File spoon-archives/phillitcrit.archive/phillitcrit_1998/phillitcrit.9802, message 81


From: Patsloane-AT-aol.com
Date: Mon, 9 Feb 1998 22:02:51 EST
Subject: Re: PLC: Re: truths and illusions


In a message dated 98-02-09 18:29:27 EST, Deaun write:

> How do you deal with persistence of vision?  In that case, the eye
>  predicts and may even "see" something that does not happen because it
>  expects to see it.  This is an "illusion" in that there is a case where
>  one person may see what another person does not do.  So, what we "see" may
>  not at all be "given."   

I need a specific example of what you mean by peristence of vision.
  
  
>  > The color portion of the electromagnetic spectrum has  red
>  > at one end and violet at the other.  It doesn't offer any explanation for
the
>  > range of colors we call reddish violets, that look to us as if they were
>  > intermediary "between" red and violet.  
>  
>  Is there any reason why electromagnetic theory is required to offer an
>  explanation for this phenomenon?  

In this case, yes. Because Maxwell set that forth as his purpose, or part of
his purpose. He said color could be explained as an electromagnetic
phenomenon.

I think, Deaun, you're basically saying you don't agree withe Goethe's
statement.  That's OK with me.

pat


     --- from list phillitcrit-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---

   

Driftline Main Page

 

Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005