Outside the Region of Clarity

This is an example of limited depth of field. Only a narrow band is clear, and things become fuzzy when we move away from it. The further we get from the band of focus, the less we can see what’s going on.

In this simple case, it’s pretty easy to see that there’s not much going on in the fuzzy regions; we can infer, probably pretty accurately, that the same drop-covered surface extends in both directions and the result is just an increasingly smooth tone as things get more and more out of focus.

If there was more going on in the fuzzy areas, with vague lines and objects, regions of different color, and so on, then we might be able to guess what’s going on. Of course, the likelihood of being right diminishes the further we get from the zone of clarity even for a richer image.

And honestly, even in this simple case, we could possibly be fooled. Are those slight variations because of the drop density changing a little, or because the car hood is reflecting something there? Is the subtle tone shift in the upper right corner because the light is slightly different or because the hood angle changes?

Now, we would be foolish to argue over these things, because it’s so clear that our knowledge is limited. Yet, sometimes the limits of our understanding are less clear; our minds have a way of fooling ourselves, and we can mistakenly think that we know what’s going on even when we clearly don’t.

This happens so much, and so strongly, that we sometimes get into disagreements, arguments, even wars, over what’s going on outside the zone of clarity, and may even imagine conflicts when they don’t really exist.

For example, this happens with politics and ideologies when we believe others hold only the most extreme positions. We may understand our own positions well, but believe that everyone in a different group holds only extreme positions. In that case, we may not realize that our views are closer than we think and there really isn’t that much to argue about. We misinterpret the vague knowledge we have of others’ opinions, rather than seeking clarity and truth.

In some cases, there may even be nothing to argue about, as in the case of the science-faith debate.

So for me, this is a reminder that we need to learn what the limits are, be aware how they can gradually get fuzzy such that we don’t realize it, and operate with humility and curiosity. We should always be questioning how clear our understanding really is.