Received: by bdragon.shore.net (0.99.970109)
  id AA09870; 09 Mar 97 04:06:02 -0500
From: keshlam@prodigy.com
Reply-To: filk-l@bdragon.shore.net (Multiple recipients of Filk discussion)
Nntp-Posting-Host: socks2.watson.ibm.com



FWIW, some serious studies have suggested that a lot of this is simple
vocabulary. Folks who work with finer distinctions of color on a regular
basis (which apparently preferentially includes women, since in our
society men tend to dress in fewer colors and not worry as much about
coordinating them -- but also includes artists and so on) do recognize
and name them more precisely, even when measured ability to percieve
these color differences is equivalent.

Then there's always the bleen-grue thought experiment: Define bleen
as something that is blue until the end of the century, then turns green.
Now try to think of a good, clear way to _use_ that distinction in
conversation. "I don't care what color it will be in the future, it's blue
now, isn't it?" "No, because it _will_ change, we have to call it bleen."
(Don't ask me what this experiment was supposed to prove, outside
of the ability of homo sap to not only plan for the future but argue
about it.)

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Joe Kesselman: keshlam@prodigy.com, http://pages.prodigy.com/keshlam
Team OS/2 Member (OS/2 acronym: "We're Staying Topmost!")
"This note is a production of Novalabs Consulting and O.R.K. Security
Services, which are solely responsible for its content. Opinions are
not necessarily those of the author, never mind anyone else."


--
Filk Digest
(echomail and newsgroup readers disregard this as it doesn't apply to you)
To post to the list, send a message to filk-d-l@bdragon.shore.net
To (un)sub-scribe, send a message to listserv@bdragon.shore.net
with "subscribe filk-d" in the message body
|Gateway: Black Dragon Inn
|GateOp: root@bdragon.shore.net