Can tulpas create feedback for senses that don't work anymore?

[motorheadlk]

There's no reason to think that normal people perceive different colours differently because every step along the way is similar. It's not reasonable to doubt something because you cannot be ansolutely sure. Sure, there's no way of truly verifying what another experiences. Take that a step further and you've got: there's no way to verify anything outside of your own mind. It's really a moronic statement, and I'd like to see it applied in a useful context.

 

So, because it's similar it's the same? There we got it, smell and taste are the same. Or are you trying to say that everyone thinks equally? Or that there aren't any genes that modifies the ways that all of our brain works?

 

Unless we were clones, I don't see how the way we perceive colors would be the same at all.

---

Not the exact same color of red if you just think of red, but it's still red and not blue. Everyone sees all the shades of red differently I guess as we can't exactly compare, but I guess what we see would be pretty similar seeing that we actually can say what shade some color is if we have studied the same color whatevers.

 

But people with color blindness can see things weirdly I guess. Remember that one time when I was talking with someone when we were painting, there was this kinda ugly dull minty color the rest of us could call that (making even remarks how it would be nicer if it would be a tad more vibrant) and then this one friend of mine going oh, looks pretty gray to me. It was a dull color so not too far from gray in my eyes, but it wasn't gray. It was mint.

 

Yes. Not only there are genes that determine the way or own eyes works, like daltonism and color blidness, we can't tell, as Waffles think, that because our minds work similarly what we perceive as X color is the same. There are trillions of colors that the human eye can perceive, to think that all of us, despite our differences, would perceive all colors the same would, well... be ridiculous.

[waffles]

Because, deep down, we are similar. Sure, 'similar' implies that there are differences, but that wouldn't constitute a big difference like red/blue. Physiology is more or less the same for all of us, including our eyes. Likewise brain anatomy (extending to the visual cortex) is pretty much the same for everyone - at least, every 'normal' person. It's not reasonable to say that our perception of vision is so radically different when there's no step along the way that is significantly different.

[motorheadlk]

Because, deep down, we are similar. Sure, 'similar' implies that there are differences, but that wouldn't constitute a big difference like red/blue. Physiology is more or less the same for all of us, including our eyes. Likewise brain anatomy (extending to the visual cortex) is pretty much the same for everyone - at least, every 'normal' person. It's not reasonable to say that our perception of vision is so radically different when there's no step along the way that is significantly different.

 

There are genes that determine the way our vision works, and there are lot's of minor external factors that make everyone of us different, even clones. I don't remember how it is called in biology anymore, I know that there is the genetic and the ambiental things that determine things in living things.

 

Our minds don't work the same way, despite them being similar. Really, there are trillion of colors that we see, and our sense is subjective. And even the format of our brains differs from person to person, and there are a great deal of "diseases" that make we see things differently. Why assume that we all see the trillions (actually, it's about 10 million) of colors we are able to see equally, when there are so many variables into the equation.

[jean-luc]

Because, deep down, we are similar. Sure, 'similar' implies that there are differences, but that wouldn't constitute a big difference like red/blue. Physiology is more or less the same for all of us, including our eyes. Likewise brain anatomy (extending to the visual cortex) is pretty much the same for everyone - at least, every 'normal' person. It's not reasonable to say that our perception of vision is so radically different when there's no step along the way that is significantly different.

 

Then why isn't blue everyone's favorite color?

[waffles]

Maybe because the variables aren't significant? Some may perceive colour slightly differently, but, as I said before, this doesn't warrant belief in a significant difference.

 

Any genetic influence on this account will likely manifest as something like colour-blindness - which, in fact, is spotted pretty quickly. That these disorders are so easily identifiable really shows that a mismatch of colour between two people would be noticeable.

 

 

 

Then why isn't blue everyone's favorite color?

When I said 'deep down' I mean mechanisms of the brain such as visual processing. Personal preference is all in the personality.

[motorheadlk]

 

Then why isn't blue everyone's favorite color?

