In this way, other potnetially immaterial things like minds can exist even if they have no directly physical/tangible basis, they can be metaphysical properties that lead to actionable consequences (behaviours) via their interaction with material existants. — Benj96
For me, an existent is something that "acts". — Benj96
This is confused. Energy and mass aren't existents (per se), they are properties of things that exist, and they can be converted to each other (that's entailed by E=MC^2).In this way, it does not need to be a material/physical thing, it only requires a phenomenology. For example some forms of energy are massless (not physical) eg a photon, but still acts - has the ability to do work. — Benj96
:100:Energy and mass aren't existents (per se), they are properties of things that exist, and they can be converted to each other (that's entailed by E=MC^2). — Relativist
This is not to say there are no issues remaining. The main one here is convincing folk that "exits", "real" and "physical" are not synonyms. — Banno
This is confused. Energy and mass aren't existents (per se), they are properties of things that exist, and they can be converted to each other (that's entailed by E=MC^2). — Relativist
By writing "matter(mass)" are you suggesting matter and mass are identical? They're not.But matter (mass) is an existent of itself is it not ? — kindred
Mass is a property that most things have, although photons are things that have 0 mass. — Relativist
By writing "matter(mass)" are you suggesting matter and mass are identical? They're not. — Relativist
Just a lump of mass? Suppose it has a mass of 500 grams. Is it the same as a 500 gram, lead fishing weight?I’d say that mass is not just a property but a thing in itself. My radio is just a lump of mass and not just a property of the radio. The problem appears to be linguistic here. — kindred
All particles behave like waves under some circumstances. They're all quanta of quantum fields (according to quantum field theory).Yes photons are confusing because they’re both waves and particles as far as i understand the concept — kindred
Just a lump of mass? Suppose it has a mass of 500 grams. Is it the same as a 500 gram, lead fishing weight? — Relativist
Aren't there actual differences between objects, that would exist even if no one was around to use language?Of course not they’re different objects with their own separate existence but they’re both just lumps of mass. Language here serves to differentiate between different objects. — kindred
Existent/thing: in humans, that which is, or possibly is, an affect upon the senses. — Mww
What about microscopic organisms…. — kindred
There are other things things that exist too which have no discernible affect upon our senses such as magnetism — kindred
What if you witnessed a unicorn in fiction such as in a movie or a book, does the unicorn exist in this type of frame or it doesn’t exist because it’s not real? — kindred
Do existents always have to have a one to one correspondence with reality. — kindred
Do triangles exist in your view ? They’re not mythical but abstractions of thought. — kindred
There's nothing logically inconsistent about the present King of France, no contradiction that follows from the very idea. — Banno
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.