Food for thought: Is seeing is believing?

Let’s leave ‘the dress’ out of this (you know, the one that’s either white and gold, or blue and black — it’s white and gold, I don’t care what people say!)–

According to this article on Business Insider, ‘blue’ was not identifiable in the conventional sense until recently. Specifically, several cultures did not have a means for describing the colour ‘blue’ or distinguishing it from other colours, thus giving rise to the possibility that we may have never ‘seen’ blue.

Basically our language development impacts how we identify colours.

Mindbogglingly confusing right? It’s called ‘linguistic relativism’.

This video condenses it down really well, methinks:

Source: Tom Scott, YouTubeAll The Colours, Including Grue: How Languages See Colours Differently. 2013.

But if you’re feeling super nerdy (I was), this link takes you to the study referred to in the BI article.

From: Vidipedia. How colour perception may be related to the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis. URL:

If you liked this post, drop me a comment, if you didn’t like it definitely drop me a comment, and if you really loved it, like it, share it, or tell your grandmother about it. 


Author: Akanksha Singh

Twenty-something travel addict || Likes: coffee, sarcasm, the Oxford comma, blue skies, and cobblestone roads. || Dislikes: rudeness, carrots, and pigeons (read: winged-rats with satanic eyes).

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s