Obstacles of Cognition. (Part 1)

Last week, we dealt with external obstacles to discovering the truth, in addition to several tests of evidence that we can use to assess the validity of our information and our evidence. Unfortunately, even when presented with fact and truth, we do not always see it for what it is. As humans, in addition to surmounting the external obstacles, we have a number of internal obstacles that must be overcome if we can hope to live in a world informed not by opinion and belief, but by fact. Over the course of this week and next, we will begin to discuss some of the internal obstacles that come between us and the truth.

1. Our Senses

The first obstacle to truth is the one that most people believe to be infallible. After all, what is more reliable than an eyewitness? Well, as it turns out, a lot of things are more reliable than an eyewitness. But we’ll get to that in a minute.

Humans have evolved to see and hear only what is necessary. In comparison with other animals in the animal kingdom, our senses are actually quite dull. We never needed to be able to spot a rodent from 1,000 feet in the air. The clarity and sharpness of our vision pales in comparison with that of the Bald Eagle (as well as many, many other animals). Our ears are likewise unremarkable in the animal kingdom. Bats, cats, dogs, and dolphins (among many others) have us beat when it comes to our auditory capabilities.

Additionally, the wavelengths to which our eyes and ears are sensitive are also very limited. Some fish, reptiles, birds, and mammals are able to see ultraviolet and infrared light. Not us. Elephants, hippos, and rhinos can hear and even emit subsonic sounds used for communication that humans aren’t even sensitive to. Similarly, whales, dolphins, and bats can emit and communicate with ultrasonic sounds to which we also have no sensitivity.

It’s probably lucky that we aren’t sensitive to the whole spectrum of light and sound. Can you imagine the madness that would ensue from trying to drive home through rush hour traffic through everyone’s radio waves, bluetooth devices, and cell phone signals?

However, in order to study the natural world more thoroughly, we have augmented our senses with technology that can detect and measure that which we can not experience directly. Today, frequencies of light and sound that were once hidden and totally unknown to us have been unlocked thanks to modern science and technology.

That being said, our eyes and ears are still pretty good. They’re good enough that we can observe the world and believe that what we are seeing is real. Or can we?

2. Our Brain

I have always been a fan of optical illusions. They are perplexing and mesmerizing and just plain fun to look at. The name is a bit of a misnomer, though. Optical illusions are actually illusions of the brain. While our senses are working fine, it is our brain that imposes false patterns and schemas on the incoming sensory data.

Humans have never seen a concave face in real life (see video above). In our centuries and millennia of experience, faces have always been convex. When presented with an image that doesn’t conform to our experience, our brain interprets it as something that can fit into an existing pattern or schema so that we can make sense of it. It’s not our eyes that deceive us, but our brains.

Optical illusions, like sleight of hand “magic tricks,” rely heavily on perspective. The perspective with which we view the world also affects our perception of it. For example, one would be excused for thinking the earth is flat, based solely on our daily experience of it. However, as we know, once our perspective changes, we begin to see that the earth is, in fact, spherical. Similarly, once our perspective changes enough when viewing the optical illusion above, we can see the reality behind the illusion.

3. Our Memory

To go back to schemas and eyewitness accounts, even the way our memories are stored leaves us with recollections that are not entirely accurate. Since memories by necessity are encoded at a very fast pace, memories of events are categorized by the brain according to type. This saves time and “processing power” that are better spent elsewhere (mainly surviving). By categorizing the world at a rapid pace, we are able to make sense of things that normally wouldn’t make sense (much like the concave face). For example, when we recall events such as a birthday party, our brain may recall balloons, cake, table settings, colorful tablecloths, utensils, and condiments such as salt and pepper shakers on the tables, and other items that fit into the “birthday party schema,” even if none were present. Our memory doesn’t have to store the details of the concept of a “party” if it has a framework in which to place these new memories. When we encounter new situations, the memories from those situations are often categorized and encoded into existing cognitive schemas.

Additionally, our memories are highly prone to alteration through suggestion. While some eyewitness accounts — and the memories that exist as a result — are accurate, studies have shown that this isn’t always the case. Memories can be inaccurately reconstructed or even planted through simple suggestion. Unfortunately, history has shown us that many people have been wrongly imprisoned as a result of faulty eyewitness testimonies.

As we can see, our senses, while they may be “good enough,” are flawed — as are our recollections of the sensory data we gather through those senses. Our vision, our hearing, our perspective, our experience, and our memories of all of the above — while convincing — may not be representative of the truth. In our daily search for the truth, we must acknowledge our physical and cognitive limitations, and understand that what we are experiencing might not be exactly what is seems.

