4 ms·

I'm colorblind, imagine you've seen colors a certain way your whole life - decades - and then someone gives you glasses to see colors "correctly". The colors ju

I'm colorblind, imagine you've seen colors a certain way your whole life - decades - and then someone gives you glasses to see colors "correctly". The colors just look wrong, not "correct". Why would I wear them? I know the color of everything already. Its also discriminatory, who says that the correct way to see colors is your way? Also, my whole life I've been discriminated against in jobs because of some broad definition of color blindness, at least some folk have made some steps to be able to categorize levels and types of color blindness now. Many jobs that weren't open to me when I was younger are now open to me, but I'm too old now. It isn't a "disability" requiring fixing.

altitudinous 6y ago
Downvoted even though I am colorblind and actually know what I'm talking about!
- loa_in_ 6y ago
  You provide nothing constructive or objective with your comment. Also your comment goes against truth, as we know the full range of visible light spectrum by measuring it.
  - watwut 6y ago
    Visible light spectrum as in wavelengths going from small to large do not have all colors in it. For example, magenta is missing, because it is not achievable with single wave. Not sure what it has to do with anything.
    - Vrondi 6y ago
      ...and if you are physically unable to see one of the colors in magenta, you cannot see magenta. Not sure what that has to do with anything.
glaberficken 6y ago
I get where you are coming from. I also have some sort of colorblindness apparently (just found out!). I agree with you that there is no single correct way to "see" colors, and as such that does not require fixing. i.e. If the glasses are only going to change color A to be more or less vivid then what really is the "philosophical" value? However, if the glasses allow you to start differentiating colors that you previously perceived as a single uniform color, then I think there is a much stronger reason to wear them.
mkl 6y ago
It's not about seeing "correctly". No human can see colour perfectly. It's about making it easier to distinguish colours that most people can easily distinguish. If someone came up with a way for me to distinguish more colours, e.g. like a tetrachromat can [1], I'd be keen to try it. My father is red-green colourblind, so I've seen some consequences of it. I consider it a disability (there are ordinary things my dad just can't do), but it doesn't require fixing. To most people red and green are as different as black and white; imagine having trouble distinguishing black and white, and you'll have an idea why some people think you might want these glasses. (Yes, I'm making assumptions about your vision here that might not be correct.) [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tetrachromacy#Humans https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tetrachromacy#Humans
Vrondi 6y ago
By that logic, if someone is born without a leg, and technology allows us to give them a functional prosthetic, we shouldn't bother, because that would be "discriminating", not giving them back equal functionality to the majority of the human race. It's just amazing that anyone could equate restoring measurable physical deficits in functionality to discrimination. Very sad psychological defensiveness for your in-born lesser function. "Naturally", my vision is poor enough that I would be completely unable to drive, watch TV, and barely able to read or use a computer without glasses, but if I were to call optometrists and my parents who wanted to give me the full function and opportunities that other humans have discriminatory and evil for giving me glasses, I would definitely be displaying some unjust ego defense. When the world has been out of focus your entire life, and a pair of glasses suddenly makes it snap into sharp focus, it is nearly indescribably overwhelming. However, it absolutely means I can do jobs I would not be safe doing otherwise (operating machinery, driving, etc.). This type of discrimination is justified for the safety of others. If you have the right type of color blindness that glasses such as these could help, then you _can_ learn and adjust to more proper colors, if you are willing to do so, just as I could adjust to the way the world looked utterly suddenly changing. Just don't be so stodgy and defensive.

altitudinous 6y ago

Downvoted even though I am colorblind and actually know what I'm talking about!

loa_in_ 6y ago
You provide nothing constructive or objective with your comment. Also your comment goes against truth, as we know the full range of visible light spectrum by measuring it.
- watwut 6y ago
  Visible light spectrum as in wavelengths going from small to large do not have all colors in it. For example, magenta is missing, because it is not achievable with single wave. Not sure what it has to do with anything.
  - Vrondi 6y ago
    ...and if you are physically unable to see one of the colors in magenta, you cannot see magenta. Not sure what that has to do with anything.

glaberficken 6y ago

I get where you are coming from. I also have some sort of colorblindness apparently (just found out!). I agree with you that there is no single correct way to "see" colors, and as such that does not require fixing. i.e. If the glasses are only going to change color A to be more or less vivid then what really is the "philosophical" value? However, if the glasses allow you to start differentiating colors that you previously perceived as a single uniform color, then I think there is a much stronger reason to wear them.

mkl 6y ago

It's not about seeing "correctly". No human can see colour perfectly. It's about making it easier to distinguish colours that most people can easily distinguish. If someone came up with a way for me to distinguish more colours, e.g. like a tetrachromat can [1], I'd be keen to try it. My father is red-green colourblind, so I've seen some consequences of it. I consider it a disability (there are ordinary things my dad just can't do), but it doesn't require fixing. To most people red and green are as different as black and white; imagine having trouble distinguishing black and white, and you'll have an idea why some people think you might want these glasses. (Yes, I'm making assumptions about your vision here that might not be correct.) [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tetrachromacy#Humans https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tetrachromacy#Humans

Vrondi 6y ago

By that logic, if someone is born without a leg, and technology allows us to give them a functional prosthetic, we shouldn't bother, because that would be "discriminating", not giving them back equal functionality to the majority of the human race. It's just amazing that anyone could equate restoring measurable physical deficits in functionality to discrimination. Very sad psychological defensiveness for your in-born lesser function. "Naturally", my vision is poor enough that I would be completely unable to drive, watch TV, and barely able to read or use a computer without glasses, but if I were to call optometrists and my parents who wanted to give me the full function and opportunities that other humans have discriminatory and evil for giving me glasses, I would definitely be displaying some unjust ego defense. When the world has been out of focus your entire life, and a pair of glasses suddenly makes it snap into sharp focus, it is nearly indescribably overwhelming. However, it absolutely means I can do jobs I would not be safe doing otherwise (operating machinery, driving, etc.). This type of discrimination is justified for the safety of others. If you have the right type of color blindness that glasses such as these could help, then you _can_ learn and adjust to more proper colors, if you are willing to do so, just as I could adjust to the way the world looked utterly suddenly changing. Just don't be so stodgy and defensive.