My one line hypothesis is that we filter information a priori from an external energy source. Much like Schopenhauer's theory of Metaphysical Will in nature... . — 3017amen
the color wheel is just a reflection of the existence of a collectively consistent human qualia/emotive experience of the colors. So, please clarify what you mean by "nature of it's existence". We all already know that photo vibration frequency don't exist as colors any more than sound pressure waves do. Obviously, the existence is in the person's personal qualia reconstruction of "reality" which is, of course, a useful illusion as to modeling/abstracting upon the true physics of matter. So, what is your point?So sure red will convey excitement on a subconscious level, but unfortunately that tells us nothing about the nature of it's existence. — 3017amen
So, please clarify what you mean by "nature of it's existence". — Sir Philo Sophia
Existence is not a condition or a state of being, it is the phenomenon of being, itself. Something must exist in order to have a state of being, and if being is necessary in order for change to occur, then cause and effect is derived from and thus subordinate to the more fundamental phenomenon of existence. — 3017amen
3. The internal qualia projection of 'red' color is what we intuitively consider 'red' and that almost certainly exists only in our qualia projected internal reality, which is likely commonly shared b/c of common visual/mental systems genetic coding.
I'm starting to build a coherent hypothesis that qualia and emotive phenomenon are logically needed to optimally create and convey wisdom, but not at all needed to create data, info, or knowledge.
Are you asking us how to use the word colour, or how to use the word exist?
One or the other. — Banno
a. we actually see colors (colors exist)
b. we only think we see colors (colors do not exist) — Zelebg
c. We actually see colors, but they are properties of our visual system, not the objects or environment itself, although they are related to the reflectivity of electromagnetic radiation in the visible range. — Marchesk
c. We actually see colors, but they are properties of our visual system, not the objects or environment itself, although they are related to the reflectivity of electromagnetic radiation in the visible range.
I don't think that the experience of seeing color being an illusion makes sense. We are conscious of colors just like pains and smells. But those aren't real, meaning independent of an animal's perception.
So, in your terms, the OP was asking an easy, obvious, trivial non-question... right?
The more interesting, and non-trivial, question to me was how does our qualia of color (mentally) exist. — Sir Philo Sophia
has little to no survival value — 3017amen
color, where apparently other species only see in black/white/grey(? — 3017amen
I made it in a reply to @3017...So what claim do you want to make? — Zelebg
it is converted into some set of symbols, or say, some molecular structure, then the conclusion is colors do not actually exist, but we only perceive something else as if it is a color. — Zelebg
What exactly do you mean by “wisdom”? — Zelebg
I have been debating that with @Possibility on another thread, but we are currently stuck at "information". Once we clear that hurdle, we'll debate knowledge then get to le piece de resistance, 'wisdom'.
Darwin would answer that Humans do not need to perceive color for the Aesthetics, but do for the optimal survival. — Sir Philo Sophia
how would you say the colors we 'see' are ontologically "related to the reflectivity of electromagnetic radiation in the visible range"? — Sir Philo Sophia
Properties of our visual system. What kind of property, measured in what units, described in terms of what: charge, magnetism, force, attraction, distance, geometry, chemistry, computation, quantum mechanics...? — Zelebg
Does it make sense near the end of the first Matrix movie that Neo sees reality as a waterfall of symbols instead of colors and textures? — Zelebg
Do you not think if you want to claim that we see actual colors as colors, instead of something else that we only interpret as colors, requires this thing “color” to actually physically exist in space as some new unknown substance rather than property or side effect of something else? — Zelebg
a. we actually see colors (colors exist)
b. we only think we see colors (colors do not exist) — Zelebg
Ugghhh. Let me try. Imagine a metaphor with a computer, it is running a program that paints the whole screen yellow. We turn off the monitor and ask does color yellow exist in the computer?
That is how I understand the question, and my answer is no. Colors do not really exist in the brain where light waves are encoded from sensory input into a signal or whatever electrochemical type of abstract information. So color signals to become real or to exist per se as colors, an agent or “self” is necessary to decode, understand or perceive those signals as colors, while in reality colors might as well look like a monochrome waterfall of Matrix symbols.
One more thing. If you say colors do actually exist, then I think you in fact must be proposing a separate realm of existence for their being, some kind of parallel dimension, otherwise I don’t see how color properties can be justified as ‘actual’ rather than ‘virtual/abstract’. — Zelebg
What in the world is not clear about better vision being better than worse vision? — Zelebg
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.