 

Thank you.

And because blue sucks. White > Black > Red > Everything else.

 

---

Maybe because the variables aren't significant? Some may perceive colour slightly differently, but, as I said before, this doesn't warrant belief in a significant difference.

 

Any genetic influence on this account will likely manifest as something like colour-blindness - which, in fact, is spotted pretty quickly. That these disorders are so easily identifiable really shows that a mismatch of colour between two people would be noticeable.

 

 

When I said 'deep down' I mean mechanisms of the brain such as visual processing. Personal preference is all in the personality.

 

We estimate that there are 10 million colors that the human eye perceive. Do you think that the genes programmed all of them to look the same for everyone and there is a specific gene to make them all look the same? Just because our ways of seeing is the same doesn't make the colors that we see the same. There are 7 billion people in the world, 7 billion different people, and there is 10 million colors that we see. Why in hell, just because our ways of thinking is similar, the color that we see be equal? Even if there was a specific gene that regulates visual processing for everyone of us, why do you think this gene would regularly make everyone see the same thing? We just associate wavelenghts with names for the colors that we see, yet the colors that we see are completely controlled by our brain, there are drugs that make we see colors differently, and then you just think that everyone sees the same colors.

 

You know what? That's just your opinion, man. You think there is no reason to believe that all the colors that we see might not be the same, and I think that everything points to them looking different. Let's please leave at that, or you are going to say why our visual processing should be similar and I'm going to insist on why that's bullshit.

 

I'm sorry to be rude with this discussion, but it is a matter of belief.

It's something I believe and that I already stated why, but I can't see any progression on this discussion where we actually reach any different conclusion, unless I was somehow capable of detailing the human mind with a few series of posts, or the human genome, or you would be able to do so.

 

What I think both of us can do is saying why we think what we think untill we both reach the same conclusio I'm proposing "Agree to disagree".

[jean-luc]

Actually, reading this through again, nobody here actually knows much about eye-cology, so we cant really come to any conclusion.

[motorheadlk]

Actually, reading this through again, nobody here actually knows much about eye-cology, so we cant really come to any conclusion.

 

And that's all

ijustsaid

folks.

[Onicron]

 

And that's all

ijustsaid

folks.

 

That includes your claims of course.

Now after I reread everything and got a good sleep, I must say that what I think is actually siding with your arguments earlier but still this is just armchair philosophizing about different approach concernin senses. There are a few errors in your approach

in my opinion

however:

 

waffles Wrote: There's no reason to think that normal people perceive different colours differently because every step along the way is similar.

 

motorheadlk Wrote: So, because it's similar it's the same? There we got it, smell and taste are the same...

 

I'm just pointing out that waffles was implying the similarity between different people concerning a single sense and you argumented with the similarity of two different senses of a single human. This is not how you handle an internet argument.

 

Anyways, why do I think there's similarities in our approach of this matter:

The most clever quote from you is this "...his experience, considering that it will be really close to what we sense, is as real as ours, for ours is not real too. Now let the deaf man think he knows what sound is for his notion of sound might be as close to reality as ours. ..."

I linked that wikipedia article about echolocation and it had This picture: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Brain_image_of_blind_echolocator.tif with a description: "Echo-related activity in the brain of an early-blind echolocator is shown on the left. There is no activity evident in the brain of a sighted person (shown on the right) listening to the same echoes"

This is basically exactly the same thing. If brain activity in sight related areas increases while a blind person echolocates, then in my opinion we can say that he has the sense of sight.

 

I'll use the power of my armchair to pull this claim even further and say: if someone missing the link between smell receptors in the nose and the smell related area in the brains manages to "taste the air" and increases the activity in the smell area of the brain while doing so; they have achieved in finding the sense of smell (or at least their perception of it is close enough to be called sensing the smell).

 

So in my opinion a sense is when areas linked to that exact sense increase in activity.

[jean-luc]

I'll use the power of my armchair to pull this claim even further and say:

wut. LOL