Studying color theory reminds me that the answers to even basic questions depend on which theory is being used to give the answer, and that in some cases these theories may not be mutually exclusive. So, asking the question "Are black and white colors?" Will generate two possible sets of answers, depending on whether one is talking about additive color or subtractive, but both sets of answers, although opposite, are correct.

So what's the lesson? I mean, I guess we could say that if the question was expressed properly then the answer would be definite, but this presupposes a kind of knowledge about the answer. But on the other hand, an answer without a supporting theory explains nothing. Or is the real conundrum in the words themselves?

I was thinking about this in connection with a story I heard on NPR about a creationist museum that was opening. The purpose of the museum is to show that christianity is scientific, but I remember one patron interviewed saying that religion was important because if there wasn't absolute truth, then you could rationalize anything. The whole thing seems so upside-down. I mean, science in a way can't really provide us with any truth, in the sense of meaning; this is really the job of philosophy or religion. Still, there is this evangelical museum justifying belief on "science".