Subpage under development, new version coming soon!
¡¡¡Tema cerrado!!!
Asunto: »Political & economic ideologies (communism, capitalism et
But if all humans would be blind, we wouldn't know that red even exist! If there would be just one non-blind person in the world, nobody would ever believe him about colour red as he would not be able to prove it exists to anyone!
(editado)
(editado)
If a tree falls when nobody is around, does it make a sound?
OK, so how would you prove to a civilisation of intelligent but blind beings that colour red exists? They would have to take your word for it, right? Or do you know another way?
Perception is not linked with the same reality, reality is linked with perception
Do you mean reality depends on perception ? Reality is defined with perception ?
Do you mean reality depends on perception ? Reality is defined with perception ?
Actually, even the definition of reality depends upon perception.
So, yes, "reality" (reality does not exist in this) is a perception.
Btw, I'm now being philosophic. Everything is relative, for that matter even perception is just a perception.
:p
So, yes, "reality" (reality does not exist in this) is a perception.
Btw, I'm now being philosophic. Everything is relative, for that matter even perception is just a perception.
:p
the wavelegnht is the scientific definition of red : 620-780nm... But it is has no sense for a blind person... It is not in his realiity... It is language to talk with you and me and the blind person but not a reality as english is a language used to talk with Rubinho (non believer) and Sasha (believer).
(editado)
(editado)
Actually, even the definition of reality depends upon perception.
So, yes, "reality" (reality does not exist in this) is a perception.
Thus your wentence wrtitten below is a contradiction :
My perception of reality can be different of yours.
If your perception of the reality is different of my perception of the reality (i hope the reality is the same) thus we can't have the same reality as your perceptions are differents ;-)
Btw, i really like to talk philosophy too :-)...
So, yes, "reality" (reality does not exist in this) is a perception.
Thus your wentence wrtitten below is a contradiction :
My perception of reality can be different of yours.
If your perception of the reality is different of my perception of the reality (i hope the reality is the same) thus we can't have the same reality as your perceptions are differents ;-)
Btw, i really like to talk philosophy too :-)...
Sh...t !! i have to go... Maybe we could talk again together tonigh if discussion has not gone too far awayof our exhanges :-)
So long, Stef. I have to run too. See you all later. :)
Forgot the word my :)
My perception of MY reality can be different of yours.
My perception of MY reality can be different of yours.
But if all humans would be blind, we wouldn't know that red even exist! If there would be just one blind person in the world, nobody would ever believe him about colour red as he would not be able to prove it exists to anyone!
If my cat was a dog, it would bark.
Seriously: see what Kwast said (tree & sound). It can still be defined as the colors between certain frames. It would be pointless, but still, it exists, it's real. We probably wouldn't define it because it's pointless. We even wouldn't know what colors are, we wouldn't know the word 'color'. But the color red (as it is scientifically defined) would still exist and be there. There would no longer be perceptions about the color red of course, as nobody could see them.
@ Stef:
the wavelegnht is the scientific definition of red : 620-780nm... But it is has no sense for a blind person... It is not in his realiity... It is language to talk with you and me and the blind person but not a reality as english is a language used to talk with Rubinho (non believer) and Sasha (believer).
It doesn't need to have a sense to be real. (see above)
(editado)
If my cat was a dog, it would bark.
Seriously: see what Kwast said (tree & sound). It can still be defined as the colors between certain frames. It would be pointless, but still, it exists, it's real. We probably wouldn't define it because it's pointless. We even wouldn't know what colors are, we wouldn't know the word 'color'. But the color red (as it is scientifically defined) would still exist and be there. There would no longer be perceptions about the color red of course, as nobody could see them.
@ Stef:
the wavelegnht is the scientific definition of red : 620-780nm... But it is has no sense for a blind person... It is not in his realiity... It is language to talk with you and me and the blind person but not a reality as english is a language used to talk with Rubinho (non believer) and Sasha (believer).
It doesn't need to have a sense to be real. (see above)
(editado)
He is as real as the imaginations of mentally ill people, is that what you're saying?
something like that.
something like that.
You're actually giving "evidence" that God can exist.
Ie:
If we were blind, we could not see red.
But red still exists.
God can not be sensed, is it real then?
Ie:
If we were blind, we could not see red.
But red still exists.
God can not be sensed, is it real then?
and to be prcise, I should write "real"
There can exist a god, I never denied that. I don't accept (perception) the existence of something when it isn't proven (reality). And see what I wrote: it must be observable for normal human beings (blind people are not normal, they have a handicap). The god of the Christians is not observable. Neither is Allah. Neither are the other gods.