Knowledge Is Power

Perception can be best defined as an assumption. When one perceives, they are combining their observations with logic to formulate a unique opinion. The validity of the opinion formed can fluctuate based on the quality of the observations and the logical process used. For example, if one was sitting in a room with no windows and asked what the condition of the weather was outside, the quality of the observations would be extremely poor and the logical capabilities of the individual would come into play. A person with a good logical process would consider the season, climate, geographic location, and recent weather patterns and make a reasonably valid perception. However, this opinion would still be less valid than one made by someone outside and able observe the present weather. Perceptions are by no means infallible. It is just as possible for a perception to be real as it is for it to be false. Perceptions can be based on factual evidence but because they are projections and estimations of the unknown, they do not carry the weight of truth. No human has the gift of foresight (although some may dispute this) and therefore the unpredictable nature of the future prevents any perception from being completely true. All perceptions retain the possibility of falsehood until the future becomes present or the past is proven.

Knowledge, on the other hand, does carry the weight and responsibility of truth. Knowledge is the understanding of reality. By this definition it becomes impossible to know something that is not real, which, logically, makes perfect sense. Hypothetically, if someone where to say that they know that a leprechaun is short, red haired, and greedy, but have never seen or met a leprechaun, they would be contradicting themselves. That person could not know the attributes of a leprechaun without seeing and meeting a real-live leprechaun because regardless of all prior “knowledge” of leprechauns, it is always possible that a leprechaun could be tall, blonde, and compassionate. That person’s “knowledge” is correctly labeled perception because an opinion was formed based on folklore and the logical assumption that any body would be naturally reluctant to share a pot of gold. Better yet, if it were to turn out that leprechauns do not exist (i.e. are not real), again, perception would be the appropriate label
because the existence of leprechauns in their assumed state was entirely perceived.

One cannot both know and perceive something at the same time. Knowledge requires an initial perception of some kind, and as stated before, perception naturally retains the ability to become reality which is, ultimately, knowledge. As soon as a perception is proven and becomes knowledge, it remains exclusively knowledge as it is unfeasible for reality to revert into falsehood. If it were suddenly to become apparent that our sun is composed of krypton gas, then the prevailing knowledge that our sun is composed of hydrogen and helium was never in actuality knowledge. The previous assumption of our sun’s composition would have always been a perception, and mislabeled as truth.

So long as one perceives they do not know because perception requires uncertainty whereas knowledge demands certainty. Uncertainty and certainty are polar opposites; meaning that they are so ideologically dissimilar that they cannot coexist.

There is only one plane of knowledge because of its foundation on reality. One object cannot be more real than another; they are either real to the same extent or unreal to the same extent. Perception does allow for some inequality in that it is possible to question the validity of a perception. The number and quality of the observations and the intellectual capability of the “perceiver” allow for there to be diversity among opinions. Two opinions can be equally unlikely or equally plausible; just as one can be feasible and the other improbable.

An example of such variety can be found by providing an imaginary situation in which a column of tanks engages infantry in a rocky canyon. One person might consider the firepower and armor of the tanks and use logic to determine that the tanks will survive the engagement because they have the capability to destroy the human frame and resist the small-arms fire coming from the infantry. The other might note that because the mobility of the tanks is restricted in the canyon and that the infantry have the ability to conceal their positions among the rocks; the infantry will survive the engagement because the terrain enables them to maneuver and attack the column at close range.

Until the engagement between the tanks and the infantry is complete, there is no certainty as to the superiority of one force. Knowledge is not attainable at this point because neither perception has been proven by occurrence.

The differences between perception and knowledge are complete and resounding- one symbolizes speculation while the other embodies authenticity. Benjamin Franklin once said, “But in this world nothing can be said to be certain, except death and taxes.” This Founding Father’s quote demonstrates the singularity of knowledge and the normality of perception. Franklin notes that out of the many things in life, only a small fraction are certain. This reasoning can be applied to when examining existence and reality, to say that society’s perceptions far exceed its knowledge. Instead of diminishing the accomplishments of society, this interpretation highlights the importance of properly labeling our standards while recognizing that nothing can be taken for granted.