The Instigator
Con (against)
2 Points
The Contender
Pro (for)
1 Points

Do we see colors the same way?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 6/12/2011 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 5 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 5,489 times Debate No: 17024
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (19)
Votes (1)





This Debate Is weather or not Everyone sees color the same way. I will take the side of Con, arguing that everyone sees different colors with the same name.

This is an Interesting topic that I got from the "philosoraptor"[1] of all places, but I started thinking. The human Eye only recognize the primary colors, and those mixed with black[2]. But Is your red my red, or is your Red my green? This no one can prove, for I never will jump into your brain, and see though your eyes.

From a young age, we probably all have been trained in colors, and because we recognize the name to the face, we all know it as the "same" color by name. I Think of this like the NATO phonetic alphabet, where each letter is known as something different in each language, Internationale, if you read out over radio "Hotel, Illinois" Whoever is on the other end will recognize it as "H, I" or in whatever characters they may use. [3], So however they see it, they know what it means.

If That was confusing, let me narrow it down to this. You highlight this text, And it becomes Blue. How do you know that the Blue is not what i see as your green, but know as Blue?

So. Is my Blue your Red?



It is true that we may never know the answer to this; however, I do feel quite confident that color does exist as some sort of material outside of humans; that is, it exists in the visible light spectrum. Visible light waves are the only electromagnetic waves we can see. We see these waves in the colors of the rainbow, and each color has a different, measurable wave length [1]. Now, we must turn our attention to the eye. The eye absorbs incoming light through various parts and sends that information to the brain (check out the source for more info) [2]. My argument then follows: if we have the same eyes that absorb the same light, then we see the same colors. We have the same eyes that absorb the same light; therefore, we see the same colors. There are some obvious exceptions such as colorblindness and other eye deficiencies.
I will leave it at this for now.

Debate Round No. 1


So my opponent Is assuming all eyes are the same, However Looking at the vocal cords, everyone has the same parts[1] yet no one has the same voice(with the acceptations of people with a debilitating disease) Therefore, you cant know that everyone with the same eye sees all the same colors. Also, I believe there are more colors then what we can see, take the Mantis shrimp for example, it has hyperspectral colour vision- that means it can see infrared as well as UV. [2]
And it is quit possible that my red is your blue.



My opponent suggests that because we have the same vocal chords and different voices, we can safely assume that the eyes work in a similar fashion. We know why we have different voices, however. One's voice is controlled by the size of the vocal chords and the mouth. Other cultural aspects also have an effect on the sound of our voices [1]. Moreover, the voice is measurable, so it is therefore possible for people to have the same voice if all other factors such as cultural background are the same.
For my opponent's argument regarding shrimp eyes, we know why those shrimp can see different wave lengths. Humans can only see in the visible light spectrum as I mentioned earlier, not UV or X-ray. Interestingly, we still know those exist, and that the visible light spectrum is only one small fragment of the radiation that is emitted from the sun. I, therefore, standby my original argument. Con has still to provide a good enough reason to doubt that we all see the same colors.

Debate Round No. 2


My opponent says " We see these waves in the colors of the rainbow, and each color has a different, measurable wave length"
With a little help from Google, this is the conclusion I have come to.
Colors are energy, therefore and there for a figure our the imagination. Our eyes can pick their wave lengths up and our minds read them however the heck they wanted. [1]

Here is a fun thought, and not really much of an argument. Personally, I think the sky is an odd color, its just very random, what if it makes since to someone else, because it is a different color?



What made you come to that conclusion? Your imagination? It is interesting to think about, but that's it. We shouldn't come to the conclusion that all colors are really just random and different, depending on who's looking, unless we have a legitimate reason to believe that. If we know that each color is made up of a different wavelength, we can safely assume that we are all seeing the same colors, especially if we know exactly how the eye works. Certainly, I could see where there might be certain instances where color changes due to processes in the mind, but it's just too far a leap to conclude that we are all seeing different colors all the time (i.e. my red is Con's green all the time). My argument still stands!
Debate Round No. 3


In theory, our eyes could very much turn the wavelength into any color. Even evolution and creation are theories, you cant prove them right or wrong either. We must remember, My opponent has no evidence either, given that He cannon t get into a head, and see the color that everyone else sees. On the other hand, Looking at my argument, there is the theory that color is but a figure of the Imagination.

