About the colour red (please pay attention):
Have you ever heard of synaesthesia?
"Synaesthesia is a neurological condition in which stimulation of one sense leads to a percept (sensation) in another, as well as in the original. The term is from the Greek syn (union) + aisthesie (sensation) and refers to a ‘union of the senses’.
Synaesthesia was first described by John Locke in 1690 in an essay entitled ‘Concerning human understanding’:
‘A studious blind man who had mightily beat his head...to understand those names of light and colours...betrayed one day that he now understood what scarlet signified. Upon which, his friend demanded what scarlet was? The blind man answered, it was like the sound of a trumpet.’
Taste can evoke tactile sensation' sound can evoke colour. Synaesthetic percepts are distinctive - automatic, instantaneous and consistent for a given stimulus. If a trumpet evokes scarlet, it will always evoke not merely scarlet, but that particular shade of scarlet. It is predominantly unidirectional; if sounds evoke colours, colours will not evoke sounds, except in extremely rare cases of ‘symmetric’ synaesthesia.
Developmental synaesthesia is present from birth and may occur individually or in families. Synaesthesia may also be acquired following a neurological injury or via pharmacological means, most notoriously LSD. While the precise neural basis remains under investigation, researchers theorise that it is a normal trait that usually disappears during neuronal ‘pruning’ in the first months of life, enabling us to distinguish smell from sight from sound. In synaesthetes some of the connections are retained. Evidence includes functional MRI studies showing activation of brain arease associate with colour perception when coloured-word synaesthetes hear words." (http://www.sdc.org.uk/general/features/feature_music.htm)
In Locke's example, the blind man figured out the colour scarlet for himself.
A fascinating story of sight sprung from technology:
www.seeingwithsound.com/asynesth.htm
A less technical article:
http://www.alite.co.uk/readings/rainbow.htm
And have y'all forgotten Helen Keller?
David C:
Entheogens: to answer your question, I have taken them (LSD, mushrooms, & salvia divinorum, to be precise), although the term "entheogen" itself is new to me.
Rock paintings: rock paintings in both France (Lascaux etc) and Southern Africa are believed to depict, amongst other things, shamanic visionary experience triggered by music, dance, & perhaps something edible. (I'm not sure to what extent entheogens were implicated in these rites, but I know that in South Africa at least, the aboriginal San are believed to have taught the immigrant Nguni people their herblore.)
Reading the Wikipedia entheogen article, with particular reference to the Christian extermination of witchcraft (and entheogen use), I appreciate your scorn for the pale vampire creed.
Originally posted by KellyJayIt's obvious for me that you don't know or don't care about what the colour red is. If you think you know what red by pointing out things that are red, you'll never know why they are red or what it means for them to be red.
[b]What numbers? Nanometers? First you explain one meter and then explain that it is one billionth of a meter. Easy.[/b]
Yes, and you understand 'red' by hearing 650X or 700X whatever the
numbers were you game me? That is enough to know what red is?
You think if I said 800X is a brighter hue of red than 700X you'd
grasp what "hue" was, or tha ...[text shortened]... visible is, so for me I'd have no trouble grasping your numbers and
gleaning an answer.
Kelly[/b]
Just because you don't understand the "set of numbers" (???) doesn't mean a blind person can't.
- Joined
- 01 Oct 04
- Moves
- 12095
Originally posted by no1marauderI suppose it is different if you are born blind.
Try this:
: How do blind people come to know color?
Andrea (age 21)
Tiffin University
Tiffin, Ohio
A:
It would seem as if a truly blind person (not just someone who is partially blind, or "legally" blind, or became blind sometime in life) would never be able to experience colors in the way that someone can see does. ...[text shortened]...
Tom
http://van.hep.uiuc.edu/van/qa/section/Light_and_Sound/Colors/20031117132433.htm
Originally posted by Bosse de NageFrom the Catechism:
What is it?
(All viewpoints welcome. Leave your firearms at the door.)
The Father and the Son revealed by the Spirit
243 Before his Passover, Jesus announced the sending of "another Paraclete" (Advocate), the Holy Spirit. At work since creation, having previously "spoken through the prophets", the Spirit will now be with and in the disciples, to teach them and guide them "into all the truth".68 The Holy Spirit is thus revealed as another divine person with Jesus and the Father.
244 The eternal origin of the Holy Spirit is revealed in his mission in time. The Spirit is sent to the apostles and to the Church both by the Father in the name of the Son, and by the Son in person, once he had returned to the Father.69 The sending of the person of the Spirit after Jesus' glorification70 reveals in its fullness the mystery of the Holy Trinity.
245 The apostolic faith concerning the Spirit was confessed by the second ecumenical council at Constantinople (381): "We believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord and giver of life, who proceeds from the Father."71 By this confession, the Church recognizes the Father as "the source and origin of the whole divinity".72 But the eternal origin of the Spirit is not unconnected with the Son's origin: "The Holy Spirit, the third person of the Trinity, is God, one and equal with the Father and the Son, of the same substance and also of the same nature. . . Yet he is not called the Spirit of the Father alone,. . . but the Spirit of both the Father and the Son."73 The Creed of the Church from the Council of Constantinople confesses: "With the Father and the Son, he is worshipped and glorified."74
246 The Latin tradition of the Creed confesses that the Spirit "proceeds from the Father and the Son (filioque)". The Council of Florence in 1438 explains: "The Holy Spirit is eternally from Father and Son; He has his nature and subsistence at once (simul) from the Father and the Son. He proceeds eternally from both as from one principle and through one spiration. . . . And, since the Father has through generation given to the only-begotten Son everything that belongs to the Father, except being Father, the Son has also eternally from the Father, from whom he is eternally born, that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Son."75
EDIT: Who* is it/he*?
