
i don't think sound is merely the vibration of molecules though.it doesn't aquire "sound"ness until something percieves it
( ,
Thu 13 Nov 2008, 22:59,
archived)

but then I thought, fuck it I'll be here all night if I start philosophising.
( ,
Thu 13 Nov 2008, 23:01,
archived)

this is child's play compared to sentences like: "common official practice cannot constitute a legal reason for accepting and treating as binding the rule of recognition itself, because the rule of recognition is an ultimate legal rule to which questions regarding what make it legally valid, or questions regarding what further legal reasons there are for accepting it, do not apply"
( ,
Thu 13 Nov 2008, 23:08,
archived)

Anyway, fancy going for a pie this weekend?
( ,
Thu 13 Nov 2008, 23:10,
archived)

I've got two heinous essays in for wednesday and very little hope of actually making the deadline. I could do with a pie though
( ,
Thu 13 Nov 2008, 23:13,
archived)

Should be around all this weekend though, so let me know if you change your mind.
( ,
Thu 13 Nov 2008, 23:17,
archived)

but there are plenty of animals out there who can't here, or see, but they can feel things.
( ,
Thu 13 Nov 2008, 23:03,
archived)


we can subjectify 'sound' as being the oscillation of our ear drums - but it's more complex than that. If sound was subjective in this way then it would not exist - sound waves (the oscillation of air molecules) is an ambient part of our environment and the way we recieve this informative is not sound itself - but our interpretation of sound.
Therefore insects and such without ears will recieve this information in a different way to humans - but that does not exclude the fact that sound exists regardless of whether it is being recieved or not in the same way that if you don't own a radio does that mean Radio Waves aren't all about us?
( ,
Thu 13 Nov 2008, 23:21,
archived)
Therefore insects and such without ears will recieve this information in a different way to humans - but that does not exclude the fact that sound exists regardless of whether it is being recieved or not in the same way that if you don't own a radio does that mean Radio Waves aren't all about us?

I don't see what difficulty this distinction is trying to overcome.
( ,
Thu 13 Nov 2008, 23:11,
archived)

So, oscillations of air particles vs hearing music.
( ,
Thu 13 Nov 2008, 23:14,
archived)

I might as well say that when we hear soft and gentle sounds, those aren't really noises. Or that when we detect a noise visually as a sound wave on a screen, that's not really a noise, or that noises that happen in Switzerland don't count because it's a quiet sort of place.
( ,
Thu 13 Nov 2008, 23:18,
archived)

But there is a distinction between a physical description of what's happening and the mental perception of it.
( ,
Thu 13 Nov 2008, 23:21,
archived)