The power of Suggestion is a powerful tool which could make you think diffident things about diffident colors. Like Blue being calming, red being angry, and yellow being happy.

Just like with the vocal cord, it could be that differences in size color and race causing different colors being seen.

My opponent in round one said that each color has a different, measurable wave length, however, Numbers are not a good description unless its in quantity. and the only other description for color is attached to emotion, therefore, there is nothing physical about color. therefore, My opponent's argument is based on nothing more then numbers.

Is my 240 your 360?


So far Con's argument is that neither of us can prove the other; therefore, he is right. What we label colors is not natural, but what we see is. The mind can play tricks on us, but until we can explain how it is tricking us, we can never know if it is; therefore, we should assume it is not tricking us. Con said it himself, and I agree, that we may never be able to prove this, so what we are left with is the safest assumption. My assumption is that we see the same colors because our eyes absorb the same light. His is that the mind plays tricks on us, so color must be completely different from person to person. That is quite a far leap. Maybe, the mind is not playing tricks on us. Look at touch. People start to shiver when the temperature drops enough. If we follows Con's logic, we could conclude that what we are feeling is a trick of the mind and that it is actually quite warm outside. Although we can't prove what others feel in regards to the temperature, we can safely assume that we are all feeling the same temperature (locally, that is).
Debate Round No. 4


I fear my opponent underestimates the power of suggestion. If we are told all our that blue is calming we will become calm. If mama makes mac'n'chees when your dog dies, your mind can associate Mac and cheese as "comfort food. The power of suggestion is found all over medical science, when the FDA tests a drug, they always give a control group sugar pills as a placebo, to see if the drug actually works. If I were to inject your Jugular with blue sugar water, and told you it was hydragermaziean, and said that you may start sweating and shivering, your mind can make you sweat and shiver [1]. So why couldn't this work with color? I mean if we are told all our lives that this is red and that is green, we wont know any different. And though we may never know, there is a good chance that that my green may be your red because we all are a little different.

I hear my opponent is chilling out in the sticks, and will not be able to post his last round, so I waited as long as I could to give him more time.

We all are influenced by the world around us. like this song [2] may be associated with "red" only by the power of suggestion, because of its title- soviet's march. If I were to say, Hey
My blue very well may be your green.

2 ;


Dmetal forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 5
19 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Dmetal_2 2 years ago
All right better late than never, i just found this argument and this is my one argument. If we all see different colors, almost at random, then wouldn't the color spectrum look a little odd, for instance RED and ORANGE, so allow me to chose two colors at random MY RED is YOUR GREEN and orange-->purple so as red gradually and smoothly transitions into orange how could that same implication occur if green must technically transition through blue and violet first?
Posted by Spartan 5 years ago
well that was weird. the video decided to put itself out of place, it belongs by the 2.
Posted by Dmetal 5 years ago
I'm not going to be able to get to the next round because I'm going camping for a couple days in the damn wilderness, so no internet and no phone.
Posted by Cliff.Stamp 5 years ago
Jeff, as it has been accepted already, were you planning on rejecting dualism?
Posted by Puck 5 years ago
May want to change it to "perceive" instead of "see".
Posted by J.Kenyon 5 years ago
Make it three rounds and I'll accept.
Posted by Cliff.Stamp 5 years ago
"There is no possible way to prove the right answer."

The BoP is on Con, not on Pro.
Posted by Cliff.Stamp 5 years ago
He is not asserting defective vision exists, i.e. colorblind
Posted by shooterboss 5 years ago
I don't see how anybody could argue with this. There is no possible way to prove the right answer.
Posted by Yorble 5 years ago
I know colorblind people, I don't see much of a debate here.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Cliff.Stamp 5 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:21 
Reasons for voting decision: Spartan could not carry the BoP, but did have an interesting resolution and Pro had a last round forfeit. 2:1 Con.