Are Colors Actions?

Are Colors Actions?

We think of colors as attributes, like shapes or natural kinds: to be red is like being square or a cat—a property that something has, not an action it does. I will argue that colors are really more akin to actions than attributes. A color is an action of an object on the nervous system and mind. The object reflects or emits light and this acts on the eyes and occipital cortex with the result that a color is seen. The color is this action. It is generally agreed that colors are relational, something like dispositions to cause sense experiences; well, they are relations of acting-on. Many things act on organisms, some animate and some not, and these things have names—heat, collisions, cuts, contagions. Colors do likewise. The word “red” is more like a verb than a noun, ontologically speaking, because redness is an active presence in objects vis-à-vis the visual system. Colors are deeds not static attributes. Just as objects may shine or shimmer or smell or vibrate, so they may redden or yellow or purple. We don’t talk that way, but it corresponds to color reality. An object isn’t “red”; it reds. Objects reflect light actively (as gravity is active); they also actively produce impressions in the mind. When they produce color sensations, they have a particular color; this producing is the color. To be red is to produce sensations of red. Producing is a type of action. So, red is a type of action—redding (like running). If there were little men inside colored objects, intentionally producing color sensations, we would unhesitatingly say that an action is involved—an intentional action. It is the same if the production is non-intentional; nature is an active arena. Things are different with shape (assuming shape to be a primary quality), since shape is not defined by its effect on perceivers; things are square whether they are perceived or not. It is because colors are powers to produce sensations that they are actions—powers-in-action. Objects have the power to produce color sensations; therefore, colors are these acts of production. When objects change color, they cease to act as they did heretofore; they start to act differently. Colors are acting powers to produce sensations of color. In an ideal language they would be expressed by verbs not nouns. Red things red, blue things blue.

Why don’t we see this? Partly it is because we don’t see the action that underlies color—the rebounding photons etc. Colors don’t look active. If we could see the whizzing photons, we would recognize the activity. Also, if colors kept changing rapidly, we would be less inclined to think of them as enduring attributes—less like shapes or species. And it is notable that we do adopt verb-like forms in some instances: a face may redden, a newspaper yellow, knuckles whiten, a sky darken. Why not talk this way all the time? Why not say “roses red” or “blackberries black” or “emeralds green”? Instead of saying the traffic light will turn red, we say that it will red (redden). The sky blues, grass greens, snow whites. These are ongoing chromatic actions of the sky, grass, and snow. And they come and go, commence and cease. Surely, smells are like this—actions on the nose that start and stop. Objects emit particles that reach the nostrils and act on the olfactory receptors; that is what a smell is. Same for sounds and sound waves in the atmosphere. Sounds and smells are actions, and colors follow suit. The grammar of our language encourages us to view colors as attributes denoted by nouns, but de re they are actions of nature, like earthquakes and rainfall. They are something nature does. Accordingly, we can say that primary perceptual qualities like shape are attributes and secondary qualities like color are actions. It isn’t just that one is objective and the other subjective, but that one is passive and the other active. Shapes are not definable as powers to produce shape sensations, but colors are definable as powers to produce color sensations—and hence fall into the category of actions (of nature). Metaphorically, colors are like pulsing hearts not rock faces. When an object looks red over time it is not that it hasn’t changed, but that it keeps performing the same action from moment to moment, stimulating your eyes with a barrage of photons (a stimulus is an action). It may look static, but in reality, it is a hive of activity (think of bees wiggling and buzzing). Flying photons are the bees of color. Colors are the honey of nature, actively created.[1]

[1] Don’t we sometimes think of colors as active, as when a diamond gleams and a strawberry displays a luscious deep red? We know intuitively that light is active and colors do seem somehow alive—more so than shapes. We find colors stimulating, exciting, sometimes overwhelming—almost like spirits. They pulsate, grab the attention, assert themselves. They seem to put on a performance. Drugs like LSD can make colors appear animated. Colors have agency.