Post Number:#226 April 27th, 2012, 2:08 am
Noted the whole chunk of your presentation is reduced ultimately and merely to semantics to support your above conclusion.Anathematized_one wrote:I so did not read through the last 15 pages.
I just wanted to assert my opinion on the matter, yes it does.
Your final conclusion is, yes it does make a sound depending on how I define (semantics) sound. Note the following definition of 'sound'.
1. the sensation produced by stimulation of the organs of hearing by vibrations transmitted through the air or other medium.
2. mechanical vibrations transmitted through an elastic medium, traveling in air at a speed of approximately 1087 feet (331 meters) per second at sea level.
3. the particular auditory effect produced by a given cause: the sound of music.
4. any auditory effect; any audible vibrational disturbance: all kinds of sounds.
1.A sensation perceived by the ear caused by the vibration of air or some other medium. Nobody made a sound. He turned when he heard the sound of footsteps behind him.
2.A vibration capable of causing this.
refer to the list provided by you.
The above dictionaries and presumably others will provide two different meanings of sound, i.e.
a. human-based or
b. independent waves within a certain range.
What you simply did was to be bias to one meaning, i.e. (b) and assert there is sound. I don't see your philosophical justifications for that.
Re Phenomenology, you got it wrong when you stated there is sound. There is 'no sound' from this perspective, note (wiki),
Sound is " "phenomena" (objects as interpreted by human sensibility and understanding)" thus if there is no one, there is no sound.phenomenology-wiki wrote:Stephen Hicks writes that to understand phenomenology, one must identify its roots in the philosophy of Immanuel Kant (1724–1804). In his Critique of Pure Reason, Kant distinguished between "phenomena" (objects as interpreted by human sensibility and understanding), and "noumena" (objects as things-in-themselves, which humans cannot directly experience).
In the case of neuroscience, 'sound' is very specific to the neural circuits in the human brain that support what is ultimately sound. In the case of synesthesia, when waves (sound) hit the eardrum and the auditory neural circuit, any damage to the circuit may not produce the sensation of sound, but it instead it could produced sensations of colors, taste, feelings, visuals, instead. If not sure check out SYNESTHESIA in google or wiki.
Re Science, while Physics may focus primarily on sound as wave, neuroscience focus on primarily on human-based sound and sound as wave is secondary.
The wiki article re this 'falling tree-no_one-sound?' scenario had a lot of clues to the philosophical perspective of the issue, wonder how you missed them?
Not-a-theist & Eclectic Philosophy. Religion is a critical need for humanity now, but not the FUTURE.