Bertrand Russell's Arguments Against Perception

Bertrand Russell a British philosopher is a critic of direct realism, who presents arguments against perception based on common sense. In his first chapter "Appearance and Reality" he begins to analyze the table in front of him that looks the same from a naked eye but can have several different perceptions depending on the person, light, angle, or more. He raises the argument that in reality, only one colour appears, but the angles and lights present a different colour, which then contradicts our initial instinct. Therefore an individual relies on the appearance based on their knowledge and inference but the reality cannot be determined with the naked eye. He further evaluates the texture of the table, from the naked eye and from a microscopic
He presents strong arguments in his distinction of appearance and reality, the question remains as to why should an individual consider perceiving the table from so many different perspectives. Common sense does prove that an individual can perceive things differently. Russell further explained how an individual's perception can change with something as simple as angle, what determines which perception is more real. This was a critical part of the argument he was
Its relation to philosophy is understandable but from a non-philosophical view, why should an individual consider perceiving a simple object from different points of view or actions. Why should the individual not rely on their first inference, things may not be as they seem but how does that affect the individual and their life. What is the individual exactly gaining from this distinction of knowing what is more real. These are the type of questions that arise when reading this chapter. Russell makes extraordinary arguments, but in my opinion leaves the most important questions unanswered, as to why it is relevant to life. This is only one chapter and potentially be answered in the following