The chairness of the collection of atoms exists in the mind of the person looking at it. An alien with no limbs would have no concept of chairness and would never see one the way we do.
-
-
Replying to @CurlOfGradient @ReferentOfSelf
A human can have a concept of a perch though they have no talons to grip it, or a thermal though they have no wings to ride it.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @ValidOfPriors @ReferentOfSelf
Yes, and the alien would likely soon come to understand chairs after watching humans use them a few times.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @CurlOfGradient @ValidOfPriors
And the important thing to note here is that it is through the chair's objective, real-world, not embedded in the mind, functional relationship with humans that gives chairness its meaning, not some fact about the underlying collection of atoms or...
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
... merely some facts about the psychology of humans
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @ReferentOfSelf @ValidOfPriors
It's a *combination* of the facts about the underlying atoms and psychology of humans. Humans label certain "collections of atoms" "chairs" because of their "real-world" utility for sitting. Thither "chairness".
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @CurlOfGradient @ValidOfPriors
What about the facts about how humans use chairs? Those facts are neither psychological, nor about atoms primarily - there is much more to human knowledge than those two (sub) disciplines. In this case, it's more of an anthropological fact.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
I'm still confused as to why you reach towards atoms for this though. This move doesn't get you anywhere since atomness is in the mind in the exact same way that chairness is.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @ReferentOfSelf @ValidOfPriors
My entire point of using atoms as an example is that I’m trying to explain that higher levels supervene on the lower ones. Explaining chairness on the level of humans and chairs is fine, but my point is that I can describe the universe in terms of atoms and get the same 1/2
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Universe back out at the end. There is nothing on the level of humans and chairs that is not accounted for on the level of atoms. All the “anthropological” concepts exist inside the minds of the resulting beings.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
That’s what I mean by reductionism.
-
-
Curl Of Gradient Retweeted Curl Of Gradient
Curl Of Gradient added,
Curl Of Gradient @CurlOfGradientReplying to @ReferentOfSelfThe objects doing a thing at this level is real, regardless of whether you know how it reduces to a lower level. My reductionism does not say "only the bottom level is real". It just says that higher levels supervene on lower levels. All levels are "real".0 replies 0 retweets 0 likesThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.