Yes, realism about ordinary objects given what science has to say. — Marchesk
If you like; the point being that context is all. It's a real paining as opposed to an illusion, but it's not a real McCubbin. The frame is real wood, not plastic. — Banno
The "scientific versions" aren't different than the "ordinary versions." They're other ways of looking at the ordinary versions, they're the ordinary versions from other reference points, at least different explanatory reference points. — Terrapin Station
The problem is that this leads to paradoxes because the scientific version raises issues for our concept of ordinary objects. — Marchesk
Okay, so the context is wanting to know whether the world is populated by ordinary objects in addition to their scientific versions (particles and empty space). — Marchesk
It's a real paining as opposed to an illusion, but it's not a real McCubbin. The frame is real wood, not plastic. — Banno
So, if someone insists the painting is real, what do they mean? — Banno
Is the chair real? — Banno
You'd have to give an example. The only thing I can think of is that the concept of a particular "ordinary object" might not include what's really going on to make the ordinary object as it is from a typical phenomenal standpoint, but ordinary object concepts are not usually claims in that regard anyway. — Terrapin Station
Not if we take science seriously, in my opinion. — Marchesk
Not if we take science seriously, in my opinion. — Marchesk
In context of art, they're disagreeing over whether it's a forgery. In general, they're being pandantic about the painting existing. — Marchesk
Science isn't saying anything at all like "chairs aren't real" lol — Terrapin Station
How do you decide exactly which collection of particles is the chair? — Marchesk
Ordinary object concepts aren't about molecules, are they? — Terrapin Station
The problem arises because philosophers noticed conflicts between our notion of everyday objects and what science says they're made up of. — Marchesk
That would be a misunderstanding of what science is doing/saying. There's no conflict. — Terrapin Station
It's not a problem. — Terrapin Station
, "The only thing I can think of is that the concept of a particular 'ordinary object' might not include what's really going on to make the ordinary object as it is from a typical phenomenal standpoint, but ordinary object concepts are not usually claims in that regard anyway." — Terrapin Station
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.