Ad blocker detected: Our website is made possible by displaying online advertisements to our visitors. Disable your ad blocker to continue using our website.
No we can sit on whatever we like, and we can call what we sit on whatever we chose, but sitting is not simply taking the weight off of your feet and distributing it across your bum, otherwise we could sit on a bed of nails. Sitting is a concept, the main idea behind it being comfort, therefore one persons idea of what a chair should be can be different to anothers. My three year old has a chair, but to me it's barely a foot stool. Things of design, have an idea in mind, and it's the idea that we call conceptual. Therefore a chair is a concept.
James Markham wrote:No we can sit on whatever we like, and we can call what we sit on whatever we chose, but sitting is not simply taking the weight off of your feet and distributing it across your bum, otherwise we could sit on a bed of nails. Sitting is a concept, the main idea behind it being comfort, therefore one persons idea of what a chair should be can be different to anothers. My three year old has a chair, but to me it's barely a foot stool. Things of design, have an idea in mind, and it's the idea that we call conceptual. Therefore a chair is a concept.
James Markham wrote:No we can sit on whatever we like, and we can call what we sit on whatever we chose, but sitting is not simply taking the weight off of your feet and distributing it across your bum, otherwise we could sit on a bed of nails. Sitting is a concept, the main idea behind it being comfort, therefore one persons idea of what a chair should be can be different to anothers. My three year old has a chair, but to me it's barely a foot stool. Things of design, have an idea in mind, and it's the idea that we call conceptual. Therefore a chair is a concept.
Again, one cannot sit on a concept.
One cannot even sit without conceptualising sitting. The chair is secondary to this.
Banno wrote:
One cannot even sit without conceptualising sitting. The chair is secondary to this.
This is either bunkum or you mean something quite odd by "conceptualising"; since I, and I suspect most of us, do not have to undertake any ratiocination in order to sit.
But then, you cannot see the distinction between use and mention, nor the use of quotes, so I ought not be surprised.
Banno wrote:
One cannot even sit without conceptualising sitting. The chair is secondary to this.
This is either bunkum or you mean something quite odd by "conceptualising"; since I, and I suspect most of us, do not have to undertake any ratiocination in order to sit.
But then, you cannot see the distinction between use and mention, nor the use of quotes, so I ought not be surprised.
How dull you are.
Of course you have to conceptualise to have a chair or to use the term sit.
Everything we are doing here is using concepts. That's the whole point dullard.
Hobbes' Choice wrote:
How dull you are.
Of course you have to conceptualise to have a chair or to use the term sit.
Everything we are doing here is using concepts. That's the whole point dullard.
Indeed, I must be very dull, or you too clever to be understood.
I've managed to frustrate you into repeating yourself while insulting me; for this I would apologise, except that since you presented your ideas for discussion, it is reasonable to assume you want someone to disagree with you. I am happy to do that, in my own simple way. Again, I say we sit on chairs, not on concepts-of-chairs.
Have you anything better than insults with which to reply?
