A blind man cannot have the same terms of reference as the sighted man. Although he may come close to a description, because he lacks the quality of sight, he cannot know entirely what the colour 'red' actually is. Therefore, his assessment of red lacks something that the sighted man already knows to be true. It would feel nonsensical for a blind man to tell the sighted ones that he 'knew' what red is.
I think you may be likening the situation to several things. At a guess, I would think that you believe that a select few people see something accurately, while many others do not. What that is, I do not know. I would guess that it may be something to do with your belief as to how the world operates in some way.
By this I mean that perhaps a small group of people know that their version of reality is correct, based on their knowledge of a thing (rather like seeing 'red' for what it actually is rather than a haphazard attempt to understand 'red' without the necessary ingredient required to see red in the first place).
Perhaps you see that anger is completely foolish because you see it for what it is - an ultimately destructive force, despite supposed benefits (in the short-term) in some cases.
2006-09-02 21:33:45
·
answer #1
·
answered by Sun is Shining ❂ 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
*Gerald McClellan by no ability had a gamble too My checklist in no particular order a million. Riddick Bowe 2. Zab Judah 3. Mike Tyson 4. Jermain Taylor 5. Fernando Vargas 6. David Reid 7. Rocky Juarez 8. Mark Breland 9. James Kirkland 10. Audley Harrison
2016-12-18 03:56:06
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
to think outside of the box. blind men describing the color red would be objective. the blind men have no reference. In likening the scenario to modern times, I would say that our loyal solders and Marines in Iraq are the blind men with the American top government officials among the select few who are sighted.
2006-09-02 18:39:50
·
answer #3
·
answered by konala 3
·
1⤊
1⤋
I think that you are talking about the Bush administration. A bit of a knock on the president and his policies. The color red may be symbolic of his war policies?
2006-09-02 21:19:27
·
answer #4
·
answered by Walty 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
What you're describing sounds like Plato's Allegory of the Cave (if I even remember the title correctly. It's been years since I read it).
2006-09-02 18:48:15
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
I would liken it to many of today's Christians trying to describe creation, the meaning of life, life and death, and God.
They are sure of themselves, but really don't have a friggin' clue.
Do catapillers tell each other, "You will never be a butterfly"?
.
2006-09-02 18:34:51
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
i thought of a story when i read your question .
once a person was explaining about his stomach pain to his blind friends. he told the cause of his stomach pain was due to taken milk of cow. the blinds asked what colour was it . he told it is white. they further questioned him what do you mean by white. he told them it was white like crane. then they asked him what was crane. he bent his hands like crane and showed to his blind Friends. then the blind friends told him that if you take such a abnormal size food then certainly your stomach would be affected.
2006-09-02 18:46:27
·
answer #7
·
answered by adraya 2
·
0⤊
1⤋
In the realm of the blind, the one eyed man is king !
2006-09-02 18:35:49
·
answer #8
·
answered by S.A.M. Gunner 7212 6
·
0⤊
1⤋
Death and blood because men are the ones that started all the wars.
2006-09-02 18:31:42
·
answer #9
·
answered by Jinx 5
·
0⤊
1⤋
Death and Blood and Opium.
Cyanide and Happiness.
Love and Hate.
Poppies and Pommegranites.
Organs and Ordeals.
War and Fortune.
2006-09-02 18:35:48
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