Yup: but unfortunately, this is one of those things that seems to have a "critical period". (We know this because of experiments on poor defenceless kittens. Thanks, science! (But, I mean, it's decades later and it's got actual medical applications now, and we don't have to re-run the experiments because the results were all written down, so… maybe we should actually thank science for this one.))
Is this a 'cheat' to learn languages better, lol?
Here's one on visual memory in mice: https://www.lucid.news/could-ketamine-restore-child-like-bra... (links to https://www.cell.com/cell-reports/fulltext/S2211-1247(21)006...)
In general, the relevant keywords for further investigation are "ketamine neuroplasticity"
But I suppose your point is still possibly valid - just even more complex.
Colour is a construct of the mind based on how we perceive light frequencies, not a tangible thing we can touch.
There is no "red" other than what we've agreed on to be red - so there's no way to swap it with "blue".
This is because it isn’t a single photoreceptor picking up, say, 320nm light. Instead you have a range of essentially analog responses across the red, green and blue spectrums, that the brain reconstructs into true colour as we perceive it.
Those with different receiving capabilities (on the one extreme: tetrachromia - those with 4 different colour sensors, who are exclusively women, because they’re on the C chromosome - and on the other end, those with cataracts - witness monet’s later life paintings) help to demonstrate the consistency with which the brain is able to achieve a similar qualia from the underlying stochastic impulses
Because color theory works on pretty much everyone, we can be sure that we all perceive the relative difference in colors the same way. But what green is is a figment of your consciousness. What you think color, sight, and all your other senses mean exists only in your mind. Not as a physical process in the brain, but purely as a part of whatever metaphysical process that results in consciousness.
A color is not a real, tangible thing. It's just the way your brain perceives light of a certain frequency. There is no way to describe what that experience is because there's no universal reference. You can't describe color to a blind man, after all.
The fact that we can't identify them with our current level of understanding of the workings of the brain is not very surprising - it is an extremely complex organ and our tools for understanding organs are very primitive in the grand scheme of things.
The mind is a level of abstraction up from the brain. The mind is what the brain does, not necessarily what it is. Consciousness of course relies on discrete physical reactions in the brain, but in the way that software relies on the discrete transistors in a CPU. Consciousness is the emergent behavior of the system. It exists more on an informational level than physical, even if it is a physical process.