Conversation
Notices
-
This is a popular example of the phenomenon, you've probably seen it before. Tile A and Tile B are both actually the same colour, but because out brain assumes shadows make things darker we assume that Tile B is lighter than it actually is. http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/60/Grey_square_optical_illusion.PNG
Saturday, 28-Feb-15 02:52:49 UTC from web-
@northernnarwhal But, this looks like... How does it change the colour to a polar Opposite?
Saturday, 28-Feb-15 02:53:36 UTC from web-
@metaltao It doesn't change the colour, it's just a subconscious assumption your brain makes that changes the colour.
Saturday, 28-Feb-15 02:56:21 UTC from web-
@northernnarwhal Sorry, I know, I am not good with terms. I talked about this in class. Um... This is cool, I MEAN IT! But, I am some reason, overwhelmed. And, I am excited to! I CAN'T WAIT TO SHARE THIS WITH MY CLASS ON MONDAY! SQUEE~!
Saturday, 28-Feb-15 02:58:22 UTC from web -
@northernnarwhal Assuming there is even a color to change apart from what one sees. :-P
Saturday, 28-Feb-15 02:58:49 UTC from web-
@loveydoe Ignoring any speculative metaphysics, yes, there is a colour to change. Or at least more specifically, a wavelength of light that makes electrical contact with our optic nerve.
Saturday, 28-Feb-15 03:00:37 UTC from web-
@northernnarwhal The color that exists is the color that is results from the brain's interpretation. Surely you don't mean that there is a canonical real color for every wavelength of light! All we have is the wavelength itself and the interpretation. No color is changed. This is not speculative.
Saturday, 28-Feb-15 03:03:36 UTC from web-
@loveydoe You could argue there isn't a canonical real anything if you really wanted to, everything we experience as far as were concerned is our brain's interpretation. That's why it's speculative. Think of it in terms of the brain in a vat thought experiment. If you really want to say that something only exists in our minds, you can apply that to any and everything we experience.
Saturday, 28-Feb-15 03:09:21 UTC from web-
@northernnarwhal Yes, you can apply this to everything sensible! I simply disagree with the idea that anyone's interpretation of the wavelength is somehow different from an observerless, canonical color which you are are referreing to. If my argument is speculative, yours is presumptuous. We needn't argue, I think.
Saturday, 28-Feb-15 03:15:33 UTC from web-
@loveydoe It's because while our perception of the wavelength is qualitative the wavelength itself is quantitative. Like it or not, regardless of how we see the wavelength the wavelength itself can be measured and distinguished. Regardless of what you interpret, it's an objective fact that, as an example, a 620–750 nm wavelength will produce a colour we refer to as "red", regardless of what red is. The only presumptions I'm making are those grounded in reality that can be generally agreed upon, but you're right in that I didn't account for your outlandish solipsist perspective. I'm out.
Saturday, 28-Feb-15 03:22:55 UTC from web-
@northernnarwhal I agree with you entirely on everything but the last two sentences, and on the idea that there are not people who don't refer to that range as red. I can think of a class of people who could only call it red having been told that it was, and who could only identify it themselves with a device that told them the wavelength itself. :-) Truce.
Saturday, 28-Feb-15 03:28:27 UTC from web-
Saturday, 28-Feb-15 03:31:00 UTC from web
-
@loveydoe You do not exist. I am only interpreting you, you are not canonically real. Get out of my head, foul specter.
-
@northernnarwhal So, what was Lovey like? Do you like her too? O3O
Saturday, 28-Feb-15 03:35:00 UTC from web-
-
@northernnarwhal Lovey Doe?
Saturday, 28-Feb-15 03:35:40 UTC from web -
@northernnarwhal Lovey Dovey?
Saturday, 28-Feb-15 03:35:46 UTC from web-
-
@northernnarwhal I am a Space Fbatcave
Saturday, 28-Feb-15 03:36:35 UTC from web
-
-
-
-
-
@northernnarwhal It isn't a question of existing, it is a question of being able to prove existence! You and I can agree on that, for that seems to be what it is! I will sing your praises, and so will philosophy, if you can indeed prove that there is a canonical color which is somehow changed, instead of a wavelength that is simply interpreted.
Saturday, 28-Feb-15 03:41:07 UTC from web-
@loveydoe I was looking for your post but this was all I found ;^) http://www.woodbury-law.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/Straw-man-big.png
Saturday, 28-Feb-15 03:46:30 UTC from web-
@northernnarwhal skekrow
Saturday, 28-Feb-15 03:47:07 UTC from web -
@northernnarwhal I HOPE THIS IS IN JEST!
Saturday, 28-Feb-15 03:49:46 UTC from web-
Saturday, 28-Feb-15 03:50:19 UTC from web
-
@northernnarwhal Indeed! You are not! EHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHhh
Saturday, 28-Feb-15 03:50:51 UTC from web
-
-
-
@northernnarwhal I see. I can only see the same thing in your argument.
Saturday, 28-Feb-15 03:55:51 UTC from web-
Saturday, 28-Feb-15 03:56:40 UTC from web
-
@northernnarwhal Sigh. Truce.
Saturday, 28-Feb-15 04:00:39 UTC from web-
Saturday, 28-Feb-15 04:01:45 UTC from web
-
@northernnarwhal I firmly respect your decision, and sometimes I wish I hadn't taken my college philosophy classes!
