Do people see the same colours?

[D D Danneh]

Colours are light with different wavelengths, so if we see the same wavelengths we seem the same colour as that is how our eyes are designed.

Okay, this forum is blue. We know that, but "blue" is just a label. It doesn't actually DESCRIBE what the colour is like. It's impossible to describe a colour without using a label we have made for it.

So, we can both see this blue colour, but who is to say we see it the same? If you could, let's say, plug my eyes into your brain (I know, the eyes don't form the image, but just for examples sake), my eyes may analyse the colour differently and you might recognise the colour as green. It's still the same ACTUAL wavelength of light, but the way our brains/eyes interpret that light could be different. However, because we have been taught to recognise that colour as blue, we both call it that, even if what we actually see is different.

What we see is simply our brains analysing a specific section of the electromagnetic spectrum to create something that allows us to recognize objects. Were we made slightly different, we might have actually seen different wavelengths of X-Rays, and used those as our "colours", whereas we might not have seen our current "visible spectrum" at all.

This also gives you an amazing insight into just how powerful the brain really is. Sure computers can do all these maths, but can they transform a near infinite amount of pieces of data into a perfect, smooth image in real time?

Here's another mind**** - if we could see past our current visible spectrum, would we see a new colour?

 

[Mr Joshua]

I've often had disagreements about peoples' eyes. Especially greens, hazels..

Bit OT but can you expand on that?

 

[aardvark]

you might like to think you are different to everybody else, but genetically speaking you are pretty much the same. every bodies eyes work the same way, every bodies brains work the same way - there is no scientific reason why people would perceive colours differently.

 

[madteamkiller]

Think about black and white. If one persons black is another persons white then wouldnt that make writing difficult? I.e If I write on white paper and another person sees my black as his white.

We look at white as a 1 colour even though its all the colours and we look at black as 1 colour even though it is supposed to be deviod of colour.

I say its hard coded for us to see the same colours and not everyone sees my red as your blue or anything like that. I agree with aardvark.

 

[GeX]

Bit OT but can you expand on that?

sounds self supporting to me, one person says someones eyes are green, the other says hazel

you might like to think you are different to everybody else, but genetically speaking you are pretty much the same. every bodies eyes work the same way, every bodies brains work the same way - there is no scientific reason why people would perceive colours differently.

colourblindness exists because that is not true though.

Color blindness is a result of certain cones misinterpreting the wavelengths that correspond to their respective colors. Red, green and blue colors have corresponding wavelengths. Red wavelengths are longest, green colors generate medium wavelengths, and blue colors are made of shorter wavelengths. If the green cones, for example, only respond to slightly longer wavelengths, green will be interpreted by the brain as red.

 

[V4NT0M]

you might like to think you are different to everybody else, but genetically speaking you are pretty much the same. every bodies eyes work the same way, every bodies brains work the same way - there is no scientific reason why people would perceive colours differently.

FFS I was just making that same post and then realised you made it!

You may also note that it would be kind of obvious if seeing colours differently was a widespread thing, as some colours just do not work well together. This kind of thing is pretty obvious with even partially colour blind people.

 

[aardvark]

colourblindness exists because that is not true though.

because of an identifiable fault with the visual machinery (i.e. the eyes).
if it works right, the way its supposed to, why would there be any difference when it gets to the brain? what would be the evolutionary point?

 

[D D Danneh]

you might like to think you are different to everybody else, but genetically speaking you are pretty much the same. every bodies eyes work the same way, every bodies brains work the same way - there is no scientific reason why people would perceive colours differently.

Well by that logic we should all like the same things? We should all look the same? Act the same?

Taste is one thing in which it is easy to tell that people taste differently, or at least interpret the feeling with the taste differently, else we would ALL like exactly the same things.

 

[tedmaul]

FFS I was just making that same post and then realised you made it!

You may also note that it would be kind of obvious if seeing colours differently was a widespread thing, as some colours just do not work well together. This kind of thing is pretty obvious with even partially colour blind people.

You are still completely missing the point of the thread though.

It's about the subjective experience of a particular colour. It doesn't matter that science can show that a particular light frequency is being picked up by the eye and interpreted by the brain in the same way by everyone. The qualitative experience that each individual has upon seeing what they call 'blue' could still be different from one person to the next and you can never know or prove otherwise.

 

[GeX]

because of an identifiable fault with the visual machinery (i.e. the eyes).
if it works right, the way its supposed to, why would there be any difference when it gets to the brain? what would be the evolutionary point?

ok, find me a source that says that every single person has exactly the same amount and type of cones in their eyes...
you won't, because they don't - and that will have an effect on what a person 'sees' and this is before you've got to the brain / processing.

some interesting spectrum images on here;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Color_blindness

 

[Dj_Jestar]

Again, missing the point. We could both look at something that is light red and say both say "thats light red" but it might look completely different to what i see (despite me also saying its light red)

No, it's not missing the point, because you don't understand the two tests in question. They place similar colors together, and with widespread testing and the same results, it provides evidence that everyone sees the same colours - regardless of their labels. If we didn't both see blue as what either one of us considers to be blue, then the test results would vary dramatically. They don't.

