Is red Real?

An age old philosophical question, answered by me.

Is Red Real?

“If all red objects were to disappear, would the color red still exist as a concept?  If so, what would be the nature of its reality? If not, did the concept ever exist?”

• Mr. Saunders

I subscribe to the idea of casual realism: there is a world outside of me that I can see, as described in chapter five of Nigel Warburton’s Philosophy: The Basics (2013). This paper argues that the existence of red, whether in the physical or non-physical world, is dependent on personal perception and collective belief. While I believe red has always existed in my personal reality, this may not be the case for everyone.

What do I consider reality? I have two options: the physical world or Plato’s perfect world, mentioned in chapter two of Nigel Warburton’s Philosophy: The Basics. Would red exist in this perfect world if it didn't exist in ours? Plato believes yes. I agree with Margaret; the real world should be something that you can feel, move, and touch. Yet I don’t believe that alone disproves the possibility of an afterlife. So my last choice is Aristotle's realism. His idea involves the concept of everything real having four aspects; material, formal, origins, and purpose. I don't believe in that; I believe the universe is fundamentally nihilistic/random, including the colors objects wear. This denies Aristotle’s concept there is a purpose in everything. But there is only one reality we can truly explore, and that’s this physical one.

I like to believe my choices matter. I believe evidence rests in karma, but I don't believe that it determines the conditions in your lifetime, as the Buddhists believe. I think that answer rests in genetics, each relationship in a family tree being a random gamble eventually resulting in you. Instead, karma is something that exists in this lifetime; it’s a name for the result of your actions, even if it’s not always fair. This is what I believe dictates personal reality and perspective. A person would have to decide if they believed in red. As a result, karma can’t exist in the afterlife because it's perfect, according to Plato. 

Who provides karma in the physical world, and why isn’t it perfect? The answer lies with other people. Every person has their own experiences. Proof is provided with people's ability to be bothered by others’ actions. The brain wants to survive; part of that survival is giving regular amounts of dopamine. Fighting against this is the world and people around you. They provide perspectives different from your own, which, while important, can be overwhelming and cause stress. The problem has only gotten worse with the internet, as now we know there are billions of other perspectives. In the modern day, collective perception is what dictates reality. 

Now, animals are color blind, and most already can’t see the color red. But in order to explain collective reality, I want to compare us to them. Animals aren't a part of our collective reality since they can't understand us. But pets definitely have their personal reality dedicated to their owners. And it’s definitely possible wild animals have their own collective consciousness with others in their species. For example, birds know to fly south for the winter, which areas are comfortable with them, and which areas aren't. Every species would likely have its own consciousness. Just as we have our own, when it comes to recognizing colors.

 A book I read recently titled Flatland (1887) is about 2-D creatures in an alternate universe. The first part of the book is developing the sociology of the world; gender politics; race wars; social hierarchies; the works. But the second part is about breaking one of those creatures' norms, showing him the 1st and 3rd dimensions, and then sending him back to spread the info. This ends up being impossible, as the main character gets ridiculed and thrown in prison. This concept, discovered by James E. Ferrier, is named epistemology. It’s the study of knowledge; it’s nature, origin, limits, and its effects on the brain. This concept is brought up in the 4-D evolution, alternate universes, and so on. I believe the same concepts would apply to colors in a world where some are missing. 

What is real is dictated by karma and perspective. In this life, karma shapes our personal reality, influencing what we perceive as real. The collective reality is all of those perceptions in a web, some teaming with others, some fighting against. Therefore, if red objects were to vanish, its reality would depend on the collective perceptions of the people. If it was discovered through something like computers, its nature would be debated constantly, the same way the 4th dimension and alternate universes are today. I believe in those two concepts, so in the world where red was discovered through computers, I would believe in the color red. But if it was never discovered by anything, it would not exist in the physical world, and I wouldn’t believe in it. 

Red would exist in the afterlife as a perfect concept. If I decided both the physical world and non-physical worlds existed, my personal reality would be that red is real and has always existed.