MacGnG

if people could feel what you feel, they would not know what the feellings were actually of; it would only be an experience. they could only guess as to what a particlar thing felt like.

dizziness probably feels different for each person.

Think. Pair. Share....

Eviltree

I was thinking that perhaps colours are seen differently by other people, and that everyone's favorite colour is the same on the 'universal' colour scheme, So if someone saw something that you saw, it would be one thing to them, but something else to them. I think thats relevent. If its not, just ignore my mindless babble.

anti fishstick

each person perceives something entirely their own way. no two people see the same thing. take for example the two profiles looking towards eachother forming the "wine glass" image of negative space. a lot of left-brained thinkers can't see the glass if their life depended on it. this positive/negative space relationship is something a right-brained person is more trained to see.

yes. color is perceived differently from one person to the next as well. why do you think people have a hard time deciding if its "purple" or "blue" etc.

__________________
And the day came when the risk to remain tight in a bud was more painful than the risk it took to blossom.
~Anais Nin

Kyo

That isn't the point. The existence of 'errors' in perception cannot be detected if the error is consistent/universal. For instance, assume there is an absolute standard for color. There is an 'absolute red', 'absolute green', 'absolute blue', that are exactly red, green, and blue, no matter what anyone seems them as. We place an object that is 'absolute red' in front of two people, one who has 'normal' vision, and one who does not. The first person obviously sees the absolute red and believes the object is red. The second person, however, sees 'absolute green' but says the object is red! Why? Because when he was learning what colors were, 'absolute red' objects were placed in front of him and called red. He saw 'absolute green', and he was taught that the color was called red. Therefore, he will always call 'absolute green', red.

It is impossible to determine exactly what he is seeing - and impossible for him to describe it to you in terms of an absolute standard. So long as he does not call two different absolute colors the same color, there is no way to tell that he is actually seeing something different.

Of course, I believe that given a careful dissection/chemical analysis of his eye and brain, we could determine what he is seeing.

So, instead of saying that no two people see the same thing, perhaps the correct statement is that it is impossible to tell what other people see.

desdes

Was watching a show on the National Geogrophic channel called Explorations just the other day and they said that human beings' perception of colors varies just like fingerprints do. If it was to be put onto some kind of calculated scale, everyone's perception of the different colors and shades would show to be at least in the smallest way different than everyone elses.

They also mentioned something 'bout the differences between males and females visual perception (colors/shades related), but I forget what it was.. =(

But to stick on topic, I'm reminded of a saying that goes: "There is no reality, only perception." So true..

Kyo

There must be a reality in order for you to perceive it. Regardless of whether you see something as black, red, or green, the object you are looking at has some chemical/physical structure which causes it to be black to someone, red to someone else, and green to yet another person - each person percieves differently, but the reality does not change.

For instance - if I pick up a rock, it will be some specified weight, some texture, some shape. If a giant picks up the same rock, it will weigh much less to him. It will also feel much smoother, since the 'texture' that I felt was caused by bumps and ridges much smaller to the giant than to me. The shape will also be different to him, assuming that his visual resolution is proportional to his size in the same way that mine is proportional.

And if we throw the rocks at someone, the force of impact will be some function of the force of our throw.

Granted, we construct our own versions of reality based on our perceptions - that's all we can do. But our reality does not necessarily correspond to the absolute reality.

desdes

What you say is exactly what I always took from that quote. Being just a simple sentence or two, most quotes are rather shallow in detail. You put it very well, though. I fully agree.

Xell101

Therefore there is no reality, only perception, if there was no perception, there would be no reality, merely what buzzes about your brain till you stop.

Kyo

But then we come to the question - if there is no observer, is the object still there?

In other words - if a tree falls in a forest, and nobody is around, does it still make a sound? But let's take it up a level: if a tree falls in a forest, and nobody is a around, does it even fall?

If all everything is perception, then so long as there are no observers, there is no reality - anything that isn't being watched doesn't actually exist.

While this is possible - since it's impossible to know with 100% certainty what is happening when you aren't watching it - it's difficult to swallow that the moment you stop watching something, it ceases to exist.

__________________
Sure I have a heart; it's floating in a jar in my closet, along with my tonsils, my appendix, and all of the other useless organs I ripped out.

MacGnG

well i wasnt really talking about all that but yea....

the "what happens to the light bulb in the fridge when u close the door" discussion

Xell101

Reletive to the human, it doesn't exist. Reletive to the human there is nothing except the perception.

freedomdowntime

I am really late on this one, I might even be considered way to late but I wished to point out what was discussed earlier by anti fishstick. This is a example of the whole possitive/negitive space =). Which one do you see?

skinbag

I see both because I've seen it before.

Xell101

I always see both at once...

krwlz

Ditto... Ive often wondered the same thing, and also came to the same conclusion.

spectre

Everything is relative based on biology and previous experience (nature and nurture). Take pain for example, some people are extremely pain tolerant while other will scream with very little pain. It's partially genetic, and partially based on how the person has handled pain in the past. It's all relative.

__________________
"Fuck these chains
No goddamn slave
I will be different" ~ Machine Head

bermuDa

has anyone read Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? I'm reminded of the empathy box.

__________________
I am the very model of a moderator gentleman.