I don't understand this. You said that words don't have meanings on their own. I provided an example of a word that has meaning on its own. Your respo...
They can be called whatever you like. But why depart from established linguistic terminology? It seems to me that if you want to call that word "a sen...
Well, I'm not sure about a metaphysical distinction between language and non-language, but I'd still make a distinction between them, even if the latt...
Well, I think our disagreement stems from a different interpretation of the ambiguous phrase "language-use". On the one hand it might refer to the act...
From my reading (of both of you), I think you misunderstood @"StreetlightX". He's not saying that there's more to meaning than language use and that m...
Well, if your target is semantic anti-realism then perhaps my comment was misdirected. I assumed the target was the type of anti-realism that would in...
Probably best. After all, consider the question "what's this?". Clearly to fully understand the question (or, rather, the (thing referred to by) "this...
The "many other names" link is just an anchor to further down the same article. The "official" rules, as stated here, are: Clicking on the first non-p...
If an armed society is a polite society then the implication is that if you're impolite you're likely to be shot. Doesn't that strike you as absurd? D...
Alright, I won't. :) Although as an aside, I didn't mean to suggest verificationism (in the sense that a thing is true if it is verified); I meant to ...
As far as I'm aware, there's nothing controversial about indirect realism. It's the accepted view of perception in the natural sciences. The claim tha...
I don't think it's a philosophical issue. I think it's scientific. If colours are objective features of the world then they should be (capable of bein...
True, but then that's why I asked for evidence. If colours were objective then, like other objective things, they should be susceptible to experimenta...
So then it's the light that's red, not the apple? Furthermore, this is consistent with indirect realism. The indirect realist says that the red colour...
How it's known is irrelevant to the discussion. The question is whether or not redness is present when nobody observes it in the same way that electro...
What other usage is there? What is redness when not the experience? Are you using it to (also) refer to the state of having a structure that reflects ...
What "two senses" are there to colours, smells, and tastes? There's just the one sense; the types of experience (which are mental representations of t...
The problem is that redness isn't a mind-independent feature. Electromagnetic radiation is a mind-independent feature. Redness is the type of experien...
Again, that they will not taste the same (when tasted) is not that they do not taste the same (when not tasted). This is conflation, as shown by your ...
And different animals (or even different persons) might have different receptors that are affected by such light in a different way and so see a diffe...
No, the direct realist argues that the taste and smell and feel of an apple are present even when not being tasted, smelled, and felt. There's nothing...
What is the taste of the apple? Is the taste of the apple identical to the chemicals which stimulate the taste receptors? It must if direct realism is...
Sure, but it doesn't then follow that the "normal" taste (for a human) is an inherent feature of the apple when not being tasted. Why? Why must an org...
And the direct realist's claim is that the properties of colour and smell and taste are present even when they're not being experienced. So the above ...
We can experimentally show that certain things exist even though we can't see those things. That's how science works. So if colours are objective then...
No, it doesn't. The knife doesn't contain the property of painfulness when not being used to stab someone. The pain is only ever in the experience. It...
By "visible" do you mean "capable of being seen"? If so, I'd agree. So for the analogy to work "tasty" must mean "capable of being considered tasty wh...
Such a perception would only show that your body reacts differently to most people to the same sensory stimulus. In everyday language we might say tha...
It makes no more sense than saying that there is a painful knife when not being used to stab someone. It's only painful once it's experienced a certai...
They're not making a metaphysical claim, though. They're just telling you that you'll like the taste when you eat them (or, rather, they're just tryin...
But that's what realism argues: "The realist view is that we perceive objects as they really are. They are composed of matter, occupy space and have p...
Comments