/lit/ - Literature

Words cannot describe how immensely deep and profound this post is. 10/10 well done.

Posting coloured squares seems to be the only way to truly please /lit/.

Ah, yes. The Self is but a square dot that expands in order to properly adapt and assimilate the contructed world around us. Makes perfect sense, op.

what what

So passé

>>2695216
>OP image is a black square
>Posting coloured squares seems to be the only way to truly please /lit/.
>coloured squares
>coloured squares
>coloured squares
>coloured squares
>coloured squares
>coloured squares
>coloured squares
>coloured squares
>coloured squares

Retard kill yourself.

>>2695216
You spelled 'colored' wrong.

>>2695229
he was right. lit prefers coloured squares. this is a black square, hence why it has a shitty number of favourable comments

>>2695229
Sometimes it's a blue square. Or a red one. I know that black isn't technically not a colour, but perhaps you could surpress your Asperger's long enough that in everyday use, 'colour' may include black.

>>2695234
*to agree

>>2695229
OP here, it's actually very very very very very dark navy.

>>2695232
I prefer the Queen's spelling over American spelling. Also, 'herbs' has got a fucking h in it.

>>2695232

>BAW I LIVE IN A DICTATORSHIP AND CAN'T SPELL
>DURR WHAT DE METRIC SYSTEM?

Fuck off mericunt.

>>2695234

Don't try and bullshit your way out of this one retard. Nobody thinks black is a colour. Again, kill yourself.

You can buy black ink. Therefore, color.

>>2695241
What is it then?

>>2695239
You jelly? I'm here eating bolognese with an parsley in it.

>>2695234
Actually black isn't a colour. White contains the full spectrum of colours, but black technically is the absence of colour.

>>2695248
I ate parsley.

>>2695246

Black is the absence of colour.

>>2695244

Holy fuck /lit/ is retarded tonight.

>>2695248
Don't spill any on your trousers.

>>2695255

No, black isn't the absense of color, you can buy black ink. Would you like a link to an online shop?

>>2695262

0/10 didn't even rage.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hue

Do you see black in there dipshit?

>>2695262
Look at black ink under a microscope. It isn't really black.

red and yellow dots on a page will look orange from a distance, but they are just red and yellow dots.

What grade did you get in high school physics? Specifically a paper relating to wave forms, frequencies, and the spectrum of visible light?

Look at a rainbow, or light through a prism, where is black? turn the light off - "Oh there it is". Yes, BLACK IS THE ABSENCE OF COLOUR. If you don't believe me, go and study more.

>>2695268
Hue isn't a colour.

>>2695262

Wow. The intelligence of a pre-schooler and patronising to boot.

You get my vote for Objectively Worst Anon Ever.

>>2695274
Just a question out of interest. How is this discussion meaningful to you?

>>2695274
no black is about how light is reflected off an object. but there is light on my tshirt and it is still black. why is it black if there is light around?

I am looking at my tshirt very closely and it is black. Not dots of small colors, its black. In daylight.

>>2695268

Hue isn't color.


>>2695278

Black is a color. You can buy black ink. Why are you even disputing this?

>>2695276

Okay, now I know you're trolling because nobody could really be that stupid:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Color

Again, kill yourself. I'd hate for some innocent person to go through life with your genes, assuming you somehow found the opportunity to rape a handicapped person.

>>2695283
We must away to the university!

>>2695283

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Color

>>2695279
Honestly? Because I am educating somebody who clearly needs it. Of course, I get to feel like a smug cunt doing so. But that post was beneficial to the person it was aimed at, so ultimately I can bask in the warm feeling of doing something good as well as basking in the smug.

>>2695285
You cannot be gullible enough to take that comment seriously even for one second. Please.

Enjoying this immensely, by the way.

>>2695293
>Educating someone with commonplace facts which the person in question knew beforehand
>Getting immensely angry over it
>Feeling smug about it afterwards
How gracious of you.

>>2695274

This guy knows what's up.

>>2695285

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black

Meanwhile, cocksucker, black is a color.

In terms of colours that you might paint with - Black is a mixture of primary colours, while white is considered an absence of colour.

You all are trying to argue about Colour Theory without really understanding the argument between science and art.