4. Propensity Toward Patterns (and Pareidolia)

From the section above, we can begin to see how, as humans, we have a predisposition to see patterns and fit our experience into those patterns. I talked briefly in one of my earlier articles about the possible reasons why we have a propensity toward seeing patterns where none exist. Regardless of why it’s there, our ability to find meaningful patterns in random data can often be a big obstacle to finding the truth. This predisposition is known as Apophenia. Apophenia, or Patternicity, as science writer Michael Shermer, likes to call it, is the erroneous perception of meaningful connections in random data.

We can find an example of apophenia and patternicity in the conpiracy theories regarding the terrorist attacks of September 11th:

• The attacks happened on 9/11: 9 + 1 + 1 =11
• It was the 254th day of the year: 2 + 5 + 4 = 11
• The first airplane to crash was American Airlines Flight 11
• There were 92 people on board: 9 + 2 = 11
• The planes that were hijacked were American Airlines flights. ‘A’ is the first letter of the alphabet: AA = 11

People see this data and find meaning and significance in the number 11. Spooky, right? Wrong.

Here’s another example:

• In 1838, Edgar Allen Poe’s one and only novel was published: The Narrative of Arthur Gordon Pym of Nantucket. In the story, the passengers of a boat find themselves adrift with no food or water. Eventually, they decide that in order to survive, they will kill and eat one of the crew. The unlucky and, I imagine, unwilling crewmate, is Richard Parker. Keep in mind that this is a fictional story written in 1838. Poor Richard Parker is stabbed and eaten so that the remaining crew members might survive.
• 50 years later, in 1884 and real life, a yacht headed for Sydney, Australia was struck by a similar disaster. The yacht, not being designed for such long voyages, sank. The crew packed themselves into lifeboats in an attempt to survive. A 17-year-old who was on board the lifeboat made the mistake of drinking seawater. As his condition and his health deteriorated, the survivors made a decision to kill him and eat him to ensure their own survival. His name was Richard Parker.

(It should also be noted that the name of the tiger that is stranded on the lifeboat with “Pi” in Life of Pi also shares the name Richard Parker. That one might not be a coincidence…)

Both of the examples above fall under the jurisdiction of what is known as “The Law of Truly Large Lumbers.” The law of truly large numbers states that, given a large enough sample size, extremely rare events are actually quite likely to occur. The law of large numbers also sometimes answers to “The Lottery Principle.” For example: my personal chances of winning the lottery are astronomically poor. However, when enough people play, someone is going to win. The odds are almost impossible, but it’s going to happen. Given enough chances, things will eventually line up in a way that seems significant. Our ability to spot and cling to coincidences can often be an obstacle to seeing the truth.

As we have seen, humans are predisposed to seeing patterns in random data. Another way this can — and has — manifested itself is through the phenomenon known as pareidolia. Faces on Mars, Jesus on a potato chip, Virgin Mary palm oil spots on a car dealership window, faces in the smoke of the Twin Towers; these are all examples of pareidolia.

Humans have evolved to value, end even require, social interaction. From a very young age, we are able to see and recognize faces and facial features. The face and the eyes can offer us a valuable cache of non-verbal communication and, as a result, we have become well-adapted to spotting them even when they aren’t really there.

Why so surprised?

Our ability to see faces where none exist is uncanny. It’s one of the reasons why we get excited when our sweetheart sends us a semicolon followed by a hyphen and close-parenthasis; or why we get annoyed when someone texts us back with a hyphen-underscore-hyphen. It’s why we stare up at the clouds and shout out the images we see. It’s why, for thousands of years, we’ve drawn figures in the stars and given them names and legends and significance. We have a propensity toward seeing patterns everywhere. It’s in our nature. One way these patterns can manifest themselves is in the form of human shapes and faces. This may not seem like a big deal, but to those spending $28,000.00 to acquire a slice of toasted cheese sandwich with a burn mark resembling the Virgin Mary’s face, it’s a big deal. A big, silly deal. Everyone knows it looks more like Marilyn Monroe, anyways. :-P

By recognizing our shortcomings in the areas of our senses, the manner in which our brain interprets, classifies, and stores information, as well as our proclivity for finding patterns in meaningless data, we can begin to hurdle our own inner obstacles in pursuit of the truth.

More on this next week!