Suppose you happened upon a room where, within its four walls, there slept what seemed to be a cat. Compelled by the forces of philosophic discussion as expressed on Sciforums, you take the unusual step of doing everything you can to discern that this is, in fact, a cat. You smell it, you taste it, you listen to it, you feel it, and of course, you see it. All your senses tell you that this is, in fact, a cat. In fact, any rational being would declare it such. What would happen then if it turned out to not be a cat? Despite acting and being like a cat in all respects, it is some sort of magical facsimilie which nonetheless is fundamentally non-cat? Would, despite its "actual" foundation in non-cat hood, still be a cat because of the qualities it has? Or would it not be a cat after all, but something else? And if so, how is it something else?
SamCDKey: I am secretly Oriental? HIYOOOOOO! But back to the serious things... Baumgarten: So if we agree to refer to an orange as an apple, this would make all oranges apples?
Is this somehow a somewhat poor twist on schrodinger's cat to address laymen? I dont know the cat and the being in an inclosed space, got me thinking that.
Despite being a cat in all respects, it turns out to be some magical facsimile that is non-cat! When did magic ever have any bearing on philosophy or science?
The problem as you pose it exists because you are also assuming that a thing has a finite and independent identity, and that you, the observer, can have an adequate knowledge of this identity. I am not sure one can have such knowledge, nor that such identity exists.
tablariddim: You never heard of LaPlace's demon? Descarte's Evil Genius? Imaplanck.: No, actually. It's a take on the "Brain in a Vat" and the Bundle Theory v. Substance Theory of ontology. Water: So lovely to see you pop on in! So then, lacking such finite and independent identities, a facsimilie cat and an actual cat are one in the same?
A man comes upon a transexual, They look female, they smell female, they may taste female, they feel female, they sound female, but they are NOT in fact female. Does that matter? Well to some it appears to do so. is this what you mean by it smells like pussy...is it pussy?
TheoryOfRelativity: Ha ha ha! I like that interpretation But that is another case where, excluding genetics (which could be considered analogous to the "magical facisimilie"), one is essentially lead to believe something which is not, yet for all intents and purposes, is. Again, is something which seems to be in every single way something, yet is not, still that something? Going back to the "brain in the vat" argument: If we are all in a "Matrix", are we eating steak or a steak facsimilie?
Also, for those who are curious as to why I have so named this thread as I have: During a recent comedic roast of William Shatner, George Takei (Hikaru Sulu from the original Star Trek show) came up to the stage and, upon noticing Farrah Fawcett and Betty White, exclaimed, "It smells like pussy in here! ...I think." The joke being that he would not know - having just came out of the closet as a gay man.
Not a pussy, a penis! This is what Barnes referred to when he gave his famous example of solipsism I believe. Not sure though. It assumes an absolute standard of some sort as the prerequisite. For how does one ascertain perception without reality and reality without perception??? :bugeye:
Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Translation: This is not a pipe ( it's a picture of a pipe)
To go back to the apples and oranges: Things aren't things independent of our naming them as such. Things are whatever we say they are.
I am not here just addressing names, but the object itself. Call the cat "rose" and it stands to reason that the cat shan't become a red flower with thorns.
No, it means that, if everyone agrees with the re-definition, our understanding of what a 'rose' looks, smells and feels like will change accordingly. But that's just fun with words. Your thing, whatever it is, is not a cat. Leaving out the dimensions of smell and taste - because it's ability to impersonate isn't that good - think of a stick insect. It looks very much like a twig. Is it a twig?
does it matter? It rather depends on what is most important to you re life, the quality of your life or the reality of your life.
How do you determine that the something that in every single way seems to be that something is not that something without noting some distinguishing characteristic that makes it not that something?