The Instigator
IntellectualPerson
Con (against)
Winning
10 Points
The Contender
HHH0000
Pro (for)
Losing
1 Points

Is black a color?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
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 4 votes the winner is...
IntellectualPerson
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/16/2013 Category: Science
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 2,890 times Debate No: 42481
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (14)
Votes (4)

 

IntellectualPerson

Con

I will argue in favor of the resolution that black is indeed not a color.

How black is not a color

1) Let us use Newton's prism to break white light into various wavelengths of each color.



We can measure red, orange, green, etc. However, we can not measure black. Black can not become any more "black" (As we perceive colors). And if we illuminate an area of darkness, even in the very least, the area will no longer be black. It would be gray.

2) Let us use the electromagnetic spectrum.

File:EM Spectrum Properties edit.svg

It consists of every color. Colors reflect themselves, however absorbs every other color. However, black does not reflect any of those colors. It simply absorbs all of them.

Conclusion:

I have come to the conclusion that black is simply the absence of the presences of the visible spectrum colors.
HHH0000

Pro

From the definition given by humans in a language to call something a color is to call something observed through the wave lengths received or not received in the eye. So in language terms black is a color but in light wave length terms it is no light at all.

The definition of a color is the property possessed by an object of producing different sensations on the eye as a result of the way the object is absorbing and/or reflecting light. An object absorbs or reflects light based on it's shape.

If an object absorbs all of the light it appears a certain way to the human eye. We identified it as black.

So yes black is a color.
Debate Round No. 1
IntellectualPerson

Con

Rebuttals:

"From the definition given by humans in a language to call something a color is to call something observed through the wave lengths received or not received in the eye. So in language terms black is a color but in light wave length terms it is no light at all."

color-spectrum

According to that, there are no range of wavelengths of black.

Black is not a color. Not because no light is emmited, but because it absorbs every color in the visible spectrum, rather than reflecting one. That's physics.

"The definition of a color is the property possessed by an object of producing different sensations on the eye as a result of the way the object is absorbing and/or reflecting light. An object absorbs or reflects light based on it's shape.

If an object absorbs all of the light it appears a certain way to the human eye. We identified it as black.

So yes black is a color."

If it absorbs all colors rather than reflecting one, or even some, then the electromagnetic spectrum colors' presences are absent. Therefore, black is not a color.
HHH0000

Pro

It's irrelevant wether or not the color black reflects light or note because then you can diverge on tangents like, well, no colors exist since objects we observe aren't actually any color they are emitting that color it's light reflecting from that object. So only light has color. It does not make sense because your using words with their own dictionary definition which mean something different.
In true terms the definition of a color includes black.

It uninteresting to debate wether something should be called X or Y because it's just a way of calling something.
Other animals don't even use words, so what? Nothing exists for them?

That's it. Black is a color.
Debate Round No. 2
IntellectualPerson

Con

Rebuttals:

"no colors exist since objects we observe aren't actually any color they are emitting that color it's light reflecting from that object"

Incorrect.

Red reflects itself, and absorbs every other color. Other than black, in a color, there is always light emmited. Let me prove my point again.

color-spectrum

According to that, there are no range of wavelengths of black. Black can not become more "black" (For the human perception of colors). Even the simplest ray of light can break into an area of darkness (Through transparent objects) and illuminate it.

"So only light has color. It does not make sense because your using words with their own dictionary definition which mean something different."

Well, that is so because that is their definition. Black is the absence of the presences of the visible spectrum colors.

Black, though, exists for pigments. The history of black pigments includes charcoal, iron metals, and other chemicals as the source of black paints.

"It uninteresting to debate wether something should be called X or Y because it's just a way of calling something."

Definitely. Words are subjective. However, based on our definitions, we can determine whether or not X or Y is so.
HHH0000

Pro

My statement about things not having any color was an false example to state the fact that your arguments are diverging on to irrelevant tangents.

If black is a color from the definition of black and the definition of color, then it is. Check the official dictionary definition of black. It mentions it's a color.

Wether black is different, referring to other colors and the attributes from different wave lengths then yes it is since it is no wave length.

There is language and then there is simply physics. Each of the words "language" and "physics" are used to name and identify.

Your saying we shouldn't call black a color because of it's different properties. It's irrelevant because we're calling elements from the basis of constructed and generally accepted language terms.

What are you trying to come down to?
Debate Round No. 3
IntellectualPerson

Con

Rebuttals:

"If black is a color from the definition of black and the definition of color, then it is. Check the official dictionary definition of black. It mentions it's a color."