For shame, /lit

For shame.

ITT: needless conflict, arbitrary arguments, silly rage.

>>2695293

The problem for you is, black is a color. You can buy black ink. Nobody gives a fuck if there's no black in the spectrum, we're not talking about light.

People never argue in blue square threads. Everyone, please be nice.

>>2695302
Oh, I stated the difference between the scientific and the everyday definition of what is and isn't a colour immediately.

Still enjoyed leading this guy on, though. It seems he wanted to rage. Who am I to stand in his way?

>>2695311

That's because they want them to go away, because they're imagination-free trolling on the same level as 'lel' or the roaches guy.

>>2695310
>doesn't understand that using black ink is actually removing colour from white paper.

>>2695302
>argument between science and art
>Drawing dichotomies that aren't there

>>2695316

> using black ink is actually removing colour from white paper.

Look, I have opened tins of black ink, and brother, it was fucking black. There is no real world difference between printing black or any other color. What you're saying is pure theology - no, I don't remove the color when I print on something, I add it. Black is a color.

>>2695316

Actually, >>2695302 is right. Color theory is a class in art colleges and universities, dumb fuck. There is an on going debate in the science and art world what is a color and what isnt

>>2695314
But they do post in them. No one gets angry either, so it's not trolling.

>>2695327
>theology

My sides.

If black is the absence of color...

What happens if I shine a torch at a nigger?

>>2695331

That's a 100% lie.

>>2695327
>Look, I have opened tins of black ink, and brother, it was fucking black

Remember that everything you see is just your brain's perception of the information sent by your eyes. The eyes are the sensors which determine where light comes from, and what frequency (or colour) it is oscillating at. The brain translates this information into the images that we see everyday. Black is still the absence of colour.

>>2695334

There's no other word for something with such a total lack of any basis in empirical fact.

>>2695327

>I have opened tins of paint

By the sounds of it you ate that paint too, didn't you?

>>2695342
So you believe there is an objective world outside of the one of your senses, do you?

Oh boy oh boy oh boy I'm gonna enjoy this.

>>2695342

This almost sounds like it isn't bullshit, but in fact, it is. Black is not the color from beyond space, my brain isn't processing it as a void because the reality would fuck with my shit, black ink is an industrially-produced commodity that looks exactly the same to anyone. Again, I'm not talking about light, I'm talking about color.

>>2695351

Enjoy your solipsistic argument then, dickhead.

>>2695350

Changing what someone said to fit the joke looks dumb when the original version is immediately available. Save that technique for spoken word.

>>2695353

>Still doesn't understand that colour is a function of light, and that the former is defined by the latter
>DERP

>>2695351
Not outside of my senses, as such. We are able to detect and analyze the full spectrum. We know it's there so it's not outside the reach of our knowledge.
The same as there are frequencies of sound outside of our hearing range. Stop trying to force your shitty philosophical concepts into my science classroom.

>>2695353

>looks exactly the same to anyone

Alright. Show me, right now, how 'black' looks to me.


Yep, that's right, you're retarded.

>>2695360
Science is perpetually on loose screws anyway.

>>2695284

Black ink is regular ink, they just suck the color out of it so it looks black.

>>2695361 Are you the same ragemonster as this guy?
>>2695356
Because you just supported my solipsistic argument there.

>>2695353
>Again, I'm not talking about light, I'm talking about color.

Look friend, it's always about light. whether you are talking about paint, t-shirts, ink or food, it is the light reflecting from the object that you are experiencing. We can see black because it is contrasted against the areas of our vision where there is light and colour.

>>2695364

What the fuck does that even mean?

>>2695361

HAHAHAHA! This is insane. Outside of 'what is truth' philosophical bull sessions, we all know what black looks like because I can buy a tin of black ink, open it and not say 'what the fuck, this isn't black'. If it looks different to each of us, which it doesn't, but if it does, the difference is obviously either negligible, or not really a variable.

Black is a color.b

>>2695364
>Implying Philosophy has any merit outside of hypothetical idealism.

>>2695371

I can see black on a surface where it isn't true black any longer. A dusty window frame in the country, for example. It's not really black, but I wouldn't immediately think that what I saw was gray, because I recognised the color beneath the dust. Black's a color, man. Even in a floodlit room, or on a sunny day, black is a color.

