Response to Andrew Roiter "Is there such thing a.."

I believe colors do really exist due to the fact that color properties are a result of a matter interaction. It is not as simple as: the sunlight hits the apple and it refracts the light and it appears red. If that would be a fundamental claim of a color theory, it would be discussed by kindergarten students.

Light is part of an electromagnetic spectrum, that consist of photons with different amounts of energy stored in them.

Photons are considered to have energy like qualities as well as matter like qualities in the world of physics.

If this argument should be discussed it would be best to take a linear approach from a standpoint of energy. Rating each light color with an amount of energy it carries. The reflected color should not be our concern, but the amount of radiation given off from the apple, the wavelength, and the frequency under each kind of color light. Based on that we could draw an accurate statement that apple reflects photons differently based upon their wavelength/frequency. The "red" apple reflects the most of the lowest possible wavelength we can see.. which happens to be red. Since the appearance.

Our senses are biased, they do not show the world from a true omnipotent standpoint, they show us a little snippet of what there really is. I base that claim on the spectrum, certain wavelength cut out we see, but in reality, science and reasoning has proven there are many more wavelengths which we cannot see.

Efficiency and joy in life

Efficiency and life were paired up from the beginning of human understanding of time. When we mentally understood that we are not immortal creatures, stress on efficiency became clear.

I myself believe such you can attempt any task using anything, any object. The efficiency varies depending on each object, and would you rather spend extra time trying to complete something, and use more effort to do an essential task or have it done by a tool made to be efficient at that given task.

An example can be given to support the claim of efficiency and life.

A starving man in the wild has to choose his weapon to hunt prey.

Hes given an option of a knife, bow, crossbow, and a hunting gun.

His obvious choice would be a hunting rifle, which would almost guarantee him a meal, because he would spend least amount of time getting the meal.

Hunting rifle is the most effective tool to hunt in that given scenario.

Knife is the worst choice, because it gives a low chance of killing the prey because it would prolong the hunt and would result in a least favourable time.

Correspondence theory is very vague about an example such as this due to rating.

Rating an object to be more effective at something is a pure coherence theorist view.

The rating between the weapons reflects the coherence between the weapons, and not the truth.