If a tree falls...

So I didn't see the full moon last time it supposedly happened. I didn't see it so---it didn't happen. Thank you.

 

Superposition :2thumbsup:



hotwater

 

You're ok hotty-the man in the moon asked me to say he apologises for missing you,but he couldn't hang around as he wanted to be home in time for the start of Jerry Springer.

 

I just don't find this concept hard to get, but it seems really difficult for people for some reason. I don't know what the problem is.

There is an experiential component to all things. Does a piece of candy have a taste if there's nobody there to taste it?

I mean, that's why it's a philosophical question in the first place, and you're all acting like the person who thought up the question was just a complete dope.

Maybe another way of phrasing it: Is a song musical if it's played on a recording no one is around to hear? Now is it musical, or is it just a "sound" as you all seem to know it...which is just a vibration.

You're misunderstanding the original question.

The question would be: Is the moon the moon if no one is around to see it?

Which I would again say, no. If life had never developed on earth, the moon wouldn't be the moon. It wouldn't even have a name. You just want me to accept that we make no difference whatsoever and I think the notion is preposterous.

 

Everything is a vibration... even the person not hearing the tree fall.

 

The moon would be the moon it would just have no name. Period. It would be exactly the fucking same except there wouldn't be footprints or an American flag on it.

 

so basically, "this is a philosophical question and if you don't come up with the same answer to it that i do, you don't get the concept."

 

The concept is simple “we don’t know until we observe it” otherwise the tree remains forever in a state of limbo.


Hotwater

 

With all the knowledge that is now poured into our minds since our youths the answer to this question may seem evident but it was first asked some centuries ago when people did not all had this basic scientific insights. I think the answers and the thinking processes to it made it more relevant to pounder back then. Now the conclusion would generally be the same: even if there are no ears to receive the vibrations of sounds the vibrations of sound are still being made by the falling of the tree.

 

The premise seems to assume that if no humans are present--nothing exists. Ridiculous and self-important.

 

^^^ This! ^^^​

.

 

You can’t take out the human element otherwise the exercise is pointless and the question irrelevant



hotwater

 

It is irrelevent and pointless. It solves nothing and proves nothing. As I said before--it's just intellectual jacking off. Were humans here 10 million years ago? No. So does that mean there was nothing but a vacuum ? Or not even a vacuum?--no existance,no earth,no stars ,etc,etc?

 

LOL ^ Scratcho, you know humans think we are the be all to end all. And if we were not or are not around to witness it, it DOES NOT happen, and DID NOT exist.

 

Except dinosaurs.

 

Yeah,Lynn. Guess that's the prob,eh? I've heard there's a country called Russia,but I doubt it because I've never seen it,so it can't possibly be there. Oh well.

 

Same with this so called 'new world', man.

 

You think way to highly of yourself.

 

This discussion reminds me of very young children who think if they hide their face no one can see them, because they can't see anyone either.