Page 2 of 2

Re: The truth of the worldview

Posted: Tue Feb 14, 2023 4:00 pm
by Skepdick
Janoah wrote: Tue Feb 14, 2023 3:45 pm there are "privileged", scientific definitions.
No, there aren't.

Why is 625–740 nanometres "red"?
Why isn't 525-640 nanometers "red" ?

Re: The truth of the worldview

Posted: Tue Feb 14, 2023 4:54 pm
by Harbal
Skepdick wrote: Tue Feb 14, 2023 2:45 pm

All three sentences (below) are definitions for the term "red".

This color is "red".
This color is "red."
A dominant wavelength of approximately 625–740 nanometres is "red".

Which definition is "more consistent"; or "truer"?
Can we have a clue, please?

Re: The truth of the worldview

Posted: Tue Feb 14, 2023 4:54 pm
by Skepdick
Harbal wrote: Tue Feb 14, 2023 4:54 pm
Skepdick wrote: Tue Feb 14, 2023 2:45 pm

All three sentences (below) are definitions for the term "red".

This color is "red".
This color is "red."
A dominant wavelength of approximately 625–740 nanometres is "red".

Which definition is "more consistent"; or "truer"?
Can we have a clue, please?
The clue was in "There are no privileged descriptions/definitions".

Re: The truth of the worldview

Posted: Fri Mar 10, 2023 1:20 pm
by Janoah
Skepdick wrote: Tue Feb 14, 2023 4:00 pm
Janoah wrote: Tue Feb 14, 2023 3:45 pm there are "privileged", scientific definitions.
No, there aren't.
for grannies sitting on a bench, scientific definitions are not privileged.
Sorry, here grandmother's tales are not interesting to me.

Re: The truth of the worldview

Posted: Sun Mar 12, 2023 5:15 pm
by Skepdick
Janoah wrote: Fri Mar 10, 2023 1:20 pm for grannies sitting on a bench, scientific definitions are not privileged.
Sorry, here grandmother's tales are not interesting to me.
And your tales are not interesting to grandmothers; or most people.

What's your point?

Re: The truth of the worldview

Posted: Mon Mar 13, 2023 4:00 am
by Agent Smith
It's quite simple actually: There's an adjective/adverb that goes with every verb. My English bad; my Latin worse; don't even talk about my Greek.