So, the official dictionary is more reliable than any other one? How so? Don't you remember that words are subjective?

Also, it is defined as a "color" of the absence of colors. That does not make sense. If it is the absence of the electromagnetic/visible spectrum colors, therefore, it is not a color.



"Wether black is different, referring to other colors and the attributes from different wave lengths then yes it is since it is no wave length"

color-spectrum

There are no range of wavelengths of black, and you have agreed with that. It is not measurable. Black can not become more "black" (As we perceive colors). And if we were to illuminate an area of darkness, even in the very least, it would no longer be black.

"There is language and then there is simply physics. Each of the words "language" and "physics" are used to name and identify."

Yes, true. Words are subjective.

"Your saying we shouldn't call black a color because of it's different properties. It's irrelevant because we're calling elements from the basis of constructed and generally accepted language terms."

Yes. It is the absence of the presences of the electromagnetic/visible spectrum colors. It does not reflect any colors, like color reflect their colors, it simply absorbs them, like a color absorbs other colors.

"What are you trying to come down to?"

I am trying to come to the conclusion that black is indeed not a color, as its attributes and characteristics aren't inherent from scientific facts.
HHH0000

Pro

Official dictionaries are generally accepted by scholars and language educators and the general public because they were written by them.

Words are subjective in there nature and origin but are made objective by the fact that societies generally agree on the meaning of words to make sense of communication.

If two words meant two different things to two different people it would make it confusing to communicate if your not aware of that information. If everybody gave a different meaning to their own words than it would make it complicated and extremely difficult to communicate.

The spectrum of colors does not include black but why would it mean black isn't a color? The spectrum of colors only talks of colors within the spectrum of light.

The absence of the the light of the visible spectrum of colors, not the abscense of color.

Color is a perception of the human eye from the properties observed to allow something to be identified.

Why does black need to have one or more wave lengths of color to be a color.

It seems to be that your confusing the fact that because your talking about the visible spectrum of colors your not including any other sources of color. So, what would you make of the wave lengths of light non visible to the human eye like infrared?
Debate Round No. 4
IntellectualPerson

Con

Rebuttals:

"Official dictionaries are generally accepted by scholars and language educators and the general public because they were written by them."

So, you wrote that?

Also, if you meant something else, then it is not reliable, just like wikipedia is not considered to be an all "reliable" source.

"Words are subjective in there nature and origin but are made objective by the fact that societies generally agree on the meaning of words to make sense of communication."

That is not what I meant. Words are subjective. Period. Our lord did not magically come down and give us knowledge.

"The spectrum of colors does not include black but why would it mean black isn't a color? The spectrum of colors only talks of colors within the spectrum of light."

Incorrect.

The electromagnetic spectrum is the range of all possible frequencies of electromagnetic radiation (Photons of colors)[1]. Every color reflects itself, and absorbs every other color. Black does not reflect any colors. It simply absorbs them. Therefore, it is the absence of the presences of the visible spectrum colors. Therefore, it itself is not a color.

Also, remember that black is immeasurable. It can not become any more "black" (At least for the human perception of colors). Also, if we were to illuminate a room of darkness, even in the very least, it would no longer be black. It would be grey.

"The absence of the the light of the visible spectrum of colors, not the abscense of color."

Actually, both. Like said, it does not reflect any colors.

"Why does black need to have one or more wave lengths of color to be a color."

It's not that. Like said, it is not reflecting any colors.

Conclusion:

I thank my opponent for accepting this particular debate and highly contesting my mainpoint, as it is not inherent from a standpoint.

Vote Con!

Sources:

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org...
HHH0000

Pro

I write all of my arguments by myself. Check my text for plagiarism. But, nevertheless I'm flattered by your remark. Never will you find anything I say to be from someone else. All sources I use would be mentioned. In all arguments stated I never used sources other then my general knowledge. Yes, I surprise some and envy others but no matter, I'm strong minded and open to anything even and especially if I'm wrong about something. I don't see being wrong or making mistakes as a taboo conception that I am stupid or inferior. I value my opinion and the valid arguments to help me evolve in the best way. I would be the first one to admit I am wrong if I believed so. After all they are just arguments and being wrong is not going to kill you in itself.

God does not exist and I could debate that as well. But people have a hard time changing their mind on something especially when it is something they put their heart, time and efforts into and have lived with, and believed in it for most of their life's.
You are not born believing in god and the idea of a god would not necessarily cross your mind if you were not exposed to it. People, societies and communication has lead people to group in beliefs that are the same to gain strength in numbers, why do religion leaders push to create new followers!, simply because it's a traditional way of validating your beliefs through the nuance of similarities. People feel more comfortable around familiarity, it's human nature.

