Knowing

 The information we take in through our senses allows us make meaning of our world. These sensory experiences provide us with a sense of knowing, of being certain that our memory of an event is accurate.  It is generally accepted if we see something than the details we recall must be true.  This maxim has been an integral belief upheld by the Canadian and U.S. Criminal Justice System; evidence reported by an eye witness has, until recently, been given more weight than other types of evidence during criminal trials.  What better authority than the Courts of our land to provide legitimacy for the accuracy of memories based on our sense of sight.  And yet, there have been numerous and tragic false convictions based on eye witness accounts both in Canada and the U.S.  It turns out that we seldomly remember with 100 per cent accuracy and often with less than 30 per cent, often reporting nonexistant details. This has been known for over a century through the numerous experiments conducted with first year psychology students throughout Europe, Canada, and the United States. So, if this is true, why do we cling so strongly to being right, even in the face of new and contradictory evidence?  This is a complex question and will be examined over the next few days.