Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Antioch]

This was one of the first subjects that came up during philosophy in the first year of high school. It is something that has occupied me on and off for years afterwards.

The assignment was about writing if a robot could be a human. The debate at some point arrived at what ANYTHING was anyway. What is a human? What is a robot? What is a table? What is a chair?


Is saying something is a chair an opinion?

[Sheb]

I'd answer, but I have a policy against talking to chairs.

[martinuzz]

With the current state of modern design, I'd say yes

[Frumple]

Can be an opinion, based on your chosen axioms. Generally, if you're working off an agreed definition of chair, identifying something as belonging (if perhaps not exclusively) to that category can be considered a(n attempt at making, since you could just be kinda' wrong) statement of fact. Other stuff falls out along those lines.

Is it human is more difficult because we're alternately arrogant and bigoted shits, and always working with incomplete information on the subject, and have traditionally tried pretty hard to avoid coming to an agreed definition on that front.

Now, if you ain't got that agreement you're having a roll in the hay with solipsism or something in its general direction and all bets are off, save that the proper response is probably going to be to ignore whoever's disagreeing's inanity and throw things at them until they go away.

[NJW2000]

Context very important. Whether a sentence is an opinion or not isn't always inherent in the sentence. Could be an argument of chair vs throne with no clear distinction.

But are what we think of as factual statements about reality "opinions"? No, that's not the normal way to use the word "opinion". Doesn't matter if you might be wrong or disagreed with. Opinion isn't perfectly defined, but it definitely isn't that.

[scriver]

What is a robot? Iirc, it is a slave. Can a slave be human? Can a chair be a slave? If a slave can be a human and a chair can be a slave, can I something that you don't can I can do the cancan

[martinuzz]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T59EDTqqW0A

[Cyroth]

What is a robot? Iirc, it is a slave. Can a slave be human? Can a chair be a slave? If a slave can be a human and a chair can be a slave, can I something that you don't can I can do the cancan

Well, a human can be a slave, and I can sit on a human. Therefore humans are obviously all robot chairs.

[Antioch]

Context very important. Whether a sentence is an opinion or not isn't always inherent in the sentence. Could be an argument of chair vs throne with no clear distinction.

But are what we think of as factual statements about reality "opinions"? No, that's not the normal way to use the word "opinion". Doesn't matter if you might be wrong or disagreed with. Opinion isn't perfectly defined, but it definitely isn't that.

But can't something that is a chair to one person be not a chair to someone else?

Just as something that is beautiful to one person be not beautiful to someone else?

What is the difference between an evaluation of "chairness" and of "beauty" ?

[misko27]

I guess I'll have to be the devil's advocate: if you consider Truth to be only truth if it's a statement that is always true, then saying it's a chair is only a correct opinion at best, not a fact. *

Consider: There is no ultimate universal definition of what a chair is and what constitutes it (Tragically, Webster's is not the ultimate universal arbiter of what is), so by that definition what a chair is can only be opinion (i.e. an opinion as to what definition of chair is proper to use). In addition, definitions may change over time, making what was true false & vica versa. So correct opinions are all we have left.

It's correct because it most certainly is a chair by the definition you have chosen to use using, but it's an opinion because "chair" is just a name for something and not something intrinsic to the object itself. Another example is the concept of Day & Night: they're just a perspective on the motion of the earth, and what you see on the surface of the earth is not true for all observers (someone in space might see no such movement at all; to them, the concept is false). But if it's only true for certain observers following certain definitions, it is an opinion). Truth is something, ah, higher than that, like mathematical, scientific, and philosophical proofs. Sure the means by which you express these might be specific and limited, but the idea itself is something that is the same for everyone in the universe, everywhere, forever. Infinite applicability within its own defined rules, a statement about what is. That is truth.*

*Disregard all of the above if you believe there really is a single specific objective definition of 'chair', independent of humanity and which exists even if humanity gets the definition wrong.

can I can do the cancan

You must answer this yourself, and post updates/results.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

Both chairness and beauty are questions of aesthetics, so they can only be philosophical opinions. Imagine something most people would accept is a chair but is actually the vital component of a cow-butchering machine. Removed from its context it gets put in a different heuristic set by human minds, unless they have the detail of knowledge to always recognize it's built purpose.

The real question is: Is philosophy a severe form of mental illness that happens to be ubiquitous in human minds, and will we be forever trapped in conflict with all alien races for being inherently and infectiously sick?

[Egan_BW]

Obviously my chair is the only *real* chair, and all other chairs are fake chairs made in the crude image of *this* chair.
In fact, this chair is the only real anything. All other things are made in the image of my chair, and have various degrees of corruption causing them to appear as not-chairs. Humans are, at core, chairs that aren't very good at being chairs.

[MrRoboto75]

Is saying something is a chair an opinion?

Realistically, anything I place my ass on is a chair.  Therefore, I am expressing my opinion that something is a chair by sitting on it.  My opinion could be incorrect if the thing I sit on breaks or something.  Or it could be a very poorly made chair, who knows.

It could be even more of a chair if all I ever do with it is place my ass on it.

[Egan_BW]

If you rest your ass on it for even a moment, you have made the object factually a chair. Wither or not it was a good idea to create that particular fact is irrelevant, because a chair is a thing you put your ass on and you put your ass on that thing.

[bloop_bleep]

If you rest your ass on it for even a moment, you have made the object factually a chair. Wither or not it was a good idea to create that particular fact is irrelevant, because a chair is a thing you put your ass on and you put your ass on that thing.

However, this arises the question whether your ass is, in fact, an ass, and thus whether it is qualified to make something a chair.