[ExI] Nobody knows the true colors of things, on this day of color.

[Brent Allsop]

Hi William,
>From a certain point of view, this is true.
But perception is not everything.  Perception, through abstracting senses,
can be mistaken, or interpreted differently, as you are pointing out.
Direct apprehension of physical facts about the final results of perception
is what really matters.  This can't be mistaken.
If you are looking at a pencil, in a glass of water, and it seems to you
like the pencil is bent, you can know, absolutely, that your knowledge of
the pencil is bent, even though you don't know the true nature of the
actual pencil in the glass of water.
If you have knowledge which believes a war is a great success, and I have
different knowledge that it is a great tragedy, then those differences are
facts.
And if one knows something, that knowledge must be something.  Once we
discover what this knowledge is, we will be able to objectively observe it,
and know what it is like, including any differences.
There is no possible miss interpretation of directly apprehended qualia.
Your redness, and what it is like, will be the same, no matter which brain
is directly apprehending it.



On Sat, Mar 19, 2022 at 1:23 PM William Flynn Wallace via extropy-chat <
extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote:

> In some cases, perception is everything.  If I think the war is a great
> success for RUssia and you think that it is a great tragedy, who's right?
> You can't say that it is what it is because it isn't anything without
> someone's perception.  Baseball play  "I'm safe. "   catcher  "He's out."
> ump "He ain't nothing until I call it.  He's out!"
>
> But if I say the Moon is made of green cheese, that's testable and not
> defined by our perception.  Sometimes there is no reality except what the
> person's perception says it is.  "I was being chased by a ghost."  His
> reality; his perception.  bill w
>
> On Sat, Mar 19, 2022 at 11:53 AM Adrian Tymes via extropy-chat <
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote:
>
>> On Sat, Mar 19, 2022 at 8:17 AM William Flynn Wallace via extropy-chat <
>> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote:
>>
>>> An "intrinsic" property of an object does not depend on how it is
>>> perceived.   adrian
>>>
>>> How can there be a property of something that does not depend on our
>>> perception of it?
>>>
>>
>> By existing independent of whether we perceive it.
>>
>> If a tomato reflects photons of a wavelength in the red range and no
>> other photons out of a white range of photons, but those particular photons
>> all fall on the ground, nearby plants, or other things that are neither
>> eyes nor cameras, it has still reflected only those photons out of a white
>> range of photons and is thus still red.
>>
>>
>>> I think that what something is is dependent on what we think it is
>>>
>>
>> You may think that, but it is incorrect.  There are a lot of people
>> wishing really hard about certain aspects of the world - certain measurable
>> aspects of the war in Ukraine come to mind.  Literally, they are trying to
>> think of it as something other than what it is, in the sense of "what we
>> think it is" that you meant.  As can be easily observed in many cases, they
>> are having no effect on what it is.
>> _______________________________________________
>> extropy-chat mailing list
>> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
>> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat
>>
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20220320/f98e5b17/attachment.htm>