What something means to a person passes through a distinct set of steps.
- The first one is that the object is measured through an instrument, such as an inch tape or the senses.
- The second is that the measurement is put on a scale. The scale would have a topmost and lower end point on its measurable values or spectrum of values.
- Then the value is given meaning by its relation to this spectrum. This derived meaning can then be taken as the start of another where these steps form a cycle through which meaning is further built.
These steps are what seems to be essential workings of how we discern an item, whether factual or imaginary, emotional or physical, and in changing any step one can alter the meaning derived from it.
For example, using this model, one could use a better instrument to get a more adequate value, such as using sonar in the sea rather than light as light is not reliable. Mentally it would mean that we spread our means of perception as much as possible so we gather as much information as possible.
The scale can be made more adequate if needed. If for example we are talking about the electromagnetic spectrum, we could have different ranges of the scale to make sense of the perceived wavelength. In practice, we would need to re-evaluate how we evaluate the gathered information and change it into a fact, where the information is discerned.
Finally is the interpretation of the value on the spectrum, whereby one could say that what is being measured is for example light and not x-rays, or a submarine rather than the ocean floor if we are using sonar. Mentally this means that how we interpret the assigned fact as to what it means to us given to how it is being presented.
These steps, although scientific, are, in a certain sense, what is happening while one is discerning and judging the world. These systems of measurements are not singular in us and more than one system can be at play at any given time. We look through our senses and thoughts to gather information about the world, we then reason it to see what sense it has made, followed by how it impacts our current outlook on the moment, a result of which could then cycle back to the first step of this means of measurement.
What is important then is that when the time comes where we are to revise our beliefs that are acting in the background causing our reactions for the given stimuli, we can dissect such beliefs by seeing them as made of these thought systems. We can ask:
- Do I have all the necessary information for all the measurements in my perception?
- Am I placing the value derived in the right order on the spectrum of understanding?
- Am I using the right scale to measure this information?
Or given the focal point of the subject:
- Do I have all the facts or am I relying on unproven or unlikely assumptions?
- Am I judging the facts in a balanced way or am I exaggerating reality?
- Do I have the capacity to understand the scene for what it is rather than what it might be?
These methods of understanding are not singular but many, and are used by more than just yourself but by others as well. The crux at play begins when two people apply their own scaling system on the same element. An example of this is when someone evaluates an item, where while for one it could have value, whereas for the other it might not. To arrive at this conclusion, one would need to observe the facts, give them a weight in value and then give a meaning for the value. Hence one could arrive at different meanings given different systems, same as how others arrived at their own different meanings through their own systems.
Arriving to the meaning can be understood as how one concludes to something. Applying a system is the same as saying how one approaches a matter. Expressing the value of the meaning could be the stating of an opinion. The system in itself can be expressed as a thought process, where one sees, evaluates and understands the truth of the matter.
These evaluations can be chained to one another, whereby the meaning arrived at in one system is used as a fact for another system. One can say that one conclusion can lead to another conclusion thus arriving at a deeper understanding of the matter in question, only to mean that the systems of analysis are interwoven to create different strata of reality, our personal reality.
This means of understanding of our inner functionality can be used to find the means and points of reference that may need revision. The explanation above can be a means of analysis that can be used with what psychology calls Cognitive Behavioural Therapy (CBT) where through the dissection of one’s beliefs one can then understand where they could be missing the plot and thus use a revision in one’s perspectives, where he would help himself to arrive to a healthier perception of reality.
