When the Tree Falls, Who Hears it?

“If a tree falls in a forest and no one is around to hear it, does it make a sound?”

One of my favorite questions to overthink about; If you’ve heard it once, you’ve heard it a thousand times. But did you know this pseudo-riddle holds its own in intellectual conversation? From philosophical ponders to discussions in quantum theory, the ‘tree in the forest’ thought experiment is bigger than what initially meets the eye… or ear *wink*

The questioning of whether or not sound, or anything for that matter, exists beyond our perception of it was largely popularized by George Berkeley, an Irish philosopher of the 18th century. Though it has never been proven that he posed the exact question of the tree in the forest he is known for pitching his tent in the thought camp of “subjective idealism”, the assumption that only mental contents exist and physical objects do not. (I’m no philosopher but I found this article and this article very interesting in explaining his work, if you’re looking to learn more.) The bulk of his doctrine can be summed up as esse est percipi.

Esse est percipi? Yes, it’s Latin and no, I haven’t used Latin since talking about scientific naming in a high school biology class, either. Esse est percipi is the term Berkeley coined for the Sparknotes version of his school of thought: To be means to be perceived. Following this precept means that in order for something to exist, it has to be observed by someone.

To briefly answer the question of the tree falling in the forest and whether or not it makes a sound: Berkeley would likely argue that it would indeed make a sound, even if no one was around. This is because Berkeley, a very religious man, believed God perceived everything, so everything in the perception of God exists even if no human beings are aware of that existence. (I’m not going to dive into too much more of his doctrine specifically, but I do think it’s interesting and would encourage you to check it out if you’re wanting to read more of his thoughts.)

Let’s take a step back and talk Latin for another moment. Esse est percipi: To be means to be perceived. I don’t think the symphony of trees falling is limited to lumberjacks only. In fact, I think the principle of esse est percipi has an overly strong hold on us all. Human beings are fundamentally wired to respond to attention. We are social creatures and like to be perceived in a number of different ways by other people, which is all natural and good. But at what point does our perception by others seemingly control our existence? Without trying too hard, you can think of a hundred different versions of the tree in the forest question:

Do your personal victories still count, even if no one is around to recognize them?

Are your feelings still justified, even if no one is around to acknowledge them?

Is the experience you had still meaningful, even if no one is around to document it?

Does your happiness still exist, even if no one is around to notice it?

So much of our reality is built on a foundation of expecting perception and validation from others. We spend a greater amount of time telling the world how we’re feeling than we do actually experiencing those feelings, or focusing more on the novelty and announcement of reaching a goal than the actual goal itself. We complete a task, large or small, and instinctively stand up with a lost look in our eyes, searching and hoping to see that someone has noticed what we’ve done. I’m not talking about a conversation of emotions and ambitions between friends, and quite honestly the idea of sharing feelings and accomplishments with others doesn’t bother me. What does bother me, and bothers me quite a lot, is the societal direction we’re moving towards “hyper-perception.” Suddenly it’s become a general goal to be perceived by the greatest number of others possible- our being is dependent not on perception alone, but rather the level and quantity at which we are perceived.

Social media is not the only contributing factor, but I do think it’s one of the largest. For example, you’ll see people, usually women, who are on a “fitness journey” create special social media accounts to track and share their progress. While there’s sometimes a “business” (*cough* pyramid sche- I mean, multi-level marketing) motive, a major purpose of having these accounts is so that person has a place to go for validation, motivation, and accountability. Again, I’m not here to pass judgement on anyone who chooses to do that but I have to ask: are you really telling me you can’t find accountability, validation, and motivation to achieve the things you want within yourself? You can notice a similar phenomenon when people go on vacation, because there’s nothing like seeing a nuclear family standing on a scenic lookout point climbing on top of each other to get the perfect photo for their friends on Snapchat and not actually enjoying the view.