>>2695364
It means that the things you hold as truth today can turn out to be false tomorrow.
In other words, science.

There is no way you can claim superiority of knowledge over philosophy.

>>2695378
Without philosophy you wouldn't even have your precious science.

>>2695374

>If it looks different to each of us, which it obviously doesn't

How do you know this?

You don't.

>>2695381

If it's black you see it according to contrast with coloured objects. Black is not a colour.

>>2695367

Funny!

>>2695374
>>2695374
>If it looks different to each of us, which it doesn't,
Colours can look different to us, my sister is colourblind and cant see the colour blue. Our brains can interpret colours differently.

Oh and btwblack is not a colour, tard

>>2695389
You say that like you forgot about the concept of humour.

Which isn't strange really, considering the board we're on.

>>2695383

You don't know what science is.

>>2695396
Perhaps you'd be so kind as to explain it to me.

>>2695390

Apart from disabled people, everyone sees it the same, stop petitfogging.


>>2695391

Yes, cocksmoker, black is a color. Here:

http://www.standardscreen.com/plastisolblack.aspx


If you don't know, now you know.

>>2695367
Science is the collection and analysis of measurable data.

Philosophy is the hypothetical ramblings about things that don't exist, such as morality and ethics.

Philosophy and science used to be one subject, then science progressed and philosophy went full retard.

>>2695397

Science aims to establish relatively reliable (while fallible) predictive models, not "truth".

Though I know you barista philosophy majors love to set up Science as a strawman in that way.

>>2695394

No, I just felt sorry for the guy and decided to acknowledge his funny.

>>2695412
I feel enlightened.

>>2695412

You don't know what philosophy is.

Cease the offtopic shit, your answer is here.

>>2695408
>>2695408
>>2695408
>>2695408
>>2695408
>>2695408
>>2695408
>>2695408
>>2695408

>>2695413
Hey, just trying to have some fun.

>>2695408

Colours aren't defined by pigments you fucking idiot.

And again, you have no way of knowing that we see colours the same way, at all.

>>2695426

Meanwhile, in the real world, yes they are. Besides anything else, it's from pigments we get the words for frequencies of light. People painted, and had names for the colors they used, before Newton.

>>2695430

Look, go dig out that Grade 6 physics paper you failed, and learn something instead of digging yourself in deeper. Black is not a colour and that is a fact.

>>2695421
>Thread started with a picture of a black square
>Offtopic
Anyways, it's getting boring now. Bye thread. We had fun.

>>2695387
Philosophy is a part of science. It isn't always about ''how to live life''. Those are morals and ethics which are derived from philosophy, but not its only product.

Philosophy is critical thinking and often tries to answer what something truly ''is''. Philosophy is required when there are holes in scientific experiments to attempt at explaining or determining what is really happening.

The theory of Atoms came from Greek philosophy.

Just a group of Greek thinkers, using only their minds, and poof - they came up with the idea of atoms. There was no proof back then, just philosophy and the critical thinking that came from it.

>>2695432

Black is a color. Here's some research that proves it:

http://www.standardscreen.com/plastisolblack.aspx

>>2695433

A subject soon presented itself, as you know.

I own a black pen.

/thread

>>2695438
>>2695438
>The theory of Atoms came from Greek philosophy.
Yes Atoma was first conceived by Democritus, and rejected by Aristotle. This led to Aristotles Elements being accepted and chemistry being held back 1000 years.

But that wasn't Philosophy or science, it was a combination of both.

>Philosophy is required when there are holes in scientific experiments to attempt at explaining or determining what is really happening.
Holes in scientific experiments are due to lack of data or interpreting results wrong. Nothing in science is fact, it is all theory. Even gravity is just a theory. We observe the effects, and make predictions and assumptions based on our findings.

There is no need for philosophy anymore. There was no need for philosophy from John Locke and Kant onwards because it is all based on straw men. Its a nice activity but it has the same worth as "Hey, imagine if the moon was made of cheese" then science comes along and says "look philosophy, we don't think the moon is made of cheese because..."

