Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Color relativism resolves the conflict between Nonvert's ... — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Perception
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Color relativism resolves the conflict between Nonvert's and Invert's color experiences without making either experience non-veridical

    Modality & PossibilityPerception
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    2 reasons against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.The tomato is red relative to Nonvert and green relative to Invert (rather than red or green simpliciter)
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The tomato looks red-for-Nonvert to Nonvert, so Nonvert's experience is veridical
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The tomato looks red-for-Invert to Invert, so Invert's experience is veridical
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Color relativism entails that 'the tomato is red' and 'the tomato is green' are simultaneously true, violating the law of non-contradiction for determinate color properties.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If color predicates are indexed to perceivers, they cease to function as genuine properties of objects and collapse into reports about subjective states, making color discourse about the world impossible.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Hilary Putnam's semantic externalism establishes that natural kind terms like color words are anchored to mind-independent extensions, not individuated by individual perceptual systems.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.The relativist move merely redescribes the conflict rather than resolving it: Nonvert and Invert still disagree about which property the tomato has when they both sincerely assert 'the tomato is red'.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.C.L. Hardin's eliminativist argument shows that surface spectral reflectance properties—not observer-relative facts—are the proper truthmakers for color discourse, making relativist veridical parity illusory.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.

    Topics

    PerceptionModality & Possibility

    Connections

    2 topics

    Truth & Knowledge2 linkedPhilosophy of Language1 linked

    Related

    C.L. Hardin's eliminativist argument shows that surface spectral reflectance pro...Color relativism entails that 'the tomato is red' and 'the tomato is green' are ...Hilary Putnam's semantic externalism establishes that natural kind terms like co...If color predicates are indexed to perceivers, they cease to function as genuine...
    +4 moreShow less
    The relativist move merely redescribes the conflict rather than resolving it: No...The tomato is red relative to Nonvert and green relative to Invert (rather than ...The tomato looks red-for-Invert to Invert, so Invert's experience is veridical

    Similar

    Argument B commits a mistake analogous to the one diagnosed in a prior...81%If relativism is only true relative to a cultural or historical contex...80%Argument B similarly treats color predicates as absolute rather than r...79%Relationalism, particularly color relationalism, is alive in contempor...78%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: qualia-inverted
    View source passageHide passage
    One might diagnose a similar mistake in Argument B, and thus endorse relativism about color. According to relativism the tomato is not red simpliciter: rather, it is red relative to Nonvert (not green relative to Nonvert), and green relative to Invert (not red relative to Invert). In other words, the tomato is simultaneously red-for-Nonvert and green-for-Invert. Since, on this view, the tomato looks red-for-Nonvert to Nonvert, and red-for-Invert to Invert, both their experiences are veridical, d
    Extraction notes

    Validity: Extracted via Max plan + API grounding/validity checks

    Details

    The tomato looks red-for-Nonvert to Nonvert, so Nonvert's experience is veridica...
    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    3 (1 for, 2 against)
    Edits
    1 edit