Correct, just as sugar is not taste. — Michael

I guess you mean sweet rather than sugar, actually.

"colour" formally, is the experience of (sorry, caused by, in most cases) such and such light frequency. — AmadeusD

How can I experience colour!? What if I never experienced red colour, and you asked me for a red pen? I would feel a big feeling of anxiety in my chest because I would not know what to hand you. But I know that pens are for writing. Why do you want it red? Choosy boy.

great work man and we're all in your debt. — Wayfarer

To keep the site running smoothly over the next while I've just deleted some of the bigger old ones. — Jamal

Yeah, thanks for your effort, Jamal. We owe you one!

It's a shame that we can't type in red here. — Banno

Colours are not subjective, but when you see a colour the seeing is ontologically subjective, and your opinions about the colour, e.g. that it's pretty, is epistemically subjective. — jkop

You asked me for a red pen. I hand you a pen which is covered by a red label and says: 'red ink pen'. You start to use the pen, but it turns out that the pen writes with blue ink. What happened here?

TA-DA.

It is fascinating how humans are choosy about trifles. Colours were stamped on flags, and they caused endless problems and wars all over the world.

But under my definition we will have uncountably many subspaces of R2 that are not subspaces of R1, for example. — Lionino

I think I can see it. By uncountable in your definition, it means that there are infinite subspaces or dimensions. Right? It is not about to be countable but if the vector space has a dimension.

Vector spaces may have irrational dimensions. — Lionino

It turns to an uncountable dimension. Right? Or am I lost in something?

Now, I can't see the next step in your rule.

If by "red pen" you mean to define a pen as comprised of redness, whatever that means, then sure, your red pen can look blue if you filter it. — Hanover

Just one red pen amongst others, red and not so red. — Banno

As I said in previous pages of this thread, asking for a red or blue pen is picky. The main point of a pen is writing on paper. It is an object that helps us to put the words of our language written on a piece of paper. Back in the day, there was only black ink available and folks used to write with feathers. Never mind Egyptians or Greeks writing directly on the stone table with a pictogram.

Why are we that complex and choosy? If I ask for a red pen and there are no red pens at that specific moment, does it mean my ability to write is restricted?

So, he really exists. Van Something (a.k.a Van de Mieroop) is a mysterious author. Gotcha, it is just his pseudonym. :lol:

Martin Van De Something. — Lionino

I almost believed that Martin Van De Something was a real name. I searched on Google for the title of the book, and it appeared a guy called Marc Van De Mieroop. It makes me wonder if you actually referred to the latter, but you didn't remember the name or you randomly posted a title of a book – and the name of the author – without knowing whether it exists or not.

The video is not available. :sad:

When I read 'Butoh' I thought about Yukio Mishima and yes, the video also made a reference to him. Although Mishimas was an excellent novelist, he also wrote plays and old Japanese tales.

To understand Butoh we have to put a bit of context which doesn't seem to appear in the video.

Butoh is a remake of classical Japanese dance-drama Noh (能, Nō, which means "talent"). One of the main characters of Noh is "shite" (仕手, シテ both human and ghost. But "shite" is usually translated as death). The themes of Noh are infinite but most of them are related to Japanese Shinto and old classical tales. I recommend Tanizaki Junichiro, for instance.

Years passed and WWII came. Japan lost the war in a very drastic way and the Japanese people felt a crisis of identity. Thanks to this, it started flourishing new ways of expressing art. Butoh is one of them.

Basically, Butoh is a mode of Noh but it is more grotesque, and it shows taboo topics, mainly homosexuality. The main character is dressed up like a woman instead of a ghost. The other characters are naked and they are very young. I remember that in 'Confessions of a Mask' by Mishima, one of the characters masturbates because he feels attracted to Greek and Roman sculptures, etc.

Yukio Mishima wrote a lot of this, and he left a good legacy in both Noh and Butoh.

Franco and Pinochet are regarded as heroes. — Fooloso4

Yeah, "heroes,” but Spain couldn’t be a member of the European Union until Franco’s death, and Chile was forgotten in its little corner of South America for decades.

How simple it is to exalt a despot when you are constantly on the side of a prosperous, rich and democratic country. The eternal incongruity of – some – Americans.

Franco and Pinochet were puppets of the White House. It would be interesting to put those authors and lovers of freedom in a country where you can’t vote, you are forced to go to church, your daughter counts zero because she is just a reproductive machine, the incomes are shite and you don’t have most of the amenities because the rest of the world turned its back on you, and it is impossible to have a TV, washing machine, light, modern cars, etc.

What bothers me the most is that they fantasize about such an authoritarian model, but only far away from their territory. Let’s see if it works in the Hispanic countries. We are already happy, developed, and modern in our democratic country called USA.

Do you feel a weight on your shoulders for how your children would feel in the future? Do you believe they will feel ‘disappointed’ with you? 

