>>11920953We know colour is a perceptive phenomenon based on wavelength. Colorblindness shows that we can miss or have different interpretations of the visible spectrum.
It is tempting to go further and say that your blue could be my red as there is no way for both of us to experience the vision of the other, but that experiment only really holds for a world of single colour. There is a biological imperative for certain colour comparisons; the human who can't spot the edible plant in the forest foliage dies. The human whose colour for grass and predator don't contrast enough gets pounced on. Visual aesthetic comes from this and most humans can feel a similar appreciation for the form and colour of a beautiful painting.
My guess is that the perception of colour drifts with genetics based on environment, but remains similar between all humans as pre-globalization we were not far enough down the genetic chain for a big difference to exists, and the environments we live in don't vary wildly enough to say, cause a genetic mutation which inverts the visible spectrum to flourish. An Anglo genetically coded to live under dreary clouds will have a slightly different interpretation of green when compared someone from the Levant, and this would be reflected and muddied in culture where the definition of ones "green" vs another "green" gets warped by language.
Sorry if this is all obvious
