4 ms·
I couldn't find anything new in this article. Sure the version of reality that gave us maximum advantage sustained. Organism who had color vision had an advanta
by buvanshak 9y ago
I couldn't find anything new in this article. Sure the version of reality that gave us maximum advantage sustained. Organism who had color vision had an advantage over organism s that only had monochrome vision...Sure. We understand that. But what is new here?
- goatlover 9y agoThe question is why having color vision was an advantage, and the evolutionary answer has to be because there's something about reality which makes it an advantage. The evolutionary argument for total skepticism/illusion can't work, because organisms wouldn't survive if their entire perceptual system produced only illusions. An organism does have to be able to distinguish between food, mates, shelter, danger, etc. or it won't pass it's genes on. And that's where reality comes in. Even invoking evolution is to assume that evolution has some basis in reality, otherwise why invoke it as an explanation for illusion? If our perceptions and cognition have no basis in reality, then neither does evolution.
- buvanshak 9y ago>because organisms wouldn't survive if their entire perceptual system produced only illusions. Small correction. You should say "organisms wouldn't survive if their entire perceptual system produced only useless illusions." The illusions here can also be replaced by an "abstraction". Color is an abstraction of wavelength. Sound is an abstraction of pressure differences. So organisms who's senses produced useful abstractions for their minds prevailed, while others perished. So again, obviously, I see nothing new but the premise that useless abstractions evolved but didn't sustain...