Thread: Color

I randomly get hit with questions about the nature of things, and how things are structured or interpreted by people. I just got hit with color. Color is a purely individual process. Like, this is my blue. blue. this is the color i was told to associate with the word blue. i cant really describe this color to someone else. i just tell them, "its blue". the person says they know what im talking about, but how do i know if my blue is the same as theirs? maybe their blue is actually my red. color is completely individual in my opinion.

Well, there is the division of colours into hot (red, yellow, orange) and cool (blue, purple?, green) in art. People seem to be able to comprehend that. There are also tests for colour blindness; complete and red-green. Although I don't know if they would still work even if everyone (meaning, people with full colour spectrum vision) saw the same colours differently.

Hmm.. Blue and red are rather extreme. However, this reminds me of a hypnotic experiment with a woman who ended up believing her red car was yellow.

This is entirely true and false at the same time. There is absolutely no way of proving this, but I do believe that we see similar things for the following reason:

When we see things, we see gradients. We are not told to associate gradients with one another, we do because they are similar. Everyone sees the same gradients, and therefore associates the colors with warmth, coldness and other aspects. However, if we see the gradients as gradual gradients, as I'm sure most of us do, then we must be seeing similar colors or at least different colors on a different position on the color wheel. The final option is that some people have inverted color vision; what we see is the inverse of what some other people may see.

But then again...we have absolutely no way of proving this.

*Edit*

Sorry if that was a bit confusing; but I'll try to straighten things out. It will probably sound redundant, but it will be less complicated.

-Colors are made of gradients, and we see these
-Gradients of colors are similar to the gradients around that color on the color wheel
-Since we all see gradual gradients, we must be seeing the same gradients as everyone else. Otherwise our vision would have lots of splashes of different colors
-This means that everyone people can see the same as you, inverted to you, or at a different position on the color wheel
-A different position on the color wheel means that they will still see the gradients, but just as different colors. Things will still be relative to the colors and they can still be able to associate them.
-If they didn't follow these three things, then they would have a hard time associating colors with other colors; as everything would be mixed and sploched.

Originally Posted by superlox3

This is entirely true and false at the same time. There is absolutely no way of proving this, but I do believe that we see similar things for the following reason:

When we see things, we see gradients. We are not told to associate gradients with one another, we do because they are similar. Everyone sees the same gradients, and therefore associates the colors with warmth, coldness and other aspects. However, if we see the gradients as gradual gradients, as I'm sure most of us do, then we must be seeing similar colors or at least different colors on a different position on the color wheel. The final option is that some people have inverted color vision; what we see is the inverse of what some other people may see.

But then again...we have absolutely no way of proving this.

*Edit*

Sorry if that was a bit confusing; but I'll try to straighten things out. It will probably sound redundant, but it will be less complicated.

-Colors are made of gradients, and we see these
-Gradients of colors are similar to the gradients around that color on the color wheel
-Since we all see gradual gradients, we must be seeing the same gradients as everyone else. Otherwise our vision would have lots of splashes of different colors
-This means that everyone people can see the same as you, inverted to you, or at a different position on the color wheel
-A different position on the color wheel means that they will still see the gradients, but just as different colors. Things will still be relative to the colors and they can still be able to associate them.
-If they didn't follow these three things, then they would have a hard time associating colors with other colors; as everything would be mixed and sploched.

Beautifully explained. I was going to say something similar, but in much clumsier sentences ("When people look at a spectrum, the colors flow together in a certain manner" ... "When two colors mix, their result appears to be a logical mesh of the two originals, whereas if my blue was your orange, mixing red and blue labeled paint would produce an unexpected color to you.")

But I understand the nature of this thread. No doubt that based on our slightly different genetic coding (not only pertaining to the coding of the cones of the eyes themselves, but also the the neurons which transmit, as well as the structure of the occipital lobe that interprets), we most likely see color differently, though not to an extreme yellow-is-blue degree (well, except for those with certain colorblindness!). With this difference is perception, however slight it may be, it alludes to another conclusion: each consciousness experiences uniquely.

i can see where you guys are coming from. this all makes me wonder even more what people with synesthesia see and feel. i wish i had that.

this all makes me wonder even more what people with synesthesia see and feel

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synesthesia
there are pictures that show what people with synesthesia see

THIS thread did a better job illustrating this idea.

The ancient greeks had no word for the colour blue. They used to call the sky the bronx. Anyway, colour is just a mechanism used to tell difference between shades of light. It has no big meaning and you can live without it.

Unless, your a ape which you would need it to identify poison food from non toxic food.

Either then that it has no use in our modern life.

There is only such a thing as "colour" (not sure what this color business is ).

It's safe to assume that most human beings see in basically the same way. A normal human being has three color-sensing cones, one for red, one for green, and one for blue. We react to the same spectrum of electromagnetic waves, and since vision is such a basic ability, we probably see the same colors.

However, I don't think any two people could conceivably "experience" a color the same way. Though the hues are probably identical in normal humans, the emotions you get when you look at a color depend largely on your experiences with it. The most obvious evidence of this is the fact that people have all different sorts of favorite colors. Even on a societal level, for example, the color red is generally associated with violence and pain in America, but in China it's associated with good fortune.

I would say, then, that if you ask "Is my blue the same as yours?", the logical answer would be "probably" (unless you or I have some type of vision disorder). If you ask "Does the color blue mean the same thing to you as it does to me?", then "probably not".

Tetrachromacy - the ability to use four cones for seeing. But that would only add depth to previously existing colors. So they say.

Originally Posted by petersonad

Hmm.. Blue and red are rather extreme. However, this reminds me of a hypnotic experiment with a woman who ended up believing her red car was yellow.

Link?

Originally Posted by Replicon

There is only such a thing as "colour" (not sure what this color business is ).

Quite.

I love thinking about this question. There's no way to prove that everyone sees the same colours, and that's what's so cool. The fact that we associate certain colours with heat/cold surely has to do more with the fact that fire and hot things go red, while snow and ice and the like are blue.

Still it's far more likely that everyone sees the same colours.