the way in which our eyes translate different types of light into a viewable image might change or distort the actual appearence of color…
Colors may not even exist…
Is anyone familliar with this hypothesis?
I am familliar wit hthe facts that everything we experience is a facsimilie generated by our biology, but is it posssible that our world is very very different from how we percieve it?
Is a good article/essay or whatever on the subject.
Anyway, it certainly is true that despite the fact that we evolved an ability to sense colors, that what I call “RED” you may call green, blue or pink. but the fact is we can all agree on the ‘label’ and we can all diffrentitate it from a different color such as ‘blue’.
Personally I expect that what I see as green, you see as green, though. Self-awareness has been shown to be extremely valuable to creatures, the more aware I am of myself the more I can model the thoughts/beliefs/potential actions of other brains, (this is demonstratable in creatures with different levels of awarenes and different levels of awareness of the brains of others*!)
If I viewed green as you viewed green, i’d have a better basis to judge your potential actions, feelings, whatever. Which is the whole point of being self-aware, the ability to meta-model other brains. It wouldn’t really make a whole lot of sense, otherwise.
Ah… yes. Which science has been demonstrating for the last few hundred years? The point about crystals which are mainly empty space, we see them as solid. We can find out about the universe outside of how we normally percieve it.
i agree that differentiation is the only thing which we really experience…
I keep having visions and thoughts where in the extreme, you see the world as some screwed up alien might…
Not only colors but shapes, and the very fabric of existence might be differentiated in any number of ways through the senses and explained to our blind minds…
I know that this is improbable because of our similar construction… but it still leaves a disturbing gape between my reality, your reality and the reality.
I’ll probably read that essay… i came up with the different color theory at a very early age… it should be interesting…
the hardest rock is almost entirely empty space, tiny particles so widely spaced that its totally insane. Our hands are also like that, so we see rocks as solid, if we were the size of rock molecules, we wouldn’t have to deal with ‘solid’ rocks.
there could be things so strange and ungraspable that no mind could ever understand it properly about the universe, it just doens’t justify postulating gods or whatever.
well no one said the G word lol
I know, but people use it as an excuse to suggest crazy insane things, and god is the most common of those, but by no means the only one. People incoherently talking about energies and psychics and all manner of idiot things.
funny how different you and i think…
I would use it as an example to refute normal things 
Lots of people like using their own ignorance as an excuse to postulate emotionally compelling ideas. I’m sure many of us don’t truly understand how a tv works, or even the physics envolved in using a pair of binoculars, that does not give us any* right to start postulating insane things about energies or psychics or magic. the only justification there is to say is; “I’m not sure, we don’t have enough evidencee to say one way or another”
It doesn’t justify saying “Well then the sun doesn’t exist because we may not be able to truly understand”
well because a dog doesn’t understand genetics doesn’t mean genetics is somehow magical, the dog wouldn’t be justified to postulate that genes were truly little self-aware/consciousness alien organisms, just like we’re not justified in making stupid claims about emotional compelling shit because humans don’t understand the entire universe.
Its idiotic and anyone who does it clearly doesn’t understand statistical probability, which doesn’t dissapear simply because it can’t envoke certainty.
…that’s your opinion which you are totally entitled to, but just as the unknown universe may vary widely to the part we are in: have you not considered that humans may vary widely in the experiences that they have - both, being so weird as to be unimaginable in their very concept and existence, but they still exist regardless of what any of us may say…
No, its not just my opinion that statistical probability isn’t invalidated by its inability to envoke mathematical certainty. It really, just is not my opinion at all, has absolutely nothing to do with that.
I guess I was trying to say in a nice way ‘Fuck scientific evidence to uphold what we believe to be so/true, and to denounce that which it cannot explain/validate’
There are still things we cannot validate/work out/conceptualise, yet - why would a small part of humanity be any different as to not fit any scientific moulds?
We call them hunter-gatherers who have stead largely unchanged since our prehistoric ancestors. And even they use science/technology to their advantage.
Sure they do! Isn’t that what separated man from beast: the ability to manipulate the world around us by scientific means?
Still doesn’t explain that small disparate group of unexplainables though! 
seems like you got yourself a pet peeve…
I would say with confidence, “the sun might not exist as we percieve it”
erm… even the ancient greeks knew this.
Almost certainly. The more science you learn the more you realise that our perception of the world is really a superficial abstraction that corresponds just enough with reality to enable us to survive in our respective environments. Only naive sheeple think that our perceptions accurately inform of us of ontological truths about the external world.