The definition of a color includes black.

Thank you for debating!

I wish you and your family as well as all people commenting and reading this a pleasant season and if celebrated, Christmas and New Year.
Debate Round No. 5
14 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by HHH0000 3 years ago
HHH0000
The definition of the abscense of light isn't black. It's a false belief that emerged as science came after words and language. For example if I take 2 different red shirts are they actually completely red and identical!, no. They are perceived red but in essence they are two different reds. Same with black. Anything and probably everything you call black isn't 100% the absence of light. The end of the spectrum where there is no light therefore indicates a variant of what if observed will appear black which has different properties from actual black we see and observe every day.
Posted by HHH0000 3 years ago
HHH0000
Same dictionary, definition of black
http://www.oxforddictionaries.com...
color!!!

you can't technically call something not be something it is because of its inherit properties as even do it does make sense in physics it removes the sense from communication and language.
Posted by HHH0000 3 years ago
HHH0000
http://www.oxforddictionaries.com...

Black is a color
Because how can you identify the true color as it will appear differently through the color sensors wether it's a camera your eye or anything else. You can't define any of the colors because the word originated from before light was known and explained in physics.
You can't relate something like language to define something like physics because words are not precise enough.
Posted by HHH0000 3 years ago
HHH0000
The general public means anyone really. I'm 22 not 34 I just don't show it on my profile 34 was random.
Posted by IntellectualPerson 3 years ago
IntellectualPerson
Incorrect. He told me that the public wrote the dictionary.
Posted by Ragnar 3 years ago
Ragnar
*facepalm*
You thought a 34 year old, wrote the English dictionary... Ok, goodnight.

(removing this from my notifications)
Posted by IntellectualPerson 3 years ago
IntellectualPerson
No, Ragnar. You misunderstood. I was asking him if he wrote the dictionary.
Posted by Ragnar 3 years ago
Ragnar
The very start of R5... Inquiring if your opponent wrote their own argument "So, you wrote that?"
Posted by IntellectualPerson 3 years ago
IntellectualPerson
No, Ragnar. You don't understand. I NEVER accused him of not writing his own content. I NEVER accused him of plagiarism. If so, please quote.
Posted by Ragnar 3 years ago
Ragnar
Accusing him of not writing the content of his own argument, is not an accusation of plagiarism?
4 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Vote Placed by Ore_Ele 3 years ago
Ore_Ele
IntellectualPersonHHH0000Tied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 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:30 
Reasons for voting decision: This could have been an easy win for Pro, had he taking the opportunity to define "color" since Con left it out. While Pro did provide a definition, he did not link anything to give the definition any authority or weight.
Vote Placed by iamanatheistandthisiswhy 3 years ago
iamanatheistandthisiswhy
IntellectualPersonHHH0000Tied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 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:30 
Reasons for voting decision: This was a fun debate to read, unfortunately its a debate Pro could never win. Colour is defined in physics and as such the debate of whether Black is a colour has been decided years ago. I would suggest Con chooses a more challenging topic to debate other than a solid physics fact :) Conduct and grammar is tied. Sources are tied, as I would have expected more from both sides.
Vote Placed by TheAmazingAtheist1 3 years ago
TheAmazingAtheist1
IntellectualPersonHHH0000Tied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:40 
Reasons for voting decision: Due to HHH0000's spelling errors in the final round, I grant Con S&G. Also, his arguments, although repetitive, were a lot more convincing and pretty much just looked amazing.
Vote Placed by Ragnar 3 years ago
Ragnar
IntellectualPersonHHH0000Tied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01 
Reasons for voting decision: If this debate is over what is accepted physics, than there is no argument, which would not let con win since there would be nothing to measure. If it's over which definition is better for us, both debaters have a long way to go in explaining practicality of their arguments to daily human existence. As things stand... CONDUCT: Con's accusation of plagiarism did cause me to do a check (Google searching segments of pro's argument), I found it unwarranted. S&G: There were errors, but no Jar Jar speak. ARGUMENT: According to Merriam-Webster black is "having the very dark color of coal or the night sky." Pro really should have cited a dictionary, to make this valid fact not feel like an Appeal To False Authority. While most of the argument consisted of them repeating themselves, pro was coming ahead until the final round in which two small comments by con made him abandon the resolution. SOURCES: Con would have easily taken this, had he cited his evidence.