Color for Philosophers: Unweaving the Rainbow

by Arthur C. Danto, C.L. Hardin

This expanded edition of C. L. Hardin's ground-breaking work on color features a new chapter, Further 1993, in which the author revisits the dispute between color objectivists and subjectivists from the perspective of the ecology, genetics, and evolution of color vision, and brings to bear new data on individual variability in color perception.

Genres: Philosophy, Psychology, Science, Art, Nonfiction

268 pages, Paperback

First published December 1, 1987

About the author

Arthur C. Danto was Johnsonian Professor Emeritus of Philosophy at Columbia University and art critic for The Nation. He was the author of numerous books, including Unnatural Wonders: Essays from the Gap Between Art and Life, After the End of Art, and Beyond the Brillo Box: The Visual Arts in Post-Historical Perspective.

Reviews

[Nat · Rating 5 out of 5]

Why have I waited until now to read this? I remember flipping through it in the Seminary Co-op and being deterred by the variety of different charts and what to my myopic eyes looked like the expression of some kind of unsavory scientism. That was sheer silliness. Hardin manages to communicate the basics of the science of color perception and at the same time show how mere conceptual analysis and thought experiments are totally insufficient for a philosophically adequate account of color. I remain unconvinced that objects don't (really) have colors, but it's a testament to Hardin's book that I no longer think that that commitment is worth preserving at all costs.

[Robert Bagnall · Rating 4 out of 5]

Bought this during my first degree in philosophy with a strong interest in cognitive science twenty-plus years ago, but never got past the first few dozen pages. I was determined to read it before I die; not sure whether I read it or merely looked at the words in the order they were printed, up to and including the appendix. Not everything stuck in my mind, particularly towards the end, but I think that's a reflection on me rather than the accessibility of what's here.

[David Nash · Rating 5 out of 5]

One of my favorites. Inspired my exploration into the science and philosophy of colors

[Jessica Slagle · Rating 3 out of 5]

First book I've read about color science and color theory that attempts to bridge the gap between the two. It's pretty "science-y" at times, which was hard to follow (as I'm not a scientist).

I'll admit I did skim a lot the pages that showed the graphs/charts/numbers - I gave it a good faith attempt, but after a while I decided to assume all the science in the book was correct and move on to the philosophy sections (even if the science wasn't correct, there's no way my peanut-brain would be able know lol).

[Dr Brown · Rating 5 out of 5]

Best book on color perceptions. Period.

[Peter · Rating 4 out of 5]

One often hears that "people see colors differently depending on their culture" in support of a generalized concept of cultural or linguistic relativism. While I'm a fan of relativism in general, color perception is an EXTREMELY poor example of it: decades of research have turned up far more that is biologically determined then linguistic. Hardin ably walks through the field as it stood in the late '80s.

Hardin's primary aim is to advance philosophy by making a case that common philosophical thought experiments such as "spectrum reversal" and "Mary's room" are nonsensical in the face of what is known about the relation of physical processes to color sensation. Hardin also makes a clear case for regarding colors as real subjective phenomena, closely coupled to but distinct from physical properties of objects [Someone on Amazon wrote that this book argued that "colors does not exist and are merely illusions" They must have been reading on Opposite Day or something.]

There are some missteps, however: the color channels evident in LGN (L+M L-M, (L+M)-S) are mistakenly identified with the unique hues -- but these two phenomena do not align, and the use of cancellation experiments as an argument for unique hues is rather circular. In fact the physiological basis for unique hues remains a mystery.