Do We See Colors Differently?

[Skwim]

It's true that the wavelengths can be objectively measured, but how the eyes interpret those wavelengths is an illusion.

Subjective for sure, but an illusion? Nope, despite Jason Silva's Frsehman-year Physiological/Philosophical musings below


[youtube]_nr1TN9xOI0[/youtube]
Jason Silva on Color

 

[The Sum of Awe]

I'm not aware of any experiments about this or how it could be tested, but I might have missed news about it or something.

There is some evidence and limitations.

For example, I'm not aware of someone's color scheme being changed other than in a hallucination or dream, like suddenly viewing all strawberries as blue from now on after an injury or prolonged drug use or anything.

And logically, color schemes have to at least be consistent. For example, we have an understanding of light and dark, with some colors being lighter or darker and white and black being at the two extremes. If me and someone else had colors randomly switched, like my purple was her yellow, but our greens were the same, we'd eventually figure out a point of disagreement, that "purple" is a dark color for her and a light color for me, or something. Basically the whole thing would have to be consistent enough that there are no clues, like it would all have to be inverted so that my sense of dark and her sense of dark are reversed, but with colors still consistent along that inverse spectrum so that we don't have any discrepancies we can identify.

Yes, I wouldn't doubt if the tone were the same, or black and white.

 

[The Sum of Awe]

Subjective for sure, but an illusion? Nope, despite Jason Silva's Frsehman-year Physiological/Philosophical musings below


[youtube]_nr1TN9xOI0[/youtube]
Jason Silva on Color

I linked that video earlier in the thread

 

[sandandfoam]

What if how I see blue was completely different than how you see blue? Of course, it's a common fact that color is an illusion anyways, but that doesn't matter. We're talking in terms of personal means anyways.

The reason why we would see a different color yet call it by the same name would be because we point at something an agree with the name for its color, and blue would be the same blue for anything else that is called "blue" in your life.

So it's the same light, but how we each see that light is completely different. If that were true, how would we know otherwise? Sort of like describing color to a blind man.

For me; this is probably one of the best representations on how I view reality in general, in the extreme sense.

Since you exist in my head you see colours in the way that I believe you do.
If I construct my world such that you are independent of me than I grant that you see them differently.
If I construct my world in such a way that we are human machines and that phenomenal experience is some sort of illusion then surely you see blue as I do.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

I think all people agree that for example green is darker than yellow, then how could my green be someone else's yellow?

 

[LuisDantas]

I think all people agree that for example green is darker than yellow, then how could my green be someone else's yellow?

I suspect it is not really that clear-cut. It will at least depend on which shades of yellow and green are being contrasted.

 

[The Sum of Awe]

I think all people agree that for example green is darker than yellow, then how could my green be someone else's yellow?

The actual way that yellow looks could be different while the tone, shade, lighting, and all that remain the same.

 

[Skwim]

I linked that video earlier in the thread

Yes, I know, which is why I mentioned it.

 

[The Sum of Awe]

Yes, I know, which is why I mentioned it.

Alright that makes more sense now. I didn't know you were referring to my post.

 

[Druidus]

Every brain creates a model of reality that you then experience. The general hardware is always the same, neurons, glial cells, etc. But they are not identical in any two people, and so they will generate different models.

We have evolved a "toolkit" for processing wavelengths of light into colour, which can then be subjectively experienced. But how, exactly, you experience it really depends on the unique structure and patterns of your brain cells. There is a "program" your brain runs to produce this subjective experience of colour, and everyone has roughly the same program. But there are myriad small differences (and sometimes large ones) in how the program runs in each brain.

These differences ensure that there will be, at the least, subtle variations in the qualia of the colour in each person's mind.

What we are experiencing is not reality, it is a model of reality, according to neuroscience. As a model it doesn't represent reality exactly, but well enough for animals like us to survive and function with.

But, because it is a model, there's nothing to ensure that we see colours the same, qualitatively. Such a thing would have no reason to evolve. Our brains have a fixed number of possible colours that can be incorporated in the model (1 million colours in males and up to 100 million colours in females). Which of these colours get incorporated into your model of reality and subjectively experienced is not set in stone. Everyone's experience of their own model's qualia will be slightly different.

It's quite possible that variations in subjective experience of qualia are what produce our unique emotional and physiological responses to colour. These responses tend to be bound (for past evolutionary reasons) to be at least sort of similar, but, again, there will always be, at the very least, subtle differences.

 

[The Sum of Awe]

Every brain creates a model of reality that you then experience. The general hardware is always the same, neurons, glial cells, etc. But they are not identical in any two people, and so they will generate different models.

We have evolved a "toolkit" for processing wavelengths of light into colour, which can then be subjectively experienced. But how, exactly, you experience it really depends on the unique structure and patterns of your brain cells. There is a "program" your brain runs to produce this subjective experience of colour, and everyone has roughly the same program. But there are myriad small differences (and sometimes large ones) in how the program runs in each brain.

These differences ensure that there will be, at the least, subtle variations in the qualia of the colour in each person's mind.

What we are experiencing is not reality, it is a model of reality, according to neuroscience. As a model it doesn't represent reality exactly, but well enough for animals like us to survive and function with.

But, because it is a model, there's nothing to ensure that we see colours the same, qualitatively. Such a thing would have no reason to evolve. Our brains have a fixed number of possible colours that can be incorporated in the model (1 million colours in males and up to 100 million colours in females). Which of these colours get incorporated into your model of reality and subjectively experienced is not set in stone. Everyone's experience of their own model's qualia will be slightly different.

It's quite possible that variations in subjective experience of qualia are what produce our unique emotional and physiological responses to colour. These responses tend to be bound (for past evolutionary reasons) to be at least sort of similar, but, again, there will always be, at the very least, subtle differences.

I wouldn't say that it's a model, as that implies a replica. More close to a tint, but more extreme.