How do you know if the colour blue is really blue?

Question

... It became known as the colour blue but that was just someone's opinion! Thus, the colour 'green' may actually be 'lilac' and what not. There is no substansial evidence to prove that any colour is exactly how we see it. The way I see it is, someone decided to call blue - blue... They assumed that name would be fit. But as you know, assumptions cans be dangerous - especially when looking at the question philosophically.

Please offer your opinions only.

Answer 1

Your absolutely right. Although I believe everyone does see the same blue, cause they love it & its so popular ♥.

I guess maybe your a black chick in real life, I just can't see it.

The wavelength doesn't prove anything. Just because it has a different wavelenght doesn't mean we all see the same thing.

Answer 2

Blue is (another word for blue) to me. Names don't matter. It is what it is. It could be someone’s red, but their red is my blue. As long as my perception of blue doesn't change, I'm fine with it being called blue. It won't change though. Shakespeare said something about roses in Romeo and Juliet similar to this. If you want, you can call blue by some made up name that suits you. That may confuse people though. The person who decided to name the color blue did not assume anything. They simply decided. The sky was a certain color in the middle of the day. A group of influential beings called it blue. They all agreed and now we call it blue. They did not assume the name to be fit. To them it was fit, and so it was not an assumption, so it was not dangerous. Dangerous assumptions are different. Like assuming that you turned off the gas stove when you left your house for vacation, or assuming you fed the dog when you forgot. Many things have the same color. From observation of these objects, one can tell what other object share the same colors. If this is a color that this is and it looks like that color over there, it must be the same color. This is a proof, not an assumption. It is based on observed facts. The objects share a color. They are both of the same color. It will be called blue. I don't follow the bible, but doesn't it state that God called day, day and night, night, and all of the things like that. Did God assume things? If you believe in God, it would be best not to think this way. Assumptions are dangerous. God assuming things would endanger Himself and everyone around. In fact, I stay on the safe side and don't believe in God. Life is much simpler for me that way. But blue is blue because man says so, and with today’s world that is perfectly fine. It is based on observations, unlike other things people choose to think, or should I say believe.

Answer 3

"Blue" is a man made name we gave a colour to describe that colour when we saw it later.
Early humans could have used car, Jet or cat to describe the colour blue. Blue is only a word. Through training we have come to associate the word blue with a colour we see.
This training is gained at schools. That is why we associate a cat with the word cat when we see a cat or a rock with the word rock.
Everything needs a name to be able to identify it. That is why we created language.

The other explanation is that we see blue because of the information transmitted to our brains by the rods and cones inside our eyes. We see the colour and we then think of the name of it.
The colour is natural, the name is a man made name we give that colour to be able to identify it later.

Answer 4

Blue is the name we give, in English to any object that absorbs all colors of light except blue.. Blue is reflected. It doesnt matter what we call that color of light, it's just a name someone assigned to it so that we are all on the same page when talking about things. That is the representational basis of language. Without it, you would not be able to read what I'm writing now, and understand the concept that I'm trying to get accross. A car is only a car because we call it that, blue is blue, a chair is a chair...

Answer 5

Opinions only? It's not about opinion at all. In fact, that's the point, it's not a judgement about what blue is, blue is a globally defined standard.

There are institutes, experts, and PhD's who devote there (somewhat boring) lives to this. When white light is reflected off an object, only certain wavelengths bounce back. It's studied, analyzed, cataloged, and an international body of experts "name" it for global standardization.

Blue= a wavelength of 475 nanometers. It doesn't look greenish.

Answer 6

I agree. Blue is a learned thing. If we taught the next generation that what we see as yellow to be their blue, and our blue their red, our red their yellow, then what would happen? Also, how can I tell that the color you know to be blue isn't a completely different color? The problem is that I have been taught that a particular hue is "x;" you have been taught that a particular hue is "x." Althought the color may actually be completely different ends of the spectrum, that is what we have been taught and so believe. I'm so glad I'm not the only one who has thought of this.

Answer 7

Your question has nothing to do with "blue" really; that's just one example. The whole thing comes down to the concept of language. A word in a language (english or any other) has the meaning it does because the users of the language have all agreed upon it.

If everybody who uses this language were to agree that the color which we currently term "blue" were in fact to be called "lilac", then lilac it would be. The agreement of the users of a word as to its meanings (or even its existence) are how new words and usages enter our language. Examples are "cool" and "phat"....

Generally though the meanings of words have evolved through usage over time; and if you can't get people to agree to something important (like world peace), I haven't a clue how you expect them to agree to adopt a new word to represent the color currently refered to as "blue".

Answer 8

Isn't *everything* really a matter of definition tho?

What's a chair?
What's a hamburger?
What's a car?

You could probably teach a child anything and they would grow up thinking a basketball was a blender.

Blue is just the name......it's immaterial really...isn't it? It doesn't matter what you call things, as long as you recognize them for what they are. In other words, you wouldn't try to play poker on a football, or take a bath with a spatula. But it helps to be consistent with the rest of the world....doesn't it?

:)

Answer 9

Light weights have different frequencies which (if our eyes work properly) we perceive in our minds as different colors. We have no way of knowing however whether the blue you see in your mind is the same as the blue I see in my mind.

As for the naming of the colors (or the naming of anything) all that's required is mutual agreement so that when I ask you to pass the blue paint you know which color I want.

Answer 10

i've always wondered if colors were different for everyone- like if I looked through someone else's eyes, the sky would be orange and the grass would be red or something, but the person would still call them blue and green because that's the way they've always seen things