The Instigator
ViceRegent
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
vardaanbhat
Pro (for)
Winning
18 Points

How would an atheist prove the existence of color as an asthetic concept to a blind man?

Do you like this debate?NoYes-5
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 3 votes the winner is...
vardaanbhat
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/4/2016 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 8 months ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 937 times Debate No: 89160
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (59)
Votes (3)

 

ViceRegent

Con

Do atheists know that their physical senses are the only ones? What would they say to a blind man who said there are only four senses, denying the existence of the sense of sight. He demands evidence from you as to the existence of color as an asthetic concept. What would you say?
vardaanbhat

Pro

Color, as an aesthetic concept, is simply a result of our ability to see - our sight. Sight is a sense, and senses are man's only connection to reality. As a result, they are our only means of acquriing information (data about the world).

Now, since we are aware that we have the sense of sight, but a blind person may not, let us perform the following experiment. We will give the blind person 5 boxes. One will have a special braille marking on one side, and an X drawn on another. The blind person will be able to touch this box, but you will not. He, obviously, cannot see the special X marking. Now, you leave the room, allowing him to jumble up the boxes in any order. You come back, and you must find the special box without touching the boxes. Of course, you will be able to identify it.

While the blind man cannot actually experience the sensation of sight, he will now know that it exists, as it has been objectively proven.
Debate Round No. 1
ViceRegent

Con

Are atheists illiterate or are they intentionally obtuse?

I did not ask you to prove that sight exists, but that color exists as an esthetic concept. Pay attention and re-answer the question actually asked.
vardaanbhat

Pro

I could ask you the same question, but I won't. Please remember basic debate etiquette (i.e., don't be a jerk).

To prove that color exists, we must first prove that sight exists. Color, as an aesthetic concept, is something that can only be experienced through sight.

One way to prove that color exists is simply to return to the previous experiment, but replace the special X marking with a color.

But to be more rigorous, we need to ask, what is color? Color "is the visual perceptual property corresponding in humans to the categories called red, blue, yellow, etc. Color derives from the spectrum of light (distribution of light power versus wavelength) interacting in the eye with the spectral sensitivities of the light receptors. Color categories and physical specifications of color are also associated with objects or materials based on their physical properties such as light absorption, reflection, or emission spectra. By defining a color space colors can be identified numerically by their coordinates."

In other words, the concept of color is based on variations in light (i.e., sight). Color is hoiw we categorize said variations. The blind man cannot categorize the boxes by color, but he can do it by braille. The not-blind man does it though color.

Also, instead of promoting blind belief in the arbitrary, perhaps you should promote science and reason instead.
Debate Round No. 2
ViceRegent

Con

In other words, you have no way to prove color exists to a blind man. ROFL
vardaanbhat

Pro

So you have no refutations? ROFL

So you don't understand science? ROFL

So logic makes no sense to you? ROFL

So my rigorous proof makes no sense? ROFL

Since you lack logic, you must not understand the subtle message here. Please actually read my arguments and use logical refutations.

Color is a way of categorizing variations in light, which is a direct result of sight. Light is the means by which sight-based information is transported to us. Color is the means by which light-based information is transmitted to us; color is a categorization of light. It is how we can separate different "streams" of light (wavelengths).
Debate Round No. 3
ViceRegent

Con

ROFL. How does blind man separate different streams of light?
vardaanbhat

Pro

He cannot. We can, and the experiment proves this. While the experiment does not allow the blind man to experience this, it does prove that non-blind people are capable of a given categorization that is named color.
Debate Round No. 4
ViceRegent

Con

You moron, the issue is not can you prove to yourself that color exists, but can you prove it to a blind man. I will take your last post to indicate you are unable to do so. Wow. God is right, atheists are fools.
vardaanbhat

Pro

Since you don't accept my thought experiment (even though it is logically valid...), perhaps I will expose you to the interesting field known to some as science.

Perhaps you've heard of measurement? Based on our senses, we as humans can construct devices that help us quantify what we sense. That leads us to machines that can measure the frequencies and wavelength of light.

Such machines allow us to objectively quantify light based on its properties. This is what color is.

