PROXY  WHOIS  RQUOTE  TEXTS  SOFT  FOREX  BBOARD
 Radio  Music  Philosophy  Code  Literature  Russian

= ROOT|Philosophy|1700-1799|berkeley-three-745.txt =

page 9 of 47



apparent colours.

     .  call you them? how shall we distinguish
these apparent colours from real?

     . Very easily. Those are to be thought apparent which,
appearing only at a distance, vanish upon a nearer approach.

     . And those, I suppose, are to be thought real which
are discovered by the most near and exact survey.

     . Right.

     . Is the nearest and exactest survey made by the help
of a microscope, or by the naked eye?

     . By a microscope, doubtless.

     . But a microscope often discovers colours in an
object different from those perceived by the unassisted sight.
And, in case we had microscopes magnifying to any assigned
degree, it is certain that no object whatsoever, viewed through
them, would appear in the same colour which it exhibits to the
naked eye.

     . And what will you conclude from all this? You cannot
argue that there are really and naturally no colours on objects:
because by artificial managements they may be altered, or made to
vanish.

     . I think it may evidently be concluded from your own
concessions, that all the colours we see with our naked eyes are
only apparent as those on the clouds, since they vanish upon a
more close and accurate inspection which is afforded us by a
microscope. Then' as to what you say by way of prevention: {185}
I ask you whether the real and natural state of an object is
better discovered by a very sharp and piercing sight, or by one
which is less sharp?

     . By the former without doubt.

     . Is it not plain from  that microscopes
make the sight more penetrating, and represent objects as they
would appear to the eye in case it were naturally endowed with a
most exquisite sharpness?

     . It is.

     . Consequently the microscopical representation is to
be thought that which best sets forth the real nature of the
thing, or what it is in itself. The colours, therefore, by it
perceived are more genuine and real than those perceived
otherwise.

     . I confess there is something in what you say.

     . Besides, it is not only possible but manifest, that
there actually are animals whose eyes are by nature framed to
perceive those things which by reason of their minuteness escape
our sight. What think you of those inconceivably small animals
perceived by glasses? must we suppose they are all stark blind?
Or, in case they see, can it be imagined their sight hath not the
same use in preserving their bodies from injuries, which appears
in that of all other animals? And if it hath, is it not evident
they must see particles less than their own bodies; which will
present them with a far different view in each object from that
which strikes our senses? Even our own eyes do not always
represent objects to us after the same manner. In the jaundice
every one knows that all things seem yellow. Is it not therefore
highly probable those animals in whose eyes we discern a very
different texture from that of ours, and whose bodies abound with
different humours, do not see the same colours in every object
that we do? From all which, should it not seem to follow that all
colours are equally apparent, and that none of those which we
perceive are really inherent in any outward object?

     . It should.

     . The point will be past all doubt, if you consider
that, in case colours were real properties or affections inherent
in external bodies, they could admit of no alteration without
some change wrought in the very bodies themselves: but, is it not
evident from what hath been said that, upon the use of
microscopes, upon a change happening in the burnouts of the eye,
or a variation of distance, without any manner of real alteration
{186} in the thing itself, the colours of any object are either
changed, or totally disappear? Nay, all other circumstances
remaining the same, change but the situation of some objects, and
they shall present different colours to the eye. The same thing
happens upon viewing an object in various degrees of light. And
what is more known than that the same bodies appear differently
coloured by candle-light from what they do in the open day? Add
to these the experiment of a prism which, separating the
heterogeneous rays of light, alters the colour of any object, and
will cause the whitest to appear of a deep blue or red to the
naked eye. And now tell me whether you are still of opinion that
every body hath its true real colour inhering in it; and, if you
think it hath, I would fain know farther from you, what certain
distance and position of the object, what peculiar texture and
formation of the eye, what degree or kind of light is necessary
=9=

1|2|3|4|5|6|7|8| < PREV = PAGE 9 = NEXT > |10|11|12|13|14|15|16|17|18.47

UP TO ROOT | UP TO DIR | TO FIRST PAGE

Google
 


E-mail Facebook VKontakte Google Digg del.icio.us BlinkList NewsVine Reddit YahooMyWeb LiveJournal Blogmarks TwitThis Live News2.ru BobrDobr.ru Memori.ru MoeMesto.ru

0.0175951 wallclock secs ( 0.01 usr + 0.00 sys = 0.01 CPU)