Originally posted by PalynkaI think it's simply because Jesus refers to Him (the Holy Spirit) as a separate Person from the Father and the Son.
Personally, I never found a Christian that could properly explain me why the HS is considered an entity (person) separate from the Father, even if most of them consider the Trinity very important.
Originally posted by lucifershammerThank you for your answer. If you can quote me the passages in the Bible where the HS is referred as a separate Person, I would appreciate it.
I think it's simply because Jesus refers to Him (the Holy Spirit) as a separate Person from the Father and the Son.
Originally posted by PalynkaJohn xiv 16-17:
Thank you for your answer. If you can quote me the passages in the Bible where the HS is referred as a separate Person, I would appreciate it.
"16 And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Counselor to be with you forever—
17 the Spirit of truth. The world cannot accept him, because it neither sees him nor knows him. But you know him, for he lives with you and will be in you."
It's clear the Holy Spirit is being spoken of as a person here.
Jn xiv 26:
"26 But the Counselor, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you all things and will remind you of everything I have said to you. "
The Holy Spirit is distinct from the Father and the Son.
EDIT: All verses from the NIV.
Originally posted by PalynkaHere is the point, if I tell you to get the red pogo stick, you would
It's obvious for me that you don't know or don't care about what the colour red is. If you think you know what red by pointing out things that are red, you'll never know why they are red or what it means for them to be red.
Just because you don't understand the "set of numbers" (???) doesn't mean a blind person can't.
look and grab it. If you tell the blind person to get it, without aid
he could not if there were several different pogo sticks each a
different color, he would either guess, or have someone tell them
what one they had to get. Even if they could scan it with something,
and the scanner spit out a sound of a trumpet, or set of numbers,
an audible tone, tingling of electric shock, a rubbing of a handle,
some output from the scanning device, it would be the output
the person would understand not the color red. It would be just
like them believing someone when they tell them the one on the
far right is the red one. For them it would not be the color red
they are experiencing, but a sound, or whatever output was
given from the scan, or the voice of someone telling them
which was which.
Kelly
Originally posted by KellyJayit would be the output the person would understand not the color red
Here is the point, if I tell you to get the red pogo stick, you would
look and grab it. If you tell the blind person to get it, without aid
he could not if there were several different pogo sticks each a
different color, he would either guess, or have someone tell them
what one they had to get. Even if they could scan it with something,
and the scanner ...[text shortened]... output was
given from the scan, or the voice of someone telling them
which was which.
Kelly
You are equating "understanding the colour red" as "identifying the colour red". What I'm saying is that identifying is not understanding. And even if you consider that it is, your scanner would identify it all the same...
Originally posted by KellyJayWhat does that have to do with your claim that you can't describe the Holy Spirit in words in a way that a non-Born Again Christian could understand just like someone couldn't explain to a blind person in words what the color red is in a way they could understand??? That was your whole point, but the University of Illinois Physics Department pointed out to you a simple way to describe colors to a blind person in a way that they could understand. Since the premise of your analogy was incorrect, you are left with explaining why you are supposedly unable to describe your invisible friend to people who can understand things that are not visible (like x-rays).
Here is the point, if I tell you to get the red pogo stick, you would
look and grab it. If you tell the blind person to get it, without aid
he could not if there were several different pogo sticks each a
different color, he would either guess, or have someone tell them
what one they had to get. Even if they could scan it with something,
and the scanner ...[text shortened]... output was
given from the scan, or the voice of someone telling them
which was which.
Kelly
Originally posted by PalynkaI'm saying understanding red is experiencing red, hearing a tone is
[b] it would be the output the person would understand not the color red
You are equating "understanding the colour red" as "identifying the colour red". What I'm saying is that identifying is not understanding. And even if you consider that it is, your scanner would identify it all the same...[/b]
experiencing a sound. For the blind reading an output on paper is an
experience of feeling when they read, it again is not coming to know
red. So getting this back to God, as the scripture says to understand
the things of man you need the spirit of man, the things of God the
Spirit of God, you need eyes to see.
Kelly
Originally posted by KellyJayI completely disagree, experiencing something is not understanding it in my opinion.
I'm saying understanding red is experiencing red, hearing a tone is
experiencing a sound. For the blind reading an output on paper is an
experience of feeling when they read, it again is not coming to know
red. So getting this back to God, as the scripture says to understand
the things of man you need the spirit of man, the things of God the
Spirit of God, you need eyes to see.
Kelly
Correcting me if I'm wrong, but according to scripture every man is salvageable and has the ability to turn to the Christian faith. So if every man has the potential to "see" I think your analogy was incorrect, even if we agree to disagree on the previous tangent.