Nothing can be proven outside of what we can observe, so making claims based upon the unknown will result in infinite predictions, none of which have any value in reality.

>>2695455
>Just a theory
We can see how deep your understanding of science goes in those three little words.

>>2695459
Please tell me you don't believe science is based on facts, and is not just the most accurate interpretations of observable reality we have.

>>2695455
>But that wasn't Philosophy or science, it was a combination of both.
Well, there isn't a clear separation either.

>>2695470
Gravity is a LAW. There are theories about why there is gravity, but that doesn't make gravity go away.

>>2695481
"A scientific law is a statement based on repeated experimental observation that describes some aspect of the world. A scientific law always applies under the same conditions, and implies that there is a causal relationship involving its elements."

If this definition is satisfactory, his statement still stands.

ahaahhahajdnkdlfszahA lit you tower of dogshit

>>2695489
He thinks gravity is just a theory.

>>2695496
>just a theory.

>>2695481
>Gravity is a LAW. There are theories about why there is gravity, but that doesn't make gravity go away.

Gravity is just a theory buddy. It's the best one we currently have.

We had Newtonian Laws about gravity, which turned out to be incorrect when relativity came along. So we made new laws. What we currently have could easily turn out to be wrong. We could discover some sub-atomic particle that has a strange effect upon the mass of an object making it appear that we have a gravitational attraction between objects with a high mass. And that will still be a theory.

>mistaking an observable force for a theory of that force

>>2695501
Did anything float up into the air when Einstein published his Special Theory of Relativity?

>>2695512
Can you prove to 100% certainty that it's gravity keeping stuff there? You can't. That's the point. There is no 100% certainty.

>>2695512
>Did anything float up into the air when Einstein published his Special Theory of Relativity?

The Hindenburg (Pic related)

>>2695512
lrn2quantum

>>2695512
>>2695499
>>2695496
Seriously guys, the first thing you should learn about anything science related is that it is all hypothetical. None of it can be proven, which is why science keeps refining its theories. You may have been taught in school that things like gravity are facts, but they are just theories.

>>2695413

>barista philosophy majors love to set up Science as a strawman

zip zop

The best part is that science denialists are always either creationists or Marxists, so it is easy to make fun of them.

>>2695592

and the ones who are willing to step inside an aeoroplane must be the bravest souls alive.

>>2695592
>>2695592
>The best part is that science denialists are always either creationists or Marxists, so it is easy to make fun of them.

Did you even read the thread?

The past 20 posts have been between someone arguing that science is fact, and someone with an understanding of science saying it's theoretical.

In summary, then: black is a color.

>>2695609
Oh fuck off.

ITT: this is what philosophers actually argue

>>2695636
Haha, yeah, because knowledge is only good when it's useful right?

Hey, friends. Summer has been intellectually unfulfilling so far, so I want to exercise my mind a bit. Is black a color?

That depends on your definition of 'color.' If you mean a specific wavelength or combination of wavelengths -- perhaps at varying intensity -- then, no, it isn't. But you don't experience 'objective colors' (unless you're a solipsistic egoist then you can fuck off) or the strictly scientific definition of 'black.'

The photo-conduction system is nutty as all fuck, but most receptors are transmitting ions in the dark, and switch off when hit by photons. So 'dark' or 'black' has the peculiar neurological quality of being a majority-positive input. Just an important thing to note. If white can be considered a color, then black ought also to be.

Ultimately, when colors have passed up through the visual cortices and into the neocortex, they become consciously available and can interact with the cognitive referrents of learned intersubjective groupings. I submit that black is among these; true black (i.e., total lack of light) is seldom encountered by people if ever, so there is an amount of very low light which would qualify as 'black.' If you have a black electronic peripheral, look at it and tell me if it actually emits no light whatsoever. Because it does.

So, as always, it depends on what you mean when you say 'color.' This is analogous to 'If a tree falls and nobody's around to hear it, does it make a sound?'

>>2695674
don't let the plebs know that usefulness is an imaginary quality.

>>2695678
>If you have a black electronic peripheral, look at it and tell me if it actually emits no light whatsoever. Because it does.

>destroys entire meticulous explanation with single grammatical error

>>2695800
>this is what prescriptivists actually do

>>2695807
I love you.