Is black actually white?

I accept that an aspect of "cognition" to to seek to predict/retrodict and control and that this "need" evokes a concept of relative permanent structures.
However, such structures are transient and species specific. "Earthness" for men is not " Earthness" for ants. I put it to you that "the Earth" you are talking about is in your minds eye, i.e. YOU are the "missing observer". There can be no structure without he who structures.

(NB Much of this is appropriate on the "reality thread" but there is so much low level word salad going on there that I have little to add to my single post which you may have spotted).

Well, chromatically speaking, they have great similarities.

Actually - since black is black because it absorbs all light, and white because it reflects it - we could argue that black, in absorbing all of what makes white white, is the very quintessence of white: while white, whose nature is to REFLECT (hence repel) all that makes white white, is its very antithesis.

Thus, in a sense, white IS black and black IS white.


There you go! Happy?

The question put to Fresco--did the earth exist before consciousness--reflects the old problem of idealism vs. materialism/realism. It seems to me that in absolute terms, terms that ignores the co-existence and co-dependence of object and subject, there is no earth either before or after consciousness. There WAS "something" (and I'm hesitant to make even that minimalist concession) before consciousness, but that something is constructed into "earth" with the birth and cultural shaping of consciousness. I can even say, ultimately, that what is true of "earth" is also true of "consciousness", but that drives us into the silence of mysticism--neti, neti.

Laptoploon

Consider this. Ask the question "did the Earth exist before men ?" to three historical subjects:

1. To a King Richard I (a medieval Christian) ..his possible answer..."yes - this domed plateau created by God in the midst of the heavens existed for a few days before the creation of man as stated in genesis."

2. To a 21st century science student (ignorant of philosophy)...."Yes, the Earth has existed as a solidified sphere of matter for n billion years before the emergence of man."

3. To a hypothetical 30th century scientist/philosopher. ..."The Earth is a 3 dimensional protruberence from n dimensional hyperspace occupied mostly by dark matter and is physically inseparable from all other visible celestial bodies via non-visible dimensions. Therefore as an individual body it has never really existed but as a psychological construct its "individuality" has certain attractions"

See the problem laptoploon ? /

(BTW it was YOU who saw YOUR tree in YOUR forest)

Laptoploon, there are clinics for people addicted to Naive Realism. They are called philosophy classes.

Laptoploon

I challenge you to think about a tree in a forest without visualzing it or experiencing it with "your minds eye". To remove yourself (the observer) from "the event" is "naive realism". What constitutes "an event" is defined by the observer.
An event must "significance" to an observer or no observation will take place.

Listen to the fan in your computer !

Why weren't you aware of it before reading this ?

Now you are stuck with "the event of hearing your fan" because we've made it "significant".

(And note that as I write this I am making the assumption that you have not passed away since our last exchange otherwise that "event" won't exist.)

A tree falling in a forest does make a sound, observer or not.

Somethin goin awry wi' ma postin tonigh' ma

Quote:

A tree falling in a forest does make a sound, observer or not.

and how the hell do you know. You bin ther? You experienced the tree pain?
Have you any idea what its like to have your base separated from yur root systm? Damn sure it makes a sound. It sounds like OW OOOH WASSA crunch