Our brains process these wavelengths in unique ways; as such, we categorize these wavelenghts in ways different from certain other animals. Therefore, colors simply refer to the perceptual categorization of different light wavelengths. Different animals have different ways of utilizing and understanding ccolor.
Debate Round No. 5
59 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by BackCommander 3 months ago
BackCommander
How would a theist prove the existence of color as an aesthetic concept to a blind man?
Posted by Furyan5 8 months ago
Furyan5
Lol please explain how it's viable or logical, never mind good?
He comes nowhere near answering the question.
You obviously don't understand the question either.
Posted by TheJazzPoliceman 8 months ago
TheJazzPoliceman
ViceRegent is SO STUPID, both in the comments and in his debate. The point of the debate is to have BOTH SIDES show their argument. The point of a debate is NOT for one person to give a perfectly reasonable, viable, logical, and quite good argument, and the other person, THE PERSON WHO STARTED THE DEBATE, MIGHT I ADD, to do the internet equivalent of clapping their hands over their ears, screaming "LA LA LA, I CAN'T HEAR YOU! ARE YOUR EVEN LITERATE? LA LA LA," as a five-year-old might do.
Posted by Furyan5 8 months ago
Furyan5
How do you describe red to a blind person?
It's a color?
Whats a color?
100 out of 100 people can correctly state that your box is red or blue...
But all that proves to the blind person is that there is something they can detect that he can't.
The blind person still has no idea what color is.

Now do you understand the question?
Posted by Furyan5 8 months ago
Furyan5
lol ADigitalArtist. So you don't get it either?
Posted by vardaanbhat 8 months ago
vardaanbhat
So what were you saying about atheists?
Posted by vardaanbhat 8 months ago
vardaanbhat
The claim that God exists is completely arbitrary, totally unprovable, and infantile.
Posted by ViceRegent 8 months ago
ViceRegent
Is it lack of ability to explain or your lack of ability to understand and accept? After all, God says so is not that hard?
Posted by ViceRegent 8 months ago
ViceRegent
I will accept your post that you are not going to answe my Q. Anyone else?
Posted by ADigitalArtist 8 months ago
ADigitalArtist
I understand that color-wavelength separation is a pet debate of yours, but I thought your opponent preformed admirably in showing why they aren't seperate. http://www.debate.org...
In any case, despite your link (which is fascinating by the way thank you!) showing that mantis shrimp having less color determination than we previously thought, they still have color determination in the UV spectrum beyond what we can see, as do many insects. So insert that as an example of you will.

As for Vice, one again you seem to be back at the presumption that blind people can't be researchers, that they must take everything at the word of other people. I don't know if you intend to sound ableist but it does come off that way to me. Any test I could do on color vision a blind person can do too.
As I said, a blind person can also receive color information in their brain through external stimulus as well, creating a first person color experience.

This will be my last comment, it's in the middle of the work week and you seem to be more interested in personal attacks than civil debate anyway. ;)
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by BackCommander 8 months ago
BackCommander
ViceRegentvardaanbhatTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Reasons for voting decision: It pains me to watch someone fail again and again at realizing that they're illogical and incapable of critical thought. Pro won.
Vote Placed by Ragnar 8 months ago
Ragnar
ViceRegentvardaanbhatTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: This type of riddle debate can be well done, but it usually comes down more to the instigators ability to find holes in the contenders answer... This case was no different, as ViceRegent failed so utterly that he fell back on Ad Hominem attacks claiming his opponent was illiterate, rather than addressing anything written by him. The final round was just sad, with ViceRegent asking for a pity vote by claiming "Wow. God is right, atheists are fools." As that is not a line in the bible, it seems to be a reference to either someone he knows whom he thinks is God, or a voice he hears (not judging it as anything other than a weak debate tactic). Pro's case however was a simple box experiment (then further backed up with an explanation of how color works, "distribution of light power versus wavelength" which is basically to say the same thing as different sound pitches and intensities the blind man can already relate his experience to, assuming he's not a mental delinquent).
Vote Placed by red_x 8 months ago
red_x
ViceRegentvardaanbhatTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Reasons for voting decision: Vice regent has done nothing but be ignorant and arrogant about what he claims, as he cannot answer his own question without science.