About the meaning of senses: "what you see it's what you get" & "never judge a book by his cover".

Accordingly to these two commons sayings it is possible to recognize a common point, moreover, a transversal concept which includes two sides about the same discussion: senses, and in what grade it is possible to trust them. In fact, "we", as a modern society are commonly trying to approximate to our reality through our experience, and clearly through our senses. But, this is really the best form to approximate to reality?

To illustrate, it is not necessary to say how science now on days is in a big way based on the trust of senses, givingly real importance to the experience for trying to explain some phenomenon’s and problems of social and natural reality. The inductivism form of scientific method can represent all this real trust in the senses and experience; also it marks really strong one part of scientific community. All this way of conceive science, givingly to the experience and sense a high stance it is going to be highly related to the common saying "what you see it's what you get".

Nevertheless, there are going to be some authors who are not agree with this way of channeling science and perceiving reality. René Descartes on his book "The Discourse on the Method" (1637) is going to propose us that senses can lie to us. How do you know if when you are doing something, something that you are really convinced that is real, are you not dreaming?. Moreover, our sight, our touch cannot be certain, for example; when we are seeing the sun it is possible to make the statement "the sun is close to me, is on the sky", however sun is kilometers of distance. Consequently -on this specific case- if we follow our sight, our sense, we will be erroneous. But, it is possible to make similar statements in terms of probability?

Following the British philosopher Karl Popper on his book "The Logic of the Social Sciences" (1934), even in probabilistic terms; the inductive method is not able to make any statement base on experience and sense. For instance; if we say "it is possible that tomorrow the sun will show, because for thousands of years the sun have shown up" it doesn’t make any contribution to our comprehension of reality, because it exists the possibility that, for one day to another, the world stop to exist (i.e for a space rock collision). Thus, the common saying "we never have to judge a book by his cover" can be understood in terms that we can be wrong about our statements.

To summarize, we can see how this commons saying can represent the forms of approximate to reality, the debate in what science is in, and the different postures that one can be a part. In a personal way I think that experience and trusting in our sense can be really useful, but sometimes can be complex, because one experience is not representative of what everybody experience.