Colour-Blindness

TheBramble

Legendary member
Messages
8,394
Likes
1,170
Inspired by a post from Pervaz, I wasn't sure which forum to head for to post this as it's more physiology than psychology and probably ( :cool: ) nothing to do with trading anyway, so here we are under GTC.

A couple of points which are offered not so much in the expectation of any response, but more as a 'Thought for the Day' - just in case you run out of thoughts, today.

I'm writing a paper on the impact of vision defects (don't ask) and I was checking out some research on van Gogh. vG is considered by some to have suffered from Xanthopsia. This is a form of chromatopsia, a distortion in colour vision, in which objects appear more yellow than they truly are. It has also been suggested that his 'style' with frequent use of 'bursts of lights' and 'flashes' were due to an associated condition impacting the optic nerve and the subsequent intepretations by the brain of what is really being 'seen'.

My point is:- if vG did have these 'defects', he wouldn't have painted them so that we (who do not have these defects) would be able to identify them. The picture would have looked 'normal'. For example, if a painter 'sees' the true reality colour RED as GREEN. When he wishes to paint something that in reality was RED (he sees it as his GREEN) he chooses 'his' GREEN paint (which in reality for the rest of us is RED). So it comes out 'right'.

(If you're also getting confused at this point - visualise traffic lights as a focus)

And before you make the decision to never lend this geek your car, it works just fine.

All you're life you're told 'this is blue, this is green, this is red...etc.'. You don't very often stop to question if the 'colour' YOU see is the same colour everyone else 'sees'.

If you were born with the same defect as our hypothetical artist above, you'd probably never know about it.

RED=RED (for you) - Everyone else is seeing GREEN. You have no idea when they say the stop-light is RED is anything different to what you are seeing.

The grass is always GREEN - you know that. But the fact that your distorted vision gives you everyone else's RED, you'd never know.

If you're confused, you should be. I often am. But does anyone get what I'm on about?

And before anyone suggest this is an analogy for trading, it wasn't, unless someone comes up with a REALLY GOOD analogy in which case that was my intention the whole time.
 
I can understand what you mean. I am red/green colourblind and can't also recognise the colour purple. Purple is just blue to me no matter how many times a person immediately shows me a purple pencil upon learning this fact. Why are you studying this though?
 
You 'know' you can't see PURPLE because it looks like another colour (BLUE) - a colour the characteristics of and references for which you and everyone else agrees upon. And they are different.

But if PURPLE looked like PINK to you and PINK looked PURPLE - you'd never know. They'd always be identifiably different to you - just as they are to everyone else - but for quite different (and opposite) reasons.

I'm just wondering if there are any other areas of life where we could be totally mistaken about something 'in reality' yet never be aware of it...
 
TheBramble said:
I'm just wondering if there are any other areas of life where we could be totally mistaken about something 'in reality' yet never be aware of it...


I think this goes on all the time :D .

Take spelling as another trivial example. As a pertinent example on this forum, how often is the word "lose" (as in "not win") seen here incorrectly spelt as "loose" (as in "not tight")?
This is extremely common. Even though we have no doubt seen the word spelt correctly countless times it simply doesn't register that we have mis-spelt it, although we may be intelligent and observant people. We don't notice our mistake even though the evidence is staring us in the face.

In all walks of life (including trading of course ;) )this is possible and perhaps common. Incorrect beliefs can be maintained for a long time despite contrary evidence being ever-present.

Why should this be so?
 
Last edited:
jimvt said:
IIn all walks of life (including trading of course ;) )this is possible and perhaps common. Incorrect beliefs can be maintained for a long time despite contrary evidence being ever-present.
I think if 'contrary evidence is ever-present' incorrect beliefs would not be maintained for too long at all. It's where the 'evidence' confirms one's incorrect perception of reality in which I'm particularly interested..
 
I with you so far. Your question is one philosophers have studied at length. How do I know that what I am perceiving is what is really there? (solipsism... or something). I could ask you about your perception of things, but what if I am perceiving you in my own special way too? How to confer with an independent unbiased source?
Right?
JO
 
Top