I am having a doubt... read the text below to understand...

A bottle of green color is kept in front of two persons, 'A' & 'B'. Both 'A' and 'B' will say-the bottle is of green color, Though 'A' doesn't know that how that color(of the bottle) is actually appearing to 'B'. The same case is with 'B' also.

Both the brains(of 'A' & 'B' respectively) will have an image 'a' and 'b' of the bottle respectively. It is not necessary that the color of the bottle in the image 'a' is the same of that to 'b'.

Basically I want to say that we don't know that what the other person is perceiving or what is the green(or any other) color is actually appearing to him/her. But as we learn from our childhood (about green color) we'll say that the bottle is of green color (though it may be appearing differently to different people). That specific frequency is of green color(green light) but the actual appearance may differ from person to person... brain to brain...

this can be extended... => color(as discussed above), shape(of the object)...
this also applies to the pitch of the sound...

I am not having any conclusion about this. Help me.

This doubt is of my own... please, before answering mention that you have understood the stuff written above and if possible just mention (in short) what did you understand.

thank you

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aniruddh Gopale

I am having a doubt...... read the text below to understand.....

A bottle of green color is kept in front of two persons, 'A' & 'B'. Both 'A' and 'B' will say-the bottle is of green color, Though 'A' doesn't know that how that color(of the bottle) is actually appearing to 'B'. The same case is with 'B' also.

Both the brains(of 'A' & 'B' respectively) will have an image 'a' and 'b' of the bottle respectively. It is not necessary that the color of the bottle in the image 'a' is the same of that to 'b'.

Basically i want to say that we don't know that what the other person is perceiving or what is the green(or any other) color is actually appearing to him/her. But as we learn from our childhood (about green color) we'll say that the bottle is of green color (though it may be appearing differently to different people). That specific frequency is of green color(green light) but the actual appearance may differ from person to person...... brain to brain......

this can be extended...=> color(as discussed above), shape(of the object)....
this also applies to the pitch of the sound....

I am not having any conclusion about this. Help me.

This doubt is of my own.......... please, before answering mention that you have understood the stuff written above and if possible just mention (in short) what did you understand.

thank you

---

Perhaps we could start with the argument for qualia.

Let us imagine that a person with normal vision viewing a bottle of green liquid under normal conditions. We can say the bottle and the liquid are made up of atoms, so there is a difference between the actual make up of the objects we are viewing and how they appear to us. We see a bottle with green liquid- we don't see atoms.

On this basis qualia are they way things appear to us. In other words, observation and experience are actually a subjective experience. So, as you point out, no two people can share the same experience. A's experience of the bottle must be slightly different to B's experience.

We can assume the atoms that make up a green liquid are not actually green. Viewing a green liquid causes us to see green because there are differences in wave lengths when it comes to light. Seeing red instead of green is a property of the wave length.

However, this is only the beginning our problems when it comes to a suitable explanation when looking at objects.

These frequencies interact with the various cells within our eyes causing chemical and electrical activity within the eye and within the brain. In other words, when we view a colour there is a whole lot of neural activity going on in the brain.

The interesting part is that this is all it really is; just a whole lot of chemical and neural activity. Nowhere inside the brain can we see anything resembling a bottle shape. Nowhere in the brain can we say the neurons are firing at a green colour. In other words, mental events are not the same as physical events.

This leads us further to believe that we must distinguish qualia from the physical objects we are looking at. There is no property that explains why a green liquid should be grouped by colour other than the explanation that green objects stimulate the same qualia in different individuals.


Of course many people would reject this explanation in favour of a reliable scientific account of colour perception. If you are interested I can try and give you the other side of the story.

Tut

I personally can not tell difference in blue and green. So it all looks different

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fr_Chuck

I personally can not tell difference in blue and green. So it all looks different

---

Hi Fr. Chuck.

From a scientific point of view we are all functionally different to some extent. For example, someone who are colour blind have some aspect of their eye physiology that is slightly different to the majority of the population.

Science would argue along the lines that mental states are noting more than physical states working in a functional way. So, if you wanted a scientific explanation for something like colour blindness, then you would invariably get a functionalist explanation.

Tut

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TUT317

Perhaps we could start off with the argument for qualia.

Let us imagine that a person with normal vision viewing a bottle of green liquid under normal conditions. We can say the bottle and the liquid are made up of atoms, so there is a difference between the actual make up of the objects we are viewing and how they appear to us. We see a bottle with green liquid- we don't see atoms.

On this basis qualia are they way things appear to us. In other words, observation and experience are actually a subjective experience. So, as you point out, no two people can share the same experience. A's experience of the bottle must be slightly different to B's experience.

We can assume the atoms that make up a green liquid are not actually green. Viewing a green liquid causes us to see green because there are differences in wave lengths when it comes to light. Seeing red instead of green is a property of the wave length.

However, this is only the beginning our problems when it comes to a suitable explanation when looking at objects.

These frequencies interact with the various cells within our eyes causing chemical and electrical activity within the eye and within the brain. In other words, when we view a colour there is a whole lot of neural activity going on in the brain.

The interesting part is that this is all it really is; just a whole lot of chemical and neural activity. Nowhere inside the brain can we see anything resembling a bottle shape. Nowhere in the brain can we say the neurons are firing at a green colour. In other words, mental events are not the same as physical events.

This leads us further to believe that we must distinguish qualia from the physical objects we are looking at. There is no property that explains why a green liquid should be grouped by colour other than the explanation that green objects stimulate the same qualia in different individuals.


Of course many people would reject this explanation in favour of a reliable scientific account of colour perception. If you are interested I can try and give you the other side of the story.

Tut

---

Its like this: everyone's perceptions are subjective, however if two or more people agree that green is green, then that's a good basis for a common understanding of language, which leads to better communication and thought processes, which ultimately leads to some people mulling over questions which are impossible to answer! I suggest you take up philosophy, as obviously, your brain is agile and needs plenty stimulation. Good luck to you x

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sijachanges

i suggest you take up philosophy, as obviously, your brain is agile and needs plenty stimulation. good luck to you x

---

Thanks for the advice. I will get round to doing that one day.

.