← Back to context

Comment by miltonlost

16 hours ago

Your example would only be valid if "blue" and "green" had objective answers for when something is Blue and something is Green and have clear demarcated boundaries. You're switching to a literal boundary example where there are actual lines to be crossed. Colors are a fuzzy continuum; national boundaries, not including fought-over areas like the Sea of Japan, are easy to be in or not.

> Colors are a fuzzy continuum

Denver is teal, the USA blue-green. Canada is Blue, and Mexico is green.

Their analogy is pretty on point.

  • You are confusing geographical position with countries.

    Countries are not a continuum, they start and end at some specific line defined by constitutions, mutually agreed by neighbours (or disputed through war and diplomacy) Colours have no such incentive for strict unified definitions, so there is no point at which blue ends.

    • I'm not confusing anything. I am 1000% unconfused and entirely on the same wavelength as OP.

      You're inability to wrap your head around the analogy is tantamount to.. Not being able to comprehend blue-green.

      1 reply →