Human are close to both beasts and angels. It's called dualism.

Colors are dependent on the wavelength of em radiation, so I don't think they're as subjective as they might appear. While it's true that not all people see the same, usually the color issue only comes up when someone can't pick up certain colors, as in color blindness.

I actually have had the same thought in the past myself. I tend not to think that could be the case after studying some color theory though.



Also, I agree with IamMe. the simplest answer is most likely correct, and living in a real universe would be the simplest explanation.

All the other ideas would necessarily assume a world for god, or the demon, or bio-computer network to exist in before we exist in that frame of reference.

My guess, and it's all that it is, since we're talking about subjective perception, is that there is some amount of variation, but it wouldn't be "flipped" to where the colors were reversed on the spectrum. I think it would be more like a distortion of the color spectrum. Maybe some peoples eyes would pick up reds better and things would appear more red to them.

There is always the possibility that in infancy the brain arbitrarily assigns different interpretations of the light, and those are used and further defined as you grow. I think there would be great similarity though, (at least among species) of how the brain interprets the information.

The way you see violet, yellow, etc is similar, but maybe not exactly the same as I see them. I could be wrong though, this is just what makes sense to me.

OK.


I don' understand. If we can't prove something impossible surely we must conclude it is possible. Isn't that the default position?

You may be mistaking brilliance for well-versed.
We have discussed this often, but more interestingly, some really great minds have discussed it for centuries.  I am simply trying to continue their work in a very small way.

I appreciate what you are saying; that you lead with your heart, but I think you also see the problem with using that as a method to go through life.  You don't "lead with your heart" in many other matters of importance, and arguably, the existence of a god is the most important matter we could ever imagine - except for our own existence.

I put this first (our existence), I trust that if there really was a god that wanted to know me, he would make it obvious.  Not play hide and seek.

I am trying to learn about this myself. Not whether there is a god or not, but what is the nature of reality and what is my nature; what is my reason: the thing that is most me for the time I am on the planet. Time passes too quickly to spend time dreaming of what an afterlife might or might not be like.

I would simply encourage you, if I might be so bold to offer advise, is to establish within yourself what you honor and love about life and yourself and practice the actions that support those things. "Know thyself".  Get to know who you are as a person and love yourself as that person, not feel as if you are somehow tragically flawed to never measure up to some level of perfection - but always strive to be better in YOUR estimation of what is "better".



BTW, just a small word on trusting your heart: very nice but as I said, maybe not the most rtustworthy in matters of reality. For example, if you hadn't learned in school that the Earth orbits the Sun, could you honestly tell me your heart would have told you this?  Look at the sky, stars, Sun and Moon. There is nothing telling you that you are flying through space at 67,000 miles per hour, or spinning over 1,000 miles per hour.  That is, your heart is not a measure for truth, only a measure of your own desires.  You desire god to exist, but this doen't mean its true. It would just be really cool if gods existed.

Why is it that you think mankind is not on the same level as animals?

Because our intellect allows us to commit mass murder against all creatures, including our own?
Because our emotional instability allows us to enjoy torture and subjigation?
Because we have the mental capacity to submit all of our intelect to the dictatorial benevolence of a nonexistant being?

Or is it because you were trained to believe this? The same way Pavlovs dogs were trained to drool?



I say "you" and mean "us", all of us are only as rational as we are trained to be. We are all slaves to our environment until we can understand it.

No I'm not new I just changed my name from CubanCigars.


My post was a response to the idea that Humans are not animals. I went off on a little tie raid, I was grumpy that day. My disagreement is with this idea that we are so much better than all animals. We, humans, have some traits that are astonishing and wonderful. However we have the same obvious irrationality and aggression that our animal ancesstors have. I was trying to point out that our irrational beliefs can cause transendent possitive experiences like hope, or aggressive hatred. A byproduct of the evolutionary process.


On the possibility of a philisophical Maxtrix... We could never know in any real sense

If we asume there is some Matrix then any information we recieve about the Matrix would be subject to the manipulations of the Matrix. This alone makes such a claim impossible to prove, or to disprove.

Wait a second, are you saying that some humans are literally different species from each other? That some of us are literally animals while some other group of chosen people are above nature?

Or are you saying that some people are "animals" only in the sense that they are more aggressive or irrational than others?