Print

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

[King Zultan]

Does it produce a smell?

[delphonso]

Is it a hobby or behavior?

[Maximum Spin]

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

I think you are answering these questions very badly. For example, I can absolutely kick one of these. And yes, kicking them demonstrates the existence of the category itself, since there must be a kind of thing for there to be a thing. Same for visibility - if I laid out every single example of this that exists in the world on a very large table, you would be seeing the whole category. You are being foolish because of the abstraction.

[A_Curious_Cat]

Is it visible?

I would say not in and of itself.

Does it produce something that is visible?

No.

Does it produce a smell?

No.

Is it a hobby or behavior?

No.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

I think you are answering these questions very badly. For example, I can absolutely kick one of these. And yes, kicking them demonstrates the existence of the category itself, since there must be a kind of thing for there to be a thing. Same for visibility - if I laid out every single example of this that exists in the world on a very large table, you would be seeing the whole category. You are being foolish because of the abstraction.

Spoiler: For Maximum Spin’s eyes only (click to show/hide)

Perhaps, but I’m referring to the family of connectors, not the connectors themselves.

Spoiler: hint (for those that want one) (click to show/hide)

While the thing(r) itself is not visible or tangible, it’s components are.

[Maximum Spin]

Spoiler: For Maximum Spin’s eyes only (click to show/hide)

Perhaps, but I’m referring to the family of connectors, not the connectors themselves.

I got that and I clearly explained why what I said still applies.

[A_Curious_Cat]

Spoiler: For Maximum Spin’s eyes only (click to show/hide)

Perhaps, but I’m referring to the family of connectors, not the connectors themselves.

I got that and I clearly explained why what I said still applies.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

But a family of objects is not the objects themselves.  It’s an abstract concept.  Abstract concepts can be seen or touched.

And what would you suggest as the best way forward?  Is the hint enough?

[Maximum Spin]

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

But a family of objects is not the objects themselves.  It’s an abstract concept.  Abstract concepts can be seen or touched.

And what would you suggest as the best way forward?  Is the hint enough?

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

I would say that it is the objects themselves, really. Look at it like this: When all the members of my family are in a room, my family is in the room, right? I can say "I'm seeing my family" etc. More importantly, I think this is how most people would think about it, which is why everyone is getting totally misled.

I think your hint is fine unless people still don't seem to be getting it, in which case you're probably going to have to say that it's a group of things. In and of itself, the hint seems fine, but some people might be so far down the wrong path that they get confused and keep thinking in terms of physical components instead of elements of a set. But yeah, I'd give them some time and see whether the hint works for now.

[King Zultan]

Are we looking for a specific thing named thing?

[MeimieFan88]

Is it purchasable from stores?

[A_Curious_Cat]

Are we looking for a specific thing named thing?

No.

Is it purchasable from stores?

Not in and of itself, however the hint may be helpful…

[MeimieFan88]

Is it some kind of interaction having to do with electricity?

[A_Curious_Cat]

Is it some kind of interaction having to do with electricity?

No.

[MeimieFan88]

Spoiler: thoughts related to hint (click to show/hide)

It's components are visible but it itself isn't... but aren't its components part of it? How can something's components be visible but the thing itself not be visible, at least partly, due to its visible components? Maybe I am misunderstanding the word 'component' and it's more like stuff that helps to generate/sustain it, rather than being actual parts of it? It would be helpful to get an example of something that has visible components but isn't visible itself, because I can't really think of any.

[Maximum Spin]

Spoiler: thoughts related to hint (click to show/hide)

It's components are visible but it itself isn't... but aren't its components part of it? How can something's components be visible but the thing itself not be visible, at least partly, due to its visible components? Maybe I am misunderstanding the word 'component' and it's more like stuff that helps to generate/sustain it, rather than being actual parts of it? It would be helpful to get an example of something that has visible components but isn't visible itself, because I can't really think of any.

Spoiler: Maybe don't look at this unless A_C_C says it's okay. I'm just trying to help though. (click to show/hide)

Take "component" literally, but think about something nonphysical. What are the components of a word, or of a song, or of 19th-century Continental philosophy?

[A_Curious_Cat]

Spoiler: thoughts related to hint (click to show/hide)

It's components are visible but it itself isn't... but aren't its components part of it? How can something's components be visible but the thing itself not be visible, at least partly, due to its visible components? Maybe I am misunderstanding the word 'component' and it's more like stuff that helps to generate/sustain it, rather than being actual parts of it? It would be helpful to get an example of something that has visible components but isn't visible itself, because I can't really think of any.

Spoiler: Maybe don't look at this unless A_C_C says it's okay. I'm just trying to help though. (click to show/hide)

Take "component" literally, but think about something nonphysical. What are the components of a word, or of a song, or of 19th-century Continental philosophy?

Yeah, I’d say go ahead and look at it so we can get this thing moving…