[PenultimateManStanding]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('ashurbanipal', 'N')ot precisely. It's the conceivability of T' ridiculous that is the problem. The fact that we can conceive such a theory indicates that our commonsense epistemic notions about science aren't as well supported as we thought.

[ashurbanipal]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'T')he human mind is capable of conceiving all kinds of nonsense. Beware of theories, and don't build on junk.

[PenultimateManStanding]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('ashurbanipal', '
')How do we know that the ontological consequences of what we normally take to be correct isn't nonsense?

[ashurbanipal]

Of course, one would think that having the ontology completely incorrect would lead to problems. But there may well be a range--possibly an infinite range--of methods of "visualizing" ontology without upsetting our predictive power. All that's required is a model that has the same logical relations between observable parts.

[PenultimateManStanding]

Ontological seems to refer to issues of God's existence if you look it up on the The Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy:
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'I')n contrast, the ontological arguments are conceptual in roughly the following sense: just as the propositions constituting the concept of a bachelor imply that every bachelor is male, the propositions constituting the concept of God, according to the ontological argument, imply that God exists.

[eric_b]

There are no colors.

'We live in a world of pure energy and colorless substance' -Albert Hofmann

Seriously though, colors are quite subjective, and the eyes perception
of color is definitely not linear. For example, the eye's peak sensitivity (in
good light) is around 550 nm, which corresponds to green. The eye is
much less sensitive to color on either end of the spectrum, especially
blues (this can be measured). It's thought about only 1 or 2% of the color
receptors (cones) in the eye are sensitive to blue - the majority are sensitive
to red and green light.

Color is a bias... an illusion really, of the senses.

There are many colors that do not correspond to a given frequency of
light... for example purple is something you see when your blue and
red receptors are tickled, but not the green ones.

From this tiny slice of the electromagnetic spectrum we thus create our
visual reality.

THere's some evidence the entire RGB color scheme was something invented
by plants to lure and attract (and repulse) animals.

[PenultimateManStanding]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('eric_b', 'T')here are no colors.
- colors are quite subjective, and the eyes perception
of color is definitely not linear.

[eric_b]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('PenultimateManStanding', 'W')hat I mean by linear is that the qualities of the EM radiation tend off in two directions from wherever you are. The qualities are always either increasing or decreasing. One-dimensional properties are by definition linear.

[PenultimateManStanding]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('eric_b', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('PenultimateManStanding', 'W')hat I mean by linear is that the qualities of the EM radiation tend off in two directions from wherever you are. The qualities are always either increasing or decreasing. One-dimensional properties are by definition linear.

[PenultimateManStanding]

You guys seem to know something about this so here's a perhaps naive question about the physiology of color. We have receptors for red light (about 660 nm) and green light (550nm). If we see yellow light which is a pure spectral yellow of intermediate length, how can we pick it up since we don't have a receptor for that length? Red and green can add to give yellow, but how does yellow split to become red and green? How else could we see it?

[Andrew_S]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('SinisterBlueCat', 'I') knew a guy that was color blind...I mean completely without the ability to see any color at all, and his vision was unbelievable. Without the distraction of color he could easily see twice or three times as far as a normal person with 20/20 vision.

There is a guy, the original horsewhisper, Monte Roberts, who also has this condition. He has truely astonishing vision, but more amazing is he credits his lack of color vision with his ability to "hear" the subtle cues that horses give him.

[eric_b]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('PenultimateManStanding', 'Y')ou guys seem to know something about this so here's a perhaps naive question about the physiology of color. We have receptors for red light (about 660 nm) and green light (550nm). If we see yellow light which is a pure spectral yellow of intermediate length, how can we pick it up since we don't have a receptor for that length? Red and green can add to give yellow, but how does yellow split to become red and green? How else could we see it?

[eric_b]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('eric_b', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('PenultimateManStanding', '
')Again, not quite following you here. That circle of colors is just one way
to project all the visible colors, so of course it's going to be seamless...
that has to do with how it's mapped and not our perception.

[PenultimateManStanding]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('eric_b', '
')
Pen, I think we are arguing from different points of view.

You seem to be evaluating the RGB color wheel from an aesthetic point
of view... what I'm trying to say is that 'seamless, obvious circularity of
the colors' has to do with how it's mapped, and not our perception.

[ashurbanipal]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'I') can't favor using such a word in a discussion about science. Do scientists use the word, "ontological"? Whether they do or not, it fits right in with what you've been saying, just not with what I've been saying. Henceforth, I shall not use the word, "ontological."

[PenultimateManStanding]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('ashurbanipal', '
')Ontology is the study of existence.

[Doly]

PMS,

The circularity of colours happens because the eyes perceive only three colours, and the brain is hardwired to compare the relative stimulation of the three colours. There's a very good page explaining this here:


http://www.psych.ucalgary.ca/PACE/VA-LA ... eories.htm

[PenultimateManStanding]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Doly', '
')The circularity of colours happens because the eyes perceive only three colours, and the brain is hardwired to compare the relative stimulation of the three colours. There's a very good page explaining this here:

[PenultimateManStanding]

ahurbanipal, if one feels drawn to philosphy and is willing to do the enormous intellectual labor to understand it in it's complex and rich traditions, I'm sure there is much to be gained by it. The ontological proof for the existence of God lies behind the use of the word, I think, historically speaking. I don't accept such ideas as they are applied to either God or T' ridiculous. But how does one establish truth in this matter? That's a problem with philosophy, how do you set up falsifiability? How can you test these kinds of ideas?

[ashurbanipal]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'O')nly philosophy could set aside a special category for existence in order to keep it seperate from that which does not exist.