Question by RW: For people who belive Spiritual/Metaphysical things do not exist…?
if, hypothetically, you had been born without vision at all. your eyes entirely non-functional.
for you, in that situation, the existance of color would be something you would be 100% incapable of perceiving.
thus, would you believe it existed, because so many others told you it did, and you just couldn’t see it, or would you insist that it did not exist?
what if you, and say, 8 other similar people were in a room with 1 sighted person. would color then be a delusion for that 1 person?
and to turn it around, if you were the 1 sighted person in a room full of people who were born without vision, would you doubt that the color you could percieve, was real, because you were in the minority? or would you have enough confidence (faith?) in your own perceptive capability, to know that you saw it, even if the others around you could not.
Four, I’m only focusing on the Color aspect, as thats a very specific aspect of sight thats for all intents, entirely non-tangible without visual perception.
the reason I focus on this is because the (not really at all subtle) equivalent, is something that is at best, eccentrically observable whatsoever to someone thats “blind” for the analogy.
what about for example some of the testing I remember reading about, or something where basically they took a device for detecting EM fields or something like that… and basically were able to confirm a certain frequency radiating from a person in certain directions and such, that was equivalent to what the person who could see aura’s saw in range and color relating to frequency and such, or something like that.
Delphic, but many times anti-metaphysical people insist that (following the analogy) since they cannot observe color, that there is no color to be observed.
Sage, but you can’t prove that those wavelengths and eye-attributes actually equate to what in our mind we identify as “color” to someone who has no vision.
and I also am of the opinion that Metaphysical events are NOT alien to scientific method, but merely that traditional science is based upon certain “givens” that isolate it from the incorporeal world. that if you adjusted those variables for the environment being tested, as such, that scientific method would still apply, and be effective.
and everyone please consider the fact that I’m talking specifically about COLOR, not HAVING vision at all, even someone who has bad enough vision to be legally blind, has visual stimuli. someone with no vision at all does not.
Craig,
your second paragraph, is the very essence of the point.
it IS part of the natural world. for people who can see ghosts, auras, percieve astral energy, or souls, or whatnot of countless various degrees and variations of non-organic perception, its as natural and as integrated into existance as their organic senses.
just as Color would *STILL* be “part of the natural world” even if humans universally had developed without visual perception, (wouldn’t that be an interesting world?) if a small percentage of people started getting visual perception… they’d be thought insane, because the “standard” of percption.. would have no concept of color at all.
“Supernatural” is a huge misnomer, because its NOT beyond nature, its simply a part many/most cannot, and through history could not, observe personally. … just as color would be for a society without vision.
Best answer:
Answer by fourmorebeers
If you had vision you COULD actually do what the others could not, you could predict where walls were, you could pick up silent objects, you could tell which liquids were which due to their colour. As soon as you provide me with evidence in any “Spiritual/Metaphyisical” manifestation I will immediate concede to you, but you got to get that evidence!
Edit:
But colour vision does allow you to do things, measurable things, that monchromatic sight does not. Also there are situations you describe in the real world! You can go into rooms full of blind people from birth with your colour vision, why not just try it?
And which anti-metaphysical people would these be?
And one more little thing… I have no problem with the fact that I as a human can see only a very small part of the electromagnetic spectrum, I can try and imagine what it would be like to see like a bee even though I cannot.
For an even better thought experiment try to imagine what it would be like to ‘see’ like a bat, Dawkins has written extensively on that.
Edit again:
You’ve just given it away! Sense perception is just that, perception, there does not have to be an external reality, we all have halucinations, most of us when we are asleep but some when awake. You have to show that there is something external to us for it to be accorded a seperate existence. I have no doubt such ‘experiences’ are real just as are religious visions, but they are real mental images and nothing more.
Know better? Leave your own answer in the comments!
As one with the eyes to see ‘color’ I KNOW the color is there and no one can tell me it is not.
people not capable of seeing things in this world are capable of IMAGINING things…
i can imagine how human beings would be living on mars although theres no humans live on mars.
on the other hand i can’t imagine how ‘god’ splits the sea for moses to pass on.
Society has an irrational fear of words. Like “spirit”, which
means “invisible”, or “without material form”.
There are all kinds of “spiritual” forces at work.
Gravity, radio waves, rays from the sun, the magnetic field that
holds our solar system together, infrared light, ultrviolet
light.
When will society mature?
There is a scientific explanation for color – the wavelenght of light, and the physical attributes of they eye that can percieve it in those that can see.
Metaphysical events cannot be scientifically measured. That does not mean they do not exist – just you can not prove something by someone’s word.
I would be blind not stupid I would observe the difference in the movements of sighted people plus they’d have nothing to gain by lying to me. Churches owe their existence to tricking people into believing the impossible.
Tammi Dee
If you perceive, you can know. If you cannot perceive, you have to decide what to believe.
It is a good thought related to matters of faith. Some people cannot sense their spirit or God. They are blind to it and no matter what others say, they trust their senses more than they trust others senses.
Or, as I like to call this debate: Insane or enlightened? How on earth do we know the difference? Even in my practice, even with people who follow my same path, I’ve had experiences I’m not going to talk about because it walks that razor-thin line. To put that better, *I* believe it’s real; others may well think me insane. Granted, I don’t much care if they do, but I’d prefer not to alienate people.
No, because even if I were blind, I could read a science book in braile that would reveal to me that color is simply the reflection of specific light waves in the e.m. spectrum. I have no reason to believe that light waves don’t exist because I’m unfortunate to have never seen light. It would pretty presumptuous of me to assume that the entire seeing world was playing a trick on me trying to convince me of the existence of the e.m. spectrum.
This question has nothing whatsoever to do with metaphysm. Metaphysm and Spiritualism deal with supernatural claims. By the very definition of supernatural it is not something which can be observed in nature. Not just by a small percentage or even a large portion of the population, but by anyone. If it could be observed or detected, it would be part of the natural world.
Your example is pretty lame in that you are trying to equate vision (an actual, physical property) with spirituality (an unproven, theoretical, nonexistant property). It doesn’t work.