A Conversation for Rainbows End - Fact and Fiction
Ravenbait Started conversation Mar 6, 2003
I only have one eye.
The philosophical debate over things or images of things is a worthwhile one; I cannot ever know that the rainbow I see is the same as the rainbow you see, because what we each see is an interpretation of various signals being received by our sensory apparatus. Subjective, you see.
But still, you have a good point; a very zen response to the koan of the rainbow's end.
Recumbentman Posted Mar 7, 2003
Hem . . . "what we each see is an interpretation" -- I can't agree with that.
We see, and we interpret. We don't then take another look, to see our interpretation.
Wittgenstein: "Don't think -- look!"
Ravenbait Posted Mar 7, 2003
The brain interprets. You think you see the sun when you look into the sky? The light takes 8 minutes to reach you. The sun isn't even there any more. And then the light causes little electrical impulses to fire off, and your brain interprets those impulses. There is no direct image of the sun in your mind, it's all interpretation.
This is why scents are evocative, why there are tribes in the Amazon that can distinguish shades of blue green that are invisible to the Western eye but can't tell the difference between orange and pink. That's why you can hear a bass line and your brain will fill in the melody when it thinks it knows the song, and it can be completely wrong. Most of what you see is your brain filling in the gaps. Our senses are shaped by our environment, but also by our preconceptions.
What you experiences is an interpretation of sensory data. Not the actual environment.
Recumbentman Posted Mar 8, 2003
You speak of what I experience; but what I see is still the sun.
ChiKiSpirit -- A1008604 Posted Mar 9, 2003
Key: Complain about this post