Generally all scientists, when they want to prove a point, first observe and then conduct experiments. Because they cannot experiment with the whole world they take only a sample from the population and then try to fit their findings from the sample to the whole world assuming that the world is represented in their sample which often is not.

I would like to add that the laboratory conditions under which science operates often do not exist in daily human lives. I refer in particular to pharmaceutical anti-depressant medicine. The treatment plan in which one has to take the pills must be followed in its exact way but often that is not the case, for people reject pills very often and think that if they take the pills, it is proven that something is wrong with them. People don't like to think of themselves as to be wrong.

Your screen experiment with trying out blindness does not go far enough, I would say - the idea is great!

It reminded me on a visit years ago here in Hamburg. They set up a room in total darkness and called it "Dialogue in the Dark" - I went there with a bunch of people and we were led through the darkness by an actual blind person which directed us through the space. It was less frightening than I would have assumed. We were put under different sensory circumstances like traffic, crossing an intersection, visiting a market, where we were asked to touch the food and tell what we were holding in our hands and so on and so forth. What I experienced was, that I wanted to be in physical touch with others and that too much noise was no good as not enough sounds also was not good. Losing eye sight I would say after this experience gets really bad in isolation and I deduce from that (LOL) this counts also for losing the ability to hear. Though the loss of smelling would not be the same feeling of disconnection, I think. That is my subjective perspective and that is the only one which counts, no?

Modern people for the most part use their eye sense along with their mind sense. That is also the reason why language offers all kinds of synonyms for seeing but less for hearing and smelling. Look, view, perspective, see, watch, watch out, spot, glimpse, glance, picture, lens, etc. - but what do we have for smell and touch and hear?

The search for the smallest particle may - among other things - lead to side findings which we may benefit or not from - as always there are more than two sides to a thing. As I also think that we are long arrived at concepts, I do not have anything to add.

Great topic!

But as you know me a little, I am missing experiences of yours from your physical existence.