We are certain of existences through our perceptions, and what we perceive is considered continually existing even in our absence. It is the foundation of our reasoning that, even upon interruption, perception holds the objects of its concern to be part of its own existence, and permanent, whether it is internally reflected on or externally perceived. What goes beyond the common experience of perception is, however, the contradiction of a continually existing object in that we may view something, a house for instance, and turn away from it before looking back and claim, without doubt, it is the same house. To our consciousness it seems so, but it has genuinely taken on a new appearance. It could not be the same house since our perception of it was interrupted and all objects cannot stay static in time. They must, in their existing state, move with time as time moves and, in that respect, take upon new space as the world has moved and the horizon has changed. Moreover, if we imagine the world as continually existing, these changes must take place. We can’t perceive the changes since our perception, although interrupted, can only claim to see the same object since we believe in a continuity outside of us, and all objects, in our absence, sustain their matter and are never subject to our own creation but are only subject to our subjective thoughts and perceptions.
We tend to a belief in the cause and effect of our perceptions and it is only that reasoning which gives us common experiences and situations, or objects, relatable to each other. We understand that day does not cause night, but if one were to toss a stone into a pond the effect would be not only a common experience but one which, beforehand, can already be predicted. Even though the object, the pond, is believed to be continually existing, we can also disrupt its reality by tossing an object into it. Now that it has changed due to the act of our changing the surface, its existence is altered and our perceptions are altered with it. If we imagine the outcome of a stone dropped into the pond, our imagination would envision the effect, but it could not duplicate it in the external world; it can only create a semblance of the effect. If the world exists only in our imagination, it comes to question whether the pond is one which is perpetually changed by this or that object landing on its surface, or whether it exists as a stolid, barely changing, object of perception.
The contradictions to common experience arise when changes take place that are unimaginable; changes which are confounded and claim different results than are expected. Within these contradictions, cause and effect still operates the same, although they may differ in size and definition. Yet, once the experience unfolds, reason applies itself to the perception and turns the outcome into what would be considered common due to the forces that drove the matter in the first place. It is only the madmen and the distempered who are unable to tie together interrupted perceptions which, with a vivacity and force, always return to an imagined continuity while undergoing imperceptible, but determinable, changes.
Liked this post? Follow this blog to get more.