What is the real color of the apple?

So what's really going on?

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Iwannaplato
Posts: 6591
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 10:55 pm

Re: What is the real color of the apple?

Post by Iwannaplato »

Skepdick wrote: Sun May 08, 2022 5:22 pm
Iwannaplato wrote: Sun May 08, 2022 5:21 pm Also could you link me to where those terms are used. I googled some and then Google Scholared them and couldn't find references. I get they haven't trickled down to popular use, but where are they used? And mainly, in what model?
They aren't used in a model. They are used informally.

https://twitter.com/keithfrankish/statu ... JOMt6KpZwg
So, I am outdated in my worldview because Keith Frankish on Twitter on May first this year has additional terms that are used informally. It's true, I don't have a Twitter account so perhaps the google algorithms don't show me much from there. Fine, I am outdated. I see that Keith Frankish is a philosopher and at a glance seems to have interesting ideas. Thanks for that. But come on man. 'Wow' and I am outdated. I just searched on his website for those terms and got no results - i didn't get qualia either, so his search function may not be good. Mind works however, so perhaps there is no paper or blog entry there on these terms. But somehow the reference to show I am outdated is a single entry on Twitter and his own website doesn't seem to have them. Could this perhaps be something new he is working on? Maybe, if he isn't you, he would have introduced the terms without trying to get a leg up on my back.

So how do these 'things' relate to my or our position(s)?
Skepdick
Posts: 14347
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: What is the real color of the apple?

Post by Skepdick »

Iwannaplato wrote: Sun May 08, 2022 5:41 pm So, I am outdated in my worldview because Keith Frankish on Twitter on May first this year has additional terms that are used informally. It's true, I don't have a Twitter account so perhaps the google algorithms don't show me much from there. Fine, I am outdated. I see that Keith Frankish is a philosopher and at a glance seems to have interesting ideas. Thanks for that. But come on man. 'Wow' and I am outdated. I just searched on his website for those terms and got no results - i didn't get qualia either, so his search function may not be good. Mind works however, so perhaps there is no paper or blog entry there on these terms. But somehow the reference to show I am outdated is a single entry on Twitter and his own website doesn't seem to have them. Could this perhaps be something new he is working on? Maybe, if he isn't you, he would have introduced the terms without trying to get a leg up on my back.
By virtue of the vocabulary existing outside of your awareness your view is outdated.
By virtue of you using a poorer vocabulary when a richer one exists your view is restricted.

The popularity; or recency of the vocabulary is immaterial when the vocabulary is demonstrably richer and more expressive.

You can say more! This is a factual observation - it has nothing to do with "get a leg up on your back."
Iwannaplato wrote: Sun May 08, 2022 5:41 pm So how do these 'things' relate to my or our position(s)?
You are surprised by the "idiosyncratic" use of words. Surprise is a measure of new information.

Your surprise indicates that you learned something new - most people would say that learning new things is a good thing, yet you have defaulted to critique, not praise having discovered a novel use of words.

Confusion being the default outcome of human communication - skillfull conmmnicators posess the ability to navigate the mess irrespective of the idoosyncratic use of words. It's basic code-switching.

Peddling normative use of language is just conservativism dressed up as philosophy. Language evolves in real time - quit pulling up the handbrake!
User avatar
bahman
Posts: 8791
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2016 3:52 pm

Re: What is the real color of the apple?

Post by bahman »

Iwannaplato wrote: Sun May 08, 2022 4:43 pm
bahman wrote: Sat May 07, 2022 9:05 pm Think of an apple. The light reflects from it and hits the retina and disappears. Electrons are released as the result. The rest is a chain electric pulse that reaches the brain. And the subject of experience, quale, is formed there. Quale is either an electromagnetic field that is directly experienced by the mind or it is something that is created by the subconscious mind/minds (that is the subconscious mind that creates dreams so it has the capacity to create the reality that we experience when we are awake too). Either way, the real color of the apple is not what we experience since even the light that is reflected from the apple is quale this quale disappears when it hit the retina.
It's a very odd use of the word 'quale' if it is referring to something 'reflected from the apple that disappears when it hits the retina'.
I should have said: "... even if the light that is reflected from the apple is quale...".
Iwannaplato wrote: Sun May 08, 2022 4:43 pm That would be something precisel NOT EXPERIENCED, EXTERNAL TO MIND. It might triggers what most people would call qualia. So, right there you are using quale in such an idiosyncratic way this will lead to a lot of confusion, I would guess.
Isn't qualia the plural of quale?
Iwannaplato wrote: Sun May 08, 2022 4:43 pm Second: qualia (now in the mind) either are electromagnetic fields experienced by the mind or something that is experienced by the mind (subconscious).
That is what I wrote: "Quale is either an electromagnetic field that is directly experienced by the mind or it is something that is created by the subconscious mind/minds.".
Iwannaplato wrote: Sun May 08, 2022 4:43 pm I think it is better to just conlude that qualia are a facet of mind. Otherwise they become something external to mind experienced by mind (and via what senses)?
We can think of both materialism (monism) and substance dualism (where there are two substances, mind and qualia in which the mind directly causes and experiences qualia. I think you are talking about materialism when you say that qualia are a facet of the mind. Qualia in this case could be the electromagnetic waves or something else generated by the brain. I personally believe in substance dualism in which the conscious mind experiences what is caused by other minds (so-called subconscious minds). Either way, one can show the color of the apple is not what we experience.
User avatar
bahman
Posts: 8791
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2016 3:52 pm

Re: What is the real color of the apple?

Post by bahman »

Skepdick wrote: Sun May 08, 2022 4:26 pm The question doesn't even make sense to a model dependent realist.
How so?
Skepdick wrote: Sun May 08, 2022 4:26 pm One can take any term (blue, orange, tree, cloud, planet, beer, chicken) and ostensively define it to be the "real color of an apple".

That's how semiosis works.
I am trying to say that the subject of experience is different from what is reflected from the apple.
Skepdick
Posts: 14347
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: What is the real color of the apple?

Post by Skepdick »

bahman wrote: Sun May 08, 2022 10:45 pm I am trying to say that the subject of experience is different from what is reflected from the apple.
How would you come to know that? The subject of experience is all you have access to.

You don't have access to "that which is reflected from the apple".
User avatar
bahman
Posts: 8791
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2016 3:52 pm

Re: What is the real color of the apple?

Post by bahman »

Skepdick wrote: Sun May 08, 2022 10:47 pm
bahman wrote: Sun May 08, 2022 10:45 pm I am trying to say that the subject of experience is different from what is reflected from the apple.
How would you come to know that? The subject of experience is all you have access to.

You don't have access to "that which is reflected from the apple".
Even if the electromagnetic waves that are reflected from the apple are qualia the frequency of the light is much higher than the typical frequency in the brain. Red light has a frequency of 4*10^14 Hz whereas the gamma band which is the highest frequency band in the brain is 80-150 Hz.
Age
Posts: 20043
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: What is the real color of the apple?

Post by Age »

bahman wrote: Sun May 08, 2022 3:11 pm
Age wrote: Sun May 08, 2022 12:52 am
bahman wrote: Sat May 07, 2022 9:05 pm Think of an apple. The light reflects from it and hits the retina and disappears. Electrons are released as the result. The rest is a chain electric pulse that reaches the brain. And the subject of experience, quale, is formed there. Quale is either an electromagnetic field that is directly experienced by the mind or it is something that is created by the subconscious mind/minds (that is the subconscious mind that creates dreams so it has the capacity to create the reality that we experience when we are awake too). Either way, the real color of the apple is not what we experience since even the light that is reflected from the apple is quale this quale disappears when it hit the retina.
How would ANY of 'you', human beings, even KNOW what the 'real' color of 'an apple' IS?

NONE of 'you' can. So, how could a 'logical' question be asked in relation to, 'What is the 'real' color of 'an apple'?'
My point is that we cannot know. Do you agree or disagree?
I SAID, "NONE of 'you', human beings, could KNOW'.

Did you REALLY 'need' to CLARIFY, with me, here?

And, if your REAL 'point' is that 'you' can NOT know what the 'real' colour of 'an apple' is, then WHY pose this thread's question the way you did here?
popeye1945
Posts: 2119
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2021 2:12 am

Re: What is the real color of the apple?

Post by popeye1945 »

Yes, red is a subjective experience, in reality, it is a light frequency, that frequency is red to you because of your biological state at any given time. Change one's biology and perhaps you change one's perceptions, thus red maybe some other color to a different biology or different state of biology. There is no color in the physical world outside of what is experienced by ones biology, in other words red as meaning as an experience is the property of a conscious subject and never the real or apparently real world.
Iwannaplato
Posts: 6591
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 10:55 pm

Re: What is the real color of the apple?

Post by Iwannaplato »

bahman wrote: Sun May 08, 2022 10:26 pm
That would be something precisel NOT EXPERIENCED, EXTERNAL TO MIND. It might triggers what most people would call qualia. So, right there you are using quale in such an idiosyncratic way this will lead to a lot of confusion, I would guess.
Isn't qualia the plural of quale?
Sure, but the issue had nothing to do with singular or plural. In your model the quale never was in or part of a mind. It bounced off the retina. That's very different from everyone else's meaning when they refer to qualia or to each quale.
That is what I wrote: "Quale is either an electromagnetic field that is directly experienced by the mind or it is something that is created by the subconscious mind/minds.".
Yes.
Iwannaplato wrote: Sun May 08, 2022 4:43 pm I think it is better to just conlude that qualia are a facet of mind. Otherwise they become something external to mind experienced by mind (and via what senses)?
I think you are talking about materialism when you say that qualia are a facet of the mind.[/quote]I'm not a materialist. I don't think that word has any meaning. Material things include new things with new or less properties all the time. If it is real it gets called physical (in physicalism) or material (in materialism). I don't think the term has any meaning. It is a monism, yes. I'm agnostic in relation to monism vs, dualism, vs...whatever.
Iwannaplato
Posts: 6591
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 10:55 pm

Re: What is the real color of the apple?

Post by Iwannaplato »

Skepdick wrote: Sun May 08, 2022 5:50 pm By virtue of the vocabulary existing outside of your awareness your view is outdated.
That's true of everyone, if we are including information in tiny corners of the web.
You could have said...
here's some interesting terms that I like/think clarify things/you might find useful. And then explained how it related.
Instead you talk about me and be shocked (wow) that I did not know everything in every corner of the internet like you presumably do.
Iwannaplato wrote: Sun May 08, 2022 5:41 pm So how do these 'things' relate to my or our position(s)?
You are surprised by the "idiosyncratic" use of words. Surprise is a measure of new information.
I didn't say I was surprised by that philosopher's use of those terms or yours. I did talk about bahman's referring to a quale that is precisely not experienced and bounced off the retina. You are making stuff up.
Your surprise indicates that you learned something new - most people would say that learning new things is a good thing, yet you have defaulted to critique, not praise having discovered a novel use of words.
I thanked you for introducing me to the philosopher and said he seemed interesting. I also looked for more information about those terms, but googling the philosoher's name, finding his website and then searching in his website for those terms. Which I told you.

Then I asked you to relate to terms to what bahman and I were discussing, since you responded to a post of mine in that discussion.
You have yet to do that. That was curiosity about the terms. That was me hoping you would use those terms in a discussion related to the thread. That was a question you could have answered but keep not answering.

I exhibited a lot of curiosity and relayed that to you. You aren't even good at being an ass. Let me give you a hint. Read the things and people you want to mock. I know it takes work away from simply labelling and cut and pasting.
Confusion being the default outcome of human communication - skillfull conmmnicators posess the ability to navigate the mess irrespective of the idoosyncratic use of words. It's basic code-swithing.
Peddling normative use of language is just conservativism dressed up as philosophy. Language evolves in real time - quit pulling up the handbrake!
I told bahman that his use was idiosyncratic because that might be useful to him. I can communicate fine with people who use terms differently including bahman.
I think it is important to point out these things and then we can move forward OR and here's the big OR there bahman might say he meant something different. Which he did.

You could join a discussion with new information and then integrate that in the discussion, like an adult. Or you can play little dominance games.
You're being a dick, but you did warn us, and now I'll just ignore you. If you are interested in those terms and actually understand their use, perhaps you will introduce them in sentences somewhere. Who knows?
User avatar
Sculptor
Posts: 8479
Joined: Wed Jun 26, 2019 11:32 pm

Re: What is the real color of the apple?

Post by Sculptor »

Depends on what you mean by "real".
All colour is mental phenomena, so even if you can nominate a colour you can never know if the apple appears the same to others as it does to you.
We can be sure that other animals give completely different values to colours than humans and we know that different humans have different perceptions of colour.
We laughingly call this "colour blindness" when in truth it is nothing of the kind, but the arrogance of the majority who like to think of others as deficient in some ways, yet even taken from the POV of some humans, the "normal" colour vision is also deficient as compared to some Africans who can see colours that the average Western is blind to.
But even were we call to agree about colours we could never know that our internal perception of colour was the same as any other despite agreeing in naming colour.

What science can agree about is that what is "real" about colour is the wavelength of light reflected from different objects.
But for human perception colour does not respect that and is continually making adjustments for different lighting conditions. If you have ever seen a photo of a sunset and wondered why it is just do damned RED, when on the day you took it the sky was not like that - the sad fact is that the brain deletes extreme conditions are readjusts perception.
You may also have seen photos taken in the home under normal incandescent light, which appears as a washed out yellowy mess. The camera never lies; the brain makes the adjustment, applying filters to normalise the colour balance.
Skepdick
Posts: 14347
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: What is the real color of the apple?

Post by Skepdick »

Iwannaplato wrote: Mon May 09, 2022 12:00 pm That's true of everyone, if we are including information in tiny corners of the web.
Precisely.
Iwannaplato wrote: Mon May 09, 2022 12:00 pm You could have said...
here's some interesting terms that I like/think clarify things/you might find useful. And then explained how it related.
Instead you talk about me and be shocked (wow) that I did not know everything in every corner of the internet like you presumably do.
I could have said anything, so I said what I said. Did I say anything that wasn't true?
Iwannaplato wrote: Mon May 09, 2022 12:00 pm I didn't say I was surprised by that philosopher's use of those terms or yours. I did talk about bahman's referring to a quale that is precisely not experienced and bounced off the retina. You are making stuff up.
Is this you? Finding use of words idiosyncratic. Peculiar. Unusual. Surprising. Or any of the other synonyms I could've used for the experience it implies.
Iwannaplato wrote: Sun May 08, 2022 4:43 pm So, right there you are using quale in such an idiosyncratic way this will lead to a lot of confusion, I would guess.
Iwannaplato wrote: Mon May 09, 2022 12:00 pm I thanked you for introducing me to the philosopher and said he seemed interesting. I also looked for more information about those terms, but googling the philosoher's name, finding his website and then searching in his website for those terms. Which I told you.

Then I asked you to relate to terms to what bahman and I were discussing, since you responded to a post of mine in that discussion.
You have yet to do that. That was curiosity about the terms. That was me hoping you would use those terms in a discussion related to the thread. That was a question you could have answered but keep not answering.
You found bahman's words idiosyncratic. Did you not?
Iwannaplato wrote: Mon May 09, 2022 12:00 pm You could join a discussion with new information and then integrate that in the discussion, like an adult. Or you can play little dominance games.
You're being a dick, but you did warn us, and now I'll just ignore you. If you are interested in those terms and actually understand their use, perhaps you will introduce them in sentences somewhere. Who knows?
I am being a dick. To somebody who's trying to frame themselves as the victim in a dominance game.

So while we are on topic... counter-factuals are factual as qualia.
Iwannaplato wrote: Sun May 08, 2022 4:43 pm It's a very odd use of the word 'quale' if it is referring to something 'reflected from the apple that disappears when it hits the retina'. That would be something precisel NOT EXPERIENCED, EXTERNAL TO MIND.
You wouldn't be able to talk about something not-experienced if you hadn't qualitatively experienced it.
User avatar
bahman
Posts: 8791
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2016 3:52 pm

Re: What is the real color of the apple?

Post by bahman »

popeye1945 wrote: Mon May 09, 2022 5:59 am Yes, red is a subjective experience, in reality, it is a light frequency, that frequency is red to you because of your biological state at any given time. Change one's biology and perhaps you change one's perceptions, thus red maybe some other color to a different biology or different state of biology. There is no color in the physical world outside of what is experienced by ones biology, in other words red as meaning as an experience is the property of a conscious subject and never the real or apparently real world.
How do you know?
User avatar
bahman
Posts: 8791
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2016 3:52 pm

Re: What is the real color of the apple?

Post by bahman »

Sculptor wrote: Mon May 09, 2022 12:42 pm Depends on what you mean by "real".
All colour is mental phenomena, so even if you can nominate a colour you can never know if the apple appears the same to others as it does to you.
We can be sure that other animals give completely different values to colours than humans and we know that different humans have different perceptions of colour.
We laughingly call this "colour blindness" when in truth it is nothing of the kind, but the arrogance of the majority who like to think of others as deficient in some ways, yet even taken from the POV of some humans, the "normal" colour vision is also deficient as compared to some Africans who can see colours that the average Western is blind to.
But even were we call to agree about colours we could never know that our internal perception of colour was the same as any other despite agreeing in naming colour.

What science can agree about is that what is "real" about colour is the wavelength of light reflected from different objects.
But for human perception colour does not respect that and is continually making adjustments for different lighting conditions. If you have ever seen a photo of a sunset and wondered why it is just do damned RED, when on the day you took it the sky was not like that - the sad fact is that the brain deletes extreme conditions are readjusts perception.
You may also have seen photos taken in the home under normal incandescent light, which appears as a washed out yellowy mess. The camera never lies; the brain makes the adjustment, applying filters to normalise the colour balance.
OK.
User avatar
Sculptor
Posts: 8479
Joined: Wed Jun 26, 2019 11:32 pm

Re: What is the real color of the apple?

Post by Sculptor »

bahman wrote: Mon May 09, 2022 5:58 pm
Sculptor wrote: Mon May 09, 2022 12:42 pm Depends on what you mean by "real".
All colour is mental phenomena, so even if you can nominate a colour you can never know if the apple appears the same to others as it does to you.
We can be sure that other animals give completely different values to colours than humans and we know that different humans have different perceptions of colour.
We laughingly call this "colour blindness" when in truth it is nothing of the kind, but the arrogance of the majority who like to think of others as deficient in some ways, yet even taken from the POV of some humans, the "normal" colour vision is also deficient as compared to some Africans who can see colours that the average Western is blind to.
But even were we call to agree about colours we could never know that our internal perception of colour was the same as any other despite agreeing in naming colour.

What science can agree about is that what is "real" about colour is the wavelength of light reflected from different objects.
But for human perception colour does not respect that and is continually making adjustments for different lighting conditions. If you have ever seen a photo of a sunset and wondered why it is just do damned RED, when on the day you took it the sky was not like that - the sad fact is that the brain deletes extreme conditions are readjusts perception.
You may also have seen photos taken in the home under normal incandescent light, which appears as a washed out yellowy mess. The camera never lies; the brain makes the adjustment, applying filters to normalise the colour balance.
OK.
OK???
Post Reply