 

[tedmaul]

No, it's not missing the point, because you don't understand the two tests in question. They place similar colors together, and with widespread testing and the same results, it provides evidence that everyone sees the same colours - regardless of their labels. If we didn't both see blue as what either one of us considers to be blue, then the test results would vary dramatically. They don't.

No - that just proves that when two people have the experience they have always called 'blue', instigated by the same external physical stimulus that always causes them to experience what they know as 'blue', they will both say:

'That's blue'

That does not mean that their subjective experience is necessarily the same.

Again, you are simply missing the point here. It is a philosophical point, not a scientific one.

 

[Dj_Jestar]

No - that just proves that when two people have the experience they have always called 'blue', instigated by the same external physical stimulus that always causes them to experience what they know as 'blue', they will both say:

'That's blue'

That does not mean that their subjective experience is necessarily the same.

Again, you are simply missing the point here. It is a philosophical point, not a scientific one.

No, it is both. These tests have every colour next to every other colour. Both similar and dissimilar. If the similarities and dissimilarities varied from subject to subject, there would be evidence that people do not see colours the same. However, this is not the case and the vast, vast majority see the same similarities and dissimilarities. I am not missing the point, I understand the question entirely and have pondered it myself before, only to find these tests that are designed explicitly to identify those who see colours differently than others do.

 

[FoxEye]

I think the point that is being missed, is not that our eyes work differently, but that our brains might process those signals and end up with different results.

There is no way this can be proved or disproved by getting people to observe different colour objects.

Take the following two people.
A sees red as blue, but still calls it red
B sees red as red.
A sees yellow as red, but calls it yellow.
B sees yellow as yellow.
B sees red + yellow as orange, and calls it orange.
A, however, sees red + yellow as purple (blue + red), but he still knows it as orange.

I don't see how any amount of observing/ mixing different colours could prove that this isn't happening.

 

[Dj_Jestar]

I think the point that is being missed, is not that our eyes work differently, but that our brains might process those signals and end up with different results.

There is no way this can be proved or disproved by getting people to observe different colour objects.

Take the following two people.
A sees red as blue, but still calls it red
B sees red as red.
A sees yellow as red, but calls it yellow.
B sees yellow as yellow.
B sees red + yellow as orange, and calls it orange.
A, however, sees red + yellow as purple (blue + red), but he still knows it as orange.

I don't see how any amount of observing/ mixing different colours could prove that this isn't happening.

*bangs head on table*

The tests don't ask people to identify colours. They ask people to identify SIMILARITIES AND DISSIMILARITIES BETWEEN COLOURS.

Read up on the tests for christ's sake.

 

[tedmaul]

*bangs head on table*

The tests don't ask people to identify colours. They ask people to identify SIMILARITIES AND DISSIMILARITIES BETWEEN COLOURS.

Read up on the tests for christ's sake.

But you could still have each person getting exactly the same similarities and dissimilarites between the colours, but be having a different actual subjective experience. It is the same scale of similarities and dissimilarites (if you want to look at it that way), but for two completely different subjective experiences.

That is the distinction you don't seem to be getting. My qualitative experience of colours could be completely different to yours, but i could still identify the differences as the scale of similarities/dissimilarities is the same.

 

[Dj_Jestar]

No, you really couldn't.

 

[tedmaul]

No, you really couldn't.

The point is, you can't prove otherwise. Nothing you have said so far has proven that this couldn't be the case. Which was the aim of the original philosophical point.

If you can come up with a good answer that proves it, there's a number of university philosophy departments that would love to hear from you!

 

[FoxEye]

Yeah that doesn't make sense.

Let's say red and green were swapped. The comparison colour was purple. Naturally you'd say RED was more similar to purple than GREEN.

However, the fellow who saw red as green (and vice versa) wouldn't see purple as purple, either. He'd see a colour which was more similar to green (that he identified as red).

So he'd still say red was more similar to purple than green, even tho he was seeing what we'd call green, because his purple wouldn't be purple either.

So what similarities wouldn't be affected by this skewing of colours? What absolute abstract measures of colour would be unaffected?

 

[FoxEye]

And let's make this even more difficult for you. Instead of colour swapping, let's say a certain person's vision is skewed towards green. As the colours he sees are simply more green than the colours you see.

He's still going to think yellow is lighter than blue, etc. How could you test for that?