The similarity law is an explanation of why we perceive the world in this way. This explains why the externalist explanation of our experience of things does not work.
While the law of similarity itself is not a general explanation of how we perceive things, it explains why we are able to react to things differently from how we react to things that we encounter in the outside world. However, this does not explain why some people have different sensory experiences. This question has long been discussed in philosophy, but the most commonly proposed solution is related to cognitive abilities. One position is that the law of similarity explains why there are some people who do not perceive things in the same way as others. However, the hypothesis that this law is based on a general truth, the truth that explains why people do not see things the same way, is usually viewed as not supported by most philosophers. Instead, the main explanation suggested is that some of the differences in sensory experience can be explained on a more subtle level. For example, we may see an apple differently because of what we know about that apple. We know that the green apple was of the same species as the apple we see in front of us now, and therefore the differences in perception that we see are due to our knowledge.
Proponents of this mistaken view often misuse the law of similarity. While the concept of the Law of Similarity explains why we perceive things differently than other people, it does not explain why we perceive things the way. In my opinion, the reason why we perceive the world the way we do it is related to the processes of perception, which are not limited to similarities.
An early attempt at demarcation can be seen in the efforts of Greek natural philosophers and medical practitioners to separate their methods and their descriptions of nature from the mythological or mystical stories of their predecessors and contemporaries.
Plato first described his concept of «timesis», embodied the Aristotelian faith in human consciousness, in his «Timaeus» and in subsequent works.
The doctrine that perception is natural and not divine was a theme he developed in his Phaedra, which spoke of a «ghostly body» (a physical representation of an idea that a person is aware of).
Phaedrus also focused on the problem of universal knowledge, stating that everyone has access to all nature, but uses the only method available to them – their own perception.
The question of whether the material objects perceived by them are real or simply the result of perception has not been understood as a matter of faith.
Thomas Aquinas followed Aristotle and expanded on Plato’s ideas in the early thirteenth century in his Summa Theologica.
He believed that people can use their senses to determine «intellectually» the existence or non-existence of objects of perception.
It means that objects do not exist for the senses without our knowledge, but they exist, at least for those who have the ability to recognize their existence.
Thomas Hobbes argued that all objects can be cognized, although there is only one truth. Only human senses can know everything; all other knowledge is the result of assumptions.
In his later works, Thomas expanded his theories about the subjective relationship between sensory perception and sensitivity. The intellect can only perceive those things that exist, or at least exist in the realm of the senses; a thought that transcends this sphere of discrimination is known as a «poetic concept.»
