Posted: Jul 21, 2018 9:48 am
by Hermit
jamest wrote:
scott1328 wrote:For your restricted definition of “sound”

Restricted, my arse.

Until about 100+ years ago 'sound' had no meaning except experientially.

Why am I not surprised you cling desperately to meanings of the ignorant? Sure, the question posed in the OP is an ancient one. It gets answered differently in the context of what we know today. Its metaphysical context has become irrelevant regardless of your tanties and ranties. Maybe slightly rephrasing the question will make your position clear to you: "If JamesT posts in the forum and no one is around to read it, is he still wrong?"

jamest wrote:If you want to carry on acting like a fucking medieval retard...

You owe me an irony-meter.

TopCat wrote:This thread should have died after post 3.

Or post #7 at the latest.

BlackBart wrote:
SafeAsMilk wrote:A deaf person doesn't hear it, so that doesn't help. You either define sound as the compression wave, in which case it obviously does, or as the perception of it, in which case it obviously doesn't. That's all there is to it.

And if one defines sound as the perception, it renders the question especially pointless as it would boil down to 'If a tree falls and no one hears it, does anyone hear it?


:this: and :this: