BXProject

[Philhod]

If it's written, I will eventually find it....,and then I'll know.

[docchevron132]

It is written
"There is a lot of shit that we dont understand, live with it".

[Bx Bandit]

but whats actually real is only ever determined by our thoughts, therefore external reality is still in the mind, since it's how WE process it that makes anything real, or not.

Perhaps it depoends on what you define as relaity, but as an example of my previous point on this:

Suppose there is a red button, is reality that 'IT IS RED' or 'I SEE IT AS RED'?

You are saying the latter - it's what's in your head right? But what about a colourblind person who see's it has grey?

[mat_the_cat]

And what about in the dark when you can't see it all - does it still exist?

[Philhod]

And what about in the dark when you can't see it all - does it still exist?

If it's not the U/V I bet that's when the button will go pink.

[docchevron132]

Ah but we only determine it as red sur to the way our eyes process reflection..

So, ya know, in external reality red may not look anything like what we thikn of as red.

[Bx Bandit]

Ah but we only determine it as red sur to the way our eyes process reflection..

So, ya know, in external reality red may not look anything like what we thikn of as red.

Well...........yes. But....if we all agree that it's red, then it's red right? Irrespective of what red is or means, we give something a label (like colour='red' or 'made of wood'). If we know that a rose is 'red' - or a colour we percieve to be red then it is for all intents and purposes red. But if a colour blind bloke comes along and says well, it looks like a shade of grey to me, then ok, his reality is that it's grey, ours is that it's a shade of red. But, by virtue of the fact that anyone without a sight defect sees 'red', then by all accounts it IS red. Colour blind bloke sees grey, but it ain't, it's red.

That probably borders the realms of what is considered to be 'normal' and what is abnormal but you get my drift?

[Philhod]

So! I take then, that if a totally blind man sees red, it's only when he gets annoyed.
Other than that red is whatever he wants it to be.

Sort of, that feels blue to me.

Or even Pink is the new red

[docchevron132]

no no, see, ok, think of the brain as a computer program right.
So, if you have a colour monitor (eye) then you'll see red, but if you're colour blind (monochrome monitor) then you'll see a shade of grey, BUT the actual is the same right?
But it isn't, it's only red to us because we are programed to dicipher the reflrction that way, the clour blind bloke deciphers it as grey, so to him, his reality is, it's grey, but he's just as right as we are for seeing it another shade.

[Philhod]

A question of making the right waves

[Fish_Botherer]

...he's just as right as we are for seeing it another shade.

From my experience of once living with an artist, there's apparently no such thing as red - it's crimson, cerise, scarlet etc.etc. ad infinitum. What's more, two different artists rarely agree. No profound point intended, just an observation.

[docchevron132]

/\ see, does prove the point though, it's all perception from within.
What I see as red is probably not what you see as red, and so on, it's all from within!

[Fish_Botherer]

This has for some reason put me in mind of one of them thar nasty psychology experiments that I studied years back.

A physiologist raised kittens in an environment where there weren't any horizontal lines to be seen - just vertical ones. When they were moved to a different environment where there were horizontal bars to trip over at low level, the little mites repeatedly tripped over them.

The bars were real, but the kittens just couldn't perceive them....

[docchevron132]

proves further that we are only as good as our total mass of experience then!

[Way2go]

no no, see, ok, think of the brain as a computer program right.
So, if you have a colour monitor (eye) then you'll see red, but if you're colour blind (monochrome monitor) then you'll see a shade of grey, BUT the actual is the same right?
But it isn't, it's only red to us because we are programed to dicipher the reflrction that way, the clour blind bloke deciphers it as grey, so to him, his reality is, it's grey, but he's just as right as we are for seeing it another shade.

Mmnh.............not usually an absence of colour but it is a very rare form, people who are colour blind DO see in colour but transpose certain colours due to defects in the red-green cones or blue cones in the eye. Working as an electronics engineer in a big company initially we had colour vision tests as part of mandatory medicals to make sure we didn't read resistor colour codes etcetera wrongly and cause things to let the smoke out!

[Philhod]

Still holds true. You will not be accepted as an apprentice electrician anywhere in UK if you are tested colourblind.

Anyway I agree with you there Doc, we are the sum of our total experience and therefore will view almost anything differently.
Which makes sites like this so interesting, because if you accept that. it means that some our previous experiences must coincide. somewhere.............. perhaps on a different plane?

[Father Ted]

I are logging in from work. This is the only page that ISNT blocked out of the "active topics".
Cheers chaps, you must be the moct foul mouthed peopel I know.

[Philhod]

fame at last

[Bx Bandit]

I do get you Doc, honestly I do and yes, what you may see as a certain shade of red may differ from mine but at the end, we agree we both see it as red - hence the 'internal' version of reality, or perception I guess it really is.

So, if you get the whole world who can see and split them into people with normal sight and people with 'colour blindness'.

For arguements sake, say 1% of people are colourblind and 99% are not. Then 99% of people are going to see red and 1% grey (or whatever they see). Is it not possible to infer that the object is actually red because
a)all people without colour blindness say Red and
b)colour blindness is a well known medical condition that states this small group of people see colours differently,
ergo 99% AND normal eyesight says it IS red.

Yes, each person has his/her own reality that interprets red slightly differently, and those 'in the wrong' see grey, but the 'norm' i.e. 99% sees red, so one can argue, well, yes, the item is infact red. The reality is, that it's red.

Perhaps red is a bad example. To say 'A xantia is shit' is far more subjective (see where I'm heading here....? ) so is that reality or not?

Another example: Anyone with eyesight see's the sun. Anyone who is blind doesn't. What's the reality?

Oh and Father really - what did you expect?

[docchevron132]

but we only call red , er , red, because we were taught that it is red, it could just as easily be green, pink, or any other colour.
Trying to avoid swearing to keep this page accessable to Marty!

to say a Xantia is S..er. rubbish, is just a term of language that we again invented and corrupted.

So, yeah, whilst there is internal and external reality, at base, the only actual reality tha matters is the internal one.
Stuff that matters to you like.
Ok, a blind doesn't see the sun, but can feel it's being.
Like, heat and such.

Does that it make it less real to him?
But equally, if he had never been taught anything about the solar system, and the sun, would it even matter?