the more general, including the "economic principles of thought," more generally, we will talk about that later.) ）（2）
Note: The blindness and ignorance in the depths of human or animal nature, i.e., the "economic principle of thinking", is a necessary survival protection mechanism, because any living thing must first reach an unconscious determination of its own celestial recognition system, and if this innate recognition system is actually ineffective, it will be eliminated immediately. It's like early humans hunting outside, but his vision is actually a spectrometer, and he can't rectify it in time in the face of the chaotic light wave information in nature, and he often wonders whether his vision is useful, maybe human beings have long been extinct. Therefore, the arbitrariness of perceptual logic is the implementation of the principle of simplicity of the natural law, so as to establish the most economical and effective system of recognition required for survival, so that the survival of the subject can be realized. The "economic principle of thinking" is expressed at the level of rational logic, that is, the implementation of the principle of natural simplicity in rational logic, that is, the pursuit of the ultimate simplicity, such as Einstein's mass-energy equation and Darwin's natural selection are all expressed at the level of rational logic. Whether it is arbitrary at the perceptual level or at the rational level, it is the implementation of the principle of natural simplicity, and the purpose is to achieve a simple and efficient grasp of oneself and the object in order to achieve survival.
Once the pursuit of "truth-seeking" will inevitably complicate the process of dealing with objects, which is by no means what any subject needs, and if he needs it, it will inevitably be eliminated naturally.
In addition, since Boyle proposed the "first quality" (e.g., the extension, size, motion, etc.) and the "second nature" (e.g., the color, sound, smell, etc.) of things in the seventeenth century, many famous philosophers have discussed them as subjects of great significance, but it seems to me that there is really only a difference between the two steps of fifty and a hundred steps, or even a difference between fifty and a hundred steps, because fundamentally they cannot prove to what extent each reflects the "truth" or the extent to which it fails to reflect the "truth". ”。 In the final analysis, the question is not what the nature of the object is, but what is the nature of what makes the object an object, a more crucial subject that has been little addressed by previous philosophies. 】（3）
Note: As for Boyle's proposal of "the quality of the first nature" and the "quality of the second nature", which does not touch on the most important question of why the subject must perceive the object in a distorted way, it is still discussed at the level of the attributes of the object, and the more crucial question is what is the nature of making the object an object, that is, why the subject does not directly take the knowledge of the object as an arbitrary basis, but must regard the object as an object.