It all boils down to our need to be perceived, which is, again, a very natural thing. However, a glitch in the system has largely reduced our capacity for self-perception and has increased our reliance on the perceptions of others. We’re starting to run on a new doctrine, non modo non intellegetur: to not be perceived means to not be.

Somehow, we’ve become both the most narcissistic and most self-doubting of beings. While we don’t hesitate to boast of our newest accomplishments or project our feelings onto large groups of unsuspecting, uninterested people, we’re also unable to recognize the slightest of personal victories, feelings, or experiences within ourselves for the sake of self-awareness. We’re building a labyrinth of self-worth under the assumption that the rest of the world will care about us for us, and I don’t like it. If you’re depending on others to perceive who [insert your name] is, do you really know who you are?

If you think I’m tearing the rug out from under “kindness towards others”, you would be wrong. Being supportive and caring will always get a standing ovation from me, and I’m not fighting the idea of cheering others on. But if to be means to be perceived, why the hell aren’t we focusing on our perception of ourselves? If a tree falls in the forest and you are the only person around, you still hear the sound, right?

We all need to spend more time being actively self-aware and taking note of who we are, what we’ve done, and how we feel. No perception of you matters more than your own. But before you lock your door, delete all your friends’ numbers from your phone and start purging your thoughts into a spiral notebook that cost a quarter, keep in mind that others play an important part in the process of “knowing thy self.” I realize this seems contrary to everything I have mentioned up to this point, but I actually think we need to do a better job of discussing our self-perceptions with people besides ourselves.

Earlier I talked about our human need for being acknowledged by others, and I still stand by that comment. In order to get a clear picture of who we are, we need to lean on our internal need for discussion. Harvard Business Review has written a lengthy piece on this idea. I think by sharing our thoughts and views of ourselves with others we expose our perceptions to a system of checks and balances. I’m not saying you need to adjust 180-degrees based on what others think, but if you tell your friend you feel like an asshole and they agree that you’re acting like one, it’s probably a good sign that something needs to change. The most important part of this, however, is that you need to choose very carefully whose opinions you consider. Trying to seek justification from every blessed person to walk the earth will plunk you right back into a cycle of hyper-perception.

Act as though you’re a president: select a handful of close advisers, and be satisfied in knowing that you will never be perceived by everyone in a way you agree with. In fact, you should find comfort in knowing that you will never be perceived by everyone and that there are going to be a lot of people on this earth who don’t know or care who you are. Picking and choosing the friends and family you’ll keep as your advisers is a very important task, and if you disagree that you need anyone because you feel you’re either too mentally or emotionally mature to need others in the process of “finding yourself”, you’re relatively no better than the folks who are posting their crappy iPhone photography on Instagram in search of validation in the form of “likes”.

Whether it’s a fear of burdening another with your feelings or the threat of projecting your thoughts, leaving others out of the process of self-perception is nothing short of cheating yourself. We’re all guilty of it at times. In person, my friends will tell you I’m a touchy-feely overload that sometimes talks too much and treats “words of affirmation” as a second language. But since I started publishing my writing in high school, I’ve always been hesitant to get “too real”, not because I’m nervous to expose my thoughts to others but because I worry that writing raw will come off as though I’m over-externalizing. This is something I’m trying to get beyond, which is probably why this blog sounds a little different than much of what I’ve written in the past. I don’t expect anyone to take this post, print it out, and read it every day but whenever I write the hope is that just one person can pull something out that moves them forward in their own journey of life, which means I need to do better at including personal substance in what I publish.

Esse est percipi: To be means to be perceived. Good ole Berkeley summed up years of philosophical ponder into just a few words. Now, I think it’s time we make room for some new doctrine at the table of perception:

Est sensus esse est percipi sui: Perception of self is to be perceived.

Sensus ab aliis non intelliguntur per omnes sensus: Perception by others does not mean perception by everyone.

The key to honest and productive self-perception is finding a healthy balance between internal awareness and informed, external input on who exactly you are. When a tree falls no one really has to know, but it is okay for a few people to hear it anyways.