Even though I get the letter's meaning, I believe there will be a common understanding that the ineptitude of politicians and the greed of some businessmen should be held accountable rather than any specific people.

So, you are tuning Italian songs this summer, Amity. Time to eat a foccacia and drink limoncello. :cool:

Ward No. 6 by Anton Chekhov.

The prologue was written by Gorki. I don't know to what extent this is important and I don't usually read the prologues of books unless they were written by the authors themselves.

Indeed. Imamura's films are quite impressive, and they tend to break away from traditional Japanese filming. Even their characters are very remarkable and when I watch them I say: 'yes, it is clear that I am watching an Imamura film'.

Making friends with an eel in jail. Only a Japanese man could ever think about that. :sweat:

What does lowest threshold of assent mean? — Metaphysician Undercover

The expression of consent – or assent in some cases –. It may be stated expressed or implied. The OP must be referring to the latter. A succinct but firm attitude of engagement with the opposite party.

What do you guys think? — moo

To reinforce the engagement between two parties, it is important to put it on a paper signed by both of you or ratified by a public notary. Handshakes might not be very reliable indicators of agreement.

Hello Clarky and welcome to another Saturday of film recommendations. I bring a beautiful film from Iran. Although I am aware that Iranian films are spectacular, I am not very familiar with them. 

I watched Taste of Cherry (طعم گیلاس..., Ta’m-e gīlās...) by Abbas Kiarostami. The film won the Palme d'Or at the 1997 Cannes Film Festival. 

Plot: Badii drives around Teheran looking for someone who can help him to do a job for him: assisting him to commit suicide. While the driveway, he met different people who had philosophical conversations with.

Colours are secondary qualities of the objects. If the banana is yellow or green, it doesn’t influence its properties or how affects me when I eat it.

Rather, it appears to be a property of the object. — NOS4A2

A colour is a quality of the object, not a property.

If we’ve all been conditioned to say something giving off the same wavelength is “red,” then we would all be able to agree on what red is. — Mp202020

Imagine you ask a colour blindness for a 'red' pen, and he gets it right handing you the red pen. Why did this happen? Your colour-blindness classmate gave up his biological condition to accept the agreement of the concept of red.

By seeing it or knowing its conditions of satisfaction. — jkop

Okay. Let's say the mantis shrimp sees red pigment. When it sees it, what does the mantis shrimp call it? "Red", "rojo", "rosso" etc. This is the point I am trying to make. When the light does the reflexion on 'red', it could be that the mantis shrimp sees it, but I don't know to what extent the animal is aware that the reflected colour is called 'red'.

No, it demonstrates colour vision under selective conditions of observation. — jkop

Hmm... I think the drawing shows the importance of light and shade in colours. It is not only a matter of observation – which is also important – but how the colours are projected and, therefore, how we perceive them. I don't think we could be able to perceive a colour without light and shade getting involved.

But also, the red pen satisfies both you and your helper. We agree that the pen is red, so "red" belongs to pens as well as to minds.

So there is something odd about claiming red is no more than a perception. — Banno

Yeah.

It would be interesting to think about the eventual scenario where you have to teach the helper what the red pen is. When I attended kindergarten, teachers taught us the colour wheel without questioning it by ourselves. We just accepted that red is red and orange is orange. Otherwise, if a child ever dared to colour a sun purple instead of yellow, he would be called a weirdo.

So, it deserves a lot of recognition for how silently those social conventions enter our knowledge. We think they have always been there, but they haven’t.

I'm referring to the biological evolution of colour vision. — jkop

:up:

What matters for an animal is what it sees, e.g. a flower, not the light nor the mechanism that together enable the seeing. — jkop

How does an animal know that it is seeing a colour? These are part of the human vocabulary and language. A dog expresses himself using the sound ‘word’ and a cat ‘meow’ etc. I can agree with you that the cone cells and perception of colours in animals have been evolving, but colours are still something related to vocabulary and social conventions. I don’t know if my dog sees that the ball is red, or, more specifically, if she is aware that the ball is red or not.

The eyes of a mantis shrimp are way trickier. — jkop

Yep. But is the mantis shrimp 100% aware of its beautiful colour scale? 

Why? Arguments from illusion suck. — jkop

That game demonstrates how colour is arbitrary. In my opinion, it effectively illustrated the significance of light, shade, and shadows in our discussion. There are many more, but if you consider them to be useless, I will not disclose them.

Lucerne and Albert by Leo Tolstoy.

Colours are used as natural signs — jkop

Are you referring to the light that reflects those colours right? because the amount of cone cells in the electromagnetic spectrum and the colour wheel differs. As a result, although humans and animals sense colour in different ways, we are both simultaneously stimulated by light.
The "natural sign" is the light not the colours.

We can even perceive the colours in different shadows and reflectances! Our eyes are tricky. Let's play the following classic illusion game:

Muy bueno. Una opinión interesante.