Saturday, 28-Feb-15 04:09:02 UTC from web-
@loveydoe Your regret is understandable. How does it feel to ask people why they want fries with their order?
Saturday, 28-Feb-15 04:11:16 UTC from web-
@northernnarwhal I don't ask them! ;)
Saturday, 28-Feb-15 04:14:15 UTC from web-
Saturday, 28-Feb-15 04:17:38 UTC from web
-
@northernnarwhal It doesn't matter whether it can be proved. I feel like you think I believe others don't exist! I can only say that I don't know whether they do. It is presumptuous to assume that they do or do not exist, but that doesn't mean it is wrong to believe either one. Both simply aren't philosophically satisfying answers, and that is the reason the body/external problem exists in the first place.
Saturday, 28-Feb-15 04:28:32 UTC from web-
Saturday, 28-Feb-15 04:32:25 UTC from web
-
@northernnarwhal I... am just going to log off. Good night.
Saturday, 28-Feb-15 04:36:47 UTC from web-
-
@northernnarwhal May I ask that you please stand down. It hurts to see you rub dirt in people like a school yard bully with more power. Except, you are using knowledge to rub self doubt in people. I do not like this... It scares me....
Saturday, 28-Feb-15 04:42:25 UTC from web -
@northernnarwhal I now have to go see if she is ok.
Saturday, 28-Feb-15 04:43:08 UTC from web-
@metaltao Here, I'm just gonna leave this here for you http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tongue-in-cheek
Saturday, 28-Feb-15 04:44:58 UTC from web-
@northernnarwhal I am not sure you are effective at it. Since, you made some one flee from a site to escape what you post. And, if I recal, Tongue in cheek is meant to be spread around, and not concentrated on one individual over an argument that is supposed to be not comedic, but serious in it's terms. You brought an unknown and conflicting element into an unrelated argument and then Strawmaned yourself by changing the topic of the debate. You two no longer talked about the Topic at hand, and instead focused on trying to make one feel like laughing, and failing to realize that you have not succeeded in that endeavor, and continued to do so. And, still, after the evidence is there that it was not mutual, you still feel as if everything is ok.
Saturday, 28-Feb-15 04:48:32 UTC from web -
@northernnarwhal And, the way you used this was very demeaning, unlike what Comedy is supposed to do, invoke positivity and Positive Change through pointing out flaws, and or making people laugh. Which, you have not succeeded at doing towards Lovey.
Saturday, 28-Feb-15 04:50:48 UTC from web -
@northernnarwhal You have not made a positive change within the person you were trying to cheer up, and, have failed. I would recommend an Apology.
Saturday, 28-Feb-15 04:51:53 UTC from web-
Saturday, 28-Feb-15 04:53:03 UTC from web
-
@northernnarwhal Indeed. But, it is against rules to hurt others. And, since you are a well regarded individual, one would feel as if they are wussing out since Spots backed you up and even started going along with you. It is very confusing. You had the support of others, and, if she blocked you, would feel as if others would continue to do what you do, and would have to block them. they would feel bad about this if they don't necessarily want to do that to friends and people they find enjoyable. In short, she respects you, and felt betrayed that you have done this. But, does not want to betray you. In her eyes.
Lovey also has the idea to hear what all have to say. Despises Censorship and all that.
She may then feel as if she would appear childish if she decided to use this feature on you over this. And, there by discrediting herself more.Saturday, 28-Feb-15 04:56:14 UTC from web-
Saturday, 28-Feb-15 05:03:26 UTC from web
-
@northernnarwhal I did not intend to do it. I am sorry.
Saturday, 28-Feb-15 05:03:58 UTC from web -
@northernnarwhal to be hurt is not a trivial matter, it means they have to figure something out, there is a point where you have to teach people what these feelings mean, and what your message was. You did not reply to any of my points, and, I feel troubled by that. It gives me the feeling that you are doing so purposefully to try to make me feel as if my argument can be so blatantly and obviously flawed that one statement is all it needs to be broken. Yet you do not explain it. Keeping the info to yourself does not promote understanding of how you view this topic and alienates me from your point.
Saturday, 28-Feb-15 05:08:11 UTC from web
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
@northernnarwhal I can't help but feel you have venom in here. It is silly, and has from experience not only extinguished my flame for Knowledge, but has also humiliated and I have seen it humiliating others before. It does not promote positive thought and criticism to reflect about how an argument is wrong, but it leads to one reflecting about how they are themselves inferior when they may or may not be. It is rude, and, I really hated that blackening experience of feeling odd one out. And, feeling irredeemable.
Saturday, 28-Feb-15 04:37:54 UTC from web
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
@loveydoe I agree with you. You are arguing that wavelength and color are not the same. To me, this seems natural. I can open a picture on my computer and tell you "this is a picture of Pinkie Pie", but I can't sincerely tell you that the bytes of the file, open in notepad, are a picture of Pinkie. They only are Pinkie in the sense that my PNG decoder can interpret them as Pinkie.
Saturday, 28-Feb-15 04:06:50 UTC from web
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
@northernnarwhal I AM AMAZIED! AND I LOVE IT! BEING DUMB IS THE BEST!
Saturday, 28-Feb-15 02:54:02 UTC from web
-
