Theories theories theories...which one to believe???

The below diagrams is an illustration as to how we all perceive things in our own way, as suggested by the theories of Jung and Freud.












Image A :What do you see? Some of you may see 2 green faces; other may see a white chalice. This all depends on your initial perception of the diagram. You may find that when you look again, you may see the alternate picture within the diagram.

Image B: what do you see? Some of you may see sloping lines; others may see horizontal parallel lines or some of you may see something COMPLETELY different…who knows only you do!

Some may think that the retina is responsible for interpreting visual stimulus such as the picture above others believe that the eye is simply a physiological process that does not actually process the signals it receives instead the job is left to the brain, for individual interpretation…
So why do humans have a sense of perception? And why is my perception different to others? I see what’s in front of me, but is it really what I see or have I just become accustomed to it through societies influence and/or my own preconceived ideas? This is what we as humans find asking ourselves on a regular basis.

The word perception means "receiving, collecting, and action of taking possession, apprehension with the mind or senses.

Psychologists are divided between two theories on perception. Some believe that perception relies directly on the information present to the stimulus whilst others believe that the perception process are dependent on the perceivers expectations and previous knowledge as well as the information available in the stimulus itself.
These two theories are seen as Active (Gregory) and Passive (Gibson)
Active: dynamic relationship between description (in the brain) ↔ senses ↔ surrounding.
Example: Gregory believes that prior knowledge and past experience, are crucial in perception. When we look at something, we develop a perceptual hypothesis, which is based on prior knowledge. The hypotheses we develop are nearly always correct. However, on rare occasions, perceptual hypotheses can be disconfirmed by the data we perceive.

Passive: surrounding → input (senses) → processing (brain) → output (re-action).
Example: Gibson argues that there is enough information in our environment to make sense of the world in a direct way. Sensation is perception: what you see if what you get. There is no need for processing (interpretation) as the information we receive about size, shape and distance etc is sufficiently detailed for us to interact directly with the environment.

...yet we have grown accustomed to our environment and our surroundings so therefore anything that we see, hear or touch we would already have preconceived ideas about...it would be natural for the brain to associate the matter with past experiences or knowledge...would it not? But what if this wasn’t the case...And so this is what our teams aims to discover.