En mi opinión, slur no puede tener mucha cabida en la lengua española. Básicamente es otro anglicismo más que se ha ido asentando en el habla española. Efectivamente, no tiene traducción, como muchas otras. Pero en fin, es otro ejemplo de la gran influencia de la lengua inglesa en el mundo. Esto último no lo mencionó cómo una crítica, sino que resalto que ellos han sido inteligentes en expandir su lengua.
La palabra slur es reconocida en gran parte del mundo. En cambio, no pasa así con blasfemia.

La palabra blasfemia es muy interesante. Tanto es así que está amparada por la Ley. La blasfemia va más allá del insulto. Hace referencia cuándo se ataca el honor o a la integridad de una persona. Por supuesto, tiene una connotación religiosa cómo has mencionado.

Por lo tanto, slur, pienso que va dirigido a insultos por raza, sexo o religión. Pero blasfemia es más sagrado. Por ejemplo: imagina qué dudo de la integridad de tu persona. Insinuó que eres un corrupto o un ladrón. O incluso pongo en duda tu mérito en lo que sea. Esto sería una gran blasfemia…

Folks, why do I buy different coloured collars for my dog? Why do I say that my dog’s favourite ball is the red one? Why do I put the water and food in different coloured bowls? My dog doesn’t care at all. She acts with different biological impulses. She goes to eat where the food is, and she goes to run whenever a park is. Dogs don’t waste time with socially biassed conventions like we do.

Yes, it is awesome. The eye is probably one of the most important sensory organs, yet it is a bit underrated.

Rather than perceiving colour, I believe we perceive light and reflection. That is why a blind person suffers from no light perception. Therefore, a blind person will never understand the social convention of ‘red’, ‘blue’ or ‘yellow’. It is a waste of time to explain to them that our world is colourful because a colour is not something they can smell or taste. Without light, everything is over regarding perceiving electromagnetic spectrum.

Asking for a 'green', 'red', or 'blue' pen is simply picky. The aim of every pen is to write, not to display colours.

If "red" is just in your mind, when you ask for a red pen, how is it that the person you are asking hands you what you want? — Banno

You would know it when that person handed you the 'red pen’. If that person mistakenly hands you a blue one, you should ask for a red one instead. Another example of how colours are social conventions. At the very least, the person is obeying by handing over the pen.

I can only say that I appreciate your help in this thread, Lionino. I like the first post more than the second because it is clearer. You know, when AI shows up, everything becomes unnecessarily complex. By the way, I am not entitled to argue or agree with those formulations because I am not good enough at logic. I hope better users read that and can provide some fruitful answers or feedback. 

I do end up ignoring users who can't drum up anything more than shoddy strawmen, actually. — Leontiskos

I am aware of how you will perceive me from now on. It is that simple to ignore me (and other users like me) without the unnecessary extra effort to change the rules of this site from its roots.

Perhaps the quality would have been improved if there had been limits. — Leontiskos

In an ideal world the poster of a thread would be able to determine the posting limit within their thread, — Leontiskos

Fair enough. I guess those limitations will increase from time to time. First, the 15-minute span, and maybe later you would allow answering to only users you like. That’s your ‘ideal’ world. I only hope the administrators don’t take you seriously, and fortunately the software on this site doesn’t allow such an amount of crank.

You claim a posting time limit, but you are answering me very quickly. Aren’t you realising this is not a great idea, given the way we are having this exchange?

Surprisingly, I am the one that respects the time limit. More than you do.

No I didn't. Did you even read my post? — Leontiskos

Yes, you did.

Perhaps encouraging more thoughtful and effortful posts for new users would elevate the philosophical standard across the board. — Leontiskos

So they don't turn into a shitshow of petty insults? Political threads are the best place for such a rule. — Leontiskos

It will not change anything. Politics are already bollocks and a clown show. Don’t expect the users to elaborate thoughtful answers. I can’t see the point of reading the same political dullness right now or in the next 15 minutes. Do you really think it will have a big impact on the constant tit for tat?

Bah. You are obsessed with rules. — Banno

:up:

And, this:

Posting limits.For example, maybe users start with one thread per week and one post per 15 minutes. — Leontiskos

I remember you posted similar dullness last year. You have a weird obsession with limiting the participation of the users. Again, you forget that not all the threads are about philosophy. There is The Shoutbox, which works like a chitchat, and it will not be effective to limit the time. On the other hand, look at the political threads. What’s the point of limiting the time and words in those threads? Folks discuss it like a ping pong game. Your proposal would reduce the participation in this forum and make it boring. It seems that you seek a place where a question is posted, then you reply with a huge answer, and that’s all. But one of the main features here is the dynamic nature of the interactions with each other. 

Oh, you also refer to ‘new’ members. But you just joined one year ago. Do you consider yourself a veteran or “new”?

That's a good example. :up: