>>11801395>>11801742You may notice this makes no sense and is completely unneeded, that's because this is a fallacy called "begging the question", commonly known as "circular reasoning".
It means the conclusion is included in one of the premises (in this case both). This is an invalid argument because it just states that if something is blue and red at the same time, it's blue and red.
With this particular example though, we actually have an answer that makes sense. I'll name 2. Simple one is to say "This ball is blue with red dots", making that ball both blue and red at the same time.
However you can also mix the colors! Blue+red=purple. We can then say A+B=C. So we rewrite:
"If A and B, then C"
"A and B"
"therefore C"
With colors:
"If blue and red, then purple"
"blue and red"
"therefore purple"
Now this is a proper logical argument, exactly because we introduced a new parameter.
Colors are wavelengths of visible light. To keep things simple, we have 3 color receptors in our eyes that respond to blue, green and red light. If you see something that's red, your red detecting cells are activated, blue for blue and green for green. Your brain processes colors by comparing the intensity, the color is between the two on the spectrum. (see pic related) Between blue and green is cyan. Between red and green is yellow, between red and blue is....green??? But the green sensitive cells say there is no green! To make some sense of this, your brain actually invents a new color. The color you see is purple!
This is how screens work, they mix red, green and blue light to trick your eyes. If red and blue pixels
are on, with green off, you see purple.
