THE PEN IS BLUE!!
What say you!?
there is no such thing as “the” definitive pen. And since it does not exist, it is indeed blue.
which pen ?
i didn’t hear you say anything…
most English speaking humans say “you” when communicating directly towards another.
i see what i see.
what is, is.
a pen is a pen.
a red pen is a red pen.
a visual representation of a pen is a visual representation of a pen.
it is what it is.
etc.
the pen is red.
A better statement would have been that the visualized pen featured within the picture is blue. But that is besides the point.
No, it would appear to me to be red. I experience the pen (picture of the assumed pen, but semantics here) to be of the general colour red (with obvious other colours). Is the pen red? Yes. If someone else sees the pen as blue then the pen is blue? The idea that the pen can change colours is rediculous, because there isn’t a pen. Just a sensation of a pen, which we interpret differently based on subjective experience.
This sentence is blue.
For any organism to exist in any environment there must be some mechanism in the organism that can correctly sense what there is in the environment that it can use for fuel, at least, and fuel plus procreational possibilites on a larger scale of organic complexity.
If I cannot look at a blue pen and find it to be blue and pen, according to agreed upon descriptions of such items, how could I trust my senses to give me the bare facts about what to eat or what to have sex with? 
Do the senses lie? Is there a reality unknown to the senses? Moot questions before the fact of a necessity for survival! Only impaired organisms, or organisms with impaired brains, where reality is sifted from senses as information about organic necessities, can doubt the validity of senses in giving accurate information about what lies outside the body.
i say duh…
But is the pen objectively red or is its “redness” a property arising only in virtue of sense-perception?
Heavenly demonic clearly has a rational mind.
I’ve stated fact without vagueness, and wanted to see that others are rational like I am.
Then maybe you should get your eyes checked.
So you say that because you experience it as red, it must be red? Suppose you were correct. Why would your experiences be more rational? Nobody said that the pen changed colours. Rationality simply tells us that it’s a blue pen.
True, I correct myself, it is a sensation of a blue pen. It is a picture, with a pen, and the pen is blue. But I don’t see what makes you sense redness.
I’m glad you recognize the truth, even though your justification confuses me. It may be a picture of a pen, without a definition attached. But it is clearly (read “definitively”) a picture of a pen. And it’s clearly blue.
-Oni Omega-
Your “x=x” dichotomy generates no new information. Is this an artistic exposition(?), because you end it by stating fiction.
Ierrellus
Good insight as usual. Though I’m not sure what it has to do with this thread. Clearly the senses of animals are not what I’ve brought up. I suppose my showing a picture could make you ponder over senses.
What does this debate within yourself arise from? What red pen are you talking about? Clearly not the one represented here?
no they were merely absolutist correct statements and the last was relativistic.
i made those statements to tell you pen is definatley not blue the pen is definatley a pen. stating it as something else is an obvious untruth.
of course in relativity for the sake of efficient communication the most accurate implication with as little effort made to acheive the objective is made.
and thus i say the pen is red, though all such statements are fiction the imply would come across, wether you understand i had yet to see.
a longer version of “the pen is red”.
i see what would be largely regarded as a red pen by most people i cummunicate with.
Yeah…
The pen is red…
The (article) pen (subject) is (verb) red (adjective).
The pen in the picture was red so it’s reasonable to say that it’s red. We can reasonably assume that the statement is refering to the picture and that we are not being deceived by the picture. So, once again, the pen is indeed red.
I say the “pen” in question is a poor representation of a pen in my mind. The picture representation doesn’t do justice to my identification of what a pen is because i can only directly experience it visually through a picture of the pen in question online. If i were to see this pen directly and sense it while it is in front of me i could make a better answer because then I’d know if it was truly a pen first of all, and second if the redness of it would match my idea of redness.
I could call it a shade of red but not red in red’s entirety.
If your ‘blueness’ means my ‘redness’ then i’d say yes!
Not all experiences are rational. I could have been trained to label ‘green’ for universal red as a child, would i be wrong? To those who learned it differently yes perhaps. I could call that pen green and it would make sense to me because my ‘red’ would look like universal green and ‘green’ universal red.
Can your blue pen be agreed upon?
Can our red be agreed upon?
Do the colors change when we label them differently?
Nah the pen is blue - you’re just seeing red!
grrrrr
kp
A pen has emotions? Since clearly the pen is a rose colored on its shell, the blue may be refering to the ink. Blue ink would indeed make it a blue pen. Yet if the ink is not blue then I would have to surmise that you believe it is a sad pen or your versions of colors are out of whack due to some head trauma or illness.
At this point I would of course hold your hand and gently walk you to the nearest pyschiatrist and or doctor. No please, I do not want to know its name , there is no obligation to introduce me to it either.
I like what Kriswest had to say.
I have no idea the color of the pen’s ink or of its frame. I do know that the pen’s frame appears to be what I know as the color “red,” as I am looking at my computer screen now.
What do you mean when you say:
?
I don’t know what quality of the pen you are addressing when you call it blue.
I think you got it. You can’t see what makes me sense redness, because it is within my subjective experience to sense it as red. The whole point is that our conceptions of reality differ, but these do not change reality but merely enforce the idea that interpretationis the key to reality… not realization of the objective.
I say the pen is both blue and red, depending on which quality you´re referring to (its external appearance or writing colour). Shared agreement of the colour depends on a consensus established in language. We´re all pretty similar organisms and perceive things in similar ways. But, as I was alluding to earlier, this does not mean the pen in the photo is objectively red. Our sense-dependent perceptions of reality may not capture the ´real´world.
Well I’m not seeing red. I’m seeing blue. But then I don’t know if you’re referring to someone else.
Kriswest is another person to correct me in my explaination. I state a short phrase, which like many short phrases, needs more specification on the subject when called in question.
Certainly, when I talk about the blue pen in the picture, I mean the frame of it. I’m not certain what the ink looks like or if it’s capable of emotions. But I factually realize that it’s blue in the picture.
Kriswest suggests that I have psychological problems due to my rationalization. But I think vice-versa. If Kriswest sees a rose coloured pen in the picture, she obviously has her colours mixed up.
In fact, I already have several people in agreement with me for justification. They all use different methods of reasoning, but they prove good reason by their ability to all come to the same conclusion. Krossie, heavenly_demonic, aporia. Would you, Kriswest, condemn us all to perscribed psychological problems?
Even bluechicken may not fully agree with me, but bluechicken admits that her/his perceptions might differ.
Krossie, heavenly_demonic, and aporia- would you help me show everyone our rational point of view? I want them to benefit from our keen objectivity.
Zak- I’m glad you have some understanding of language structure. But you’re clearly seeing the pen wrong.
fuse- I am addressing the frame of the pen. If your eyes or your screen are working improperly, I will be patient. Hopefully when you see it blue, your vision or screen will be healthy.
JoeTheMan- I’m sorry, I think your words are black at least on my screen. But it doesn’t matter to me.
I would take one willing volunteer to step forward as a special role in this exercise. Preferably someone whom hasn’t and doesn’t wish to partake in the discussion. I will give you a PM. When I post it on the board, you would verify that it’s the same as the PM I gave you. Thanks, any takers, if any.
The outer shell of the pen is red - the ink may well be blue: therefore, it could (potantially) be a blue pen.
Colour is determined by the wavelength of that colour, so the pen is red: because it cannot be anything else. How do you see blue? Do you have some sort of visual dysfunction?
I say that the pen seems red to me, and from that I conclude that your “blue” means my “red”.