 |
|
You are not logged in! F.A.Q Log in Register |
 |
|
 |
 Now online (1)big ...and 128 guests Last 5 registered Oplandisks nothingstar N_loop yipe foxtrotromeo Browse members... |
 |
Members 8025Messages 2614231 Today 13 Topics 127550 |
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
i'd like to know your answer to the old age question: if a tree falls in the forest and no one's there to hear it, does it make a sound? if possible, could you elaborate a little (i.e. not just answer 'yes' or 'no'). ps - the guy who majored in philosophy and doubts his own existence, please answer! |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
YES *crasssssssssssssh* |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
The answer is whatever you believe to be the truth. "When an ordinary man attains knowledge, he is a sage; when a sage attains understanding, he is an ordinary man." |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
I thought that quote was relevant, I was just in the loo reading "The Bathroom Zen Companion." |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
i know there's no actual right or wrong answer. so let me rephrase the question: what do you believe to be the truth? there! ;) |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
I think it's one of those things that can't really be answered... When your in the woods and tree falls, you hear it. When your not there and the same thing happens one would assume it would still make a sound. So the only debate is based on the factor you did not witness the event, so therefor there is no proof it made a sound. Course someone could always leave a recording device in the woods an find out... |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
well the tree itself felth the sound vibrations, as well as the impact, and everything in the vivinity heard it. isn't the question a zen koan though? it's not meant to be answered in such a way... |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
im not sure it's about that fact there's a witness or not, more something like what constitutes a sound for it to exist. i think the sound is created by my auditory system (ears, neurones, cortex....), thus if im not in the woods to hear it, there is no sound. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
it's not meant to have an actual answer, only to make you reflect on some notions to give you an 'insight' at the end. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
hahahhhah you forgot your paper WHALEY.....tee hee! |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
But if I was in the woods when you are not does that mean it only made a sound for me? And that in your life it never existed? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
i believe you got a good point there, and i agree. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
other creatures besides homosapiens have ears.....so someTHING hears someTHING! =0) |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
I think I just learned something from thinking about that question...Now I am also more confused about things. All this points out is that a lot of things could be viewed in the same context; If I shoot someone in the woods and no one is there to see it did I really do it? I know I did, but initially no one else does because there is no record or witness to the event, So in the technical world if no one ever found the body and I never told anyone, it never happened... |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Ha! I remember one particularly long session on the can where I came across the passage: "Zen is not some kind of excitement, but concentration on our usual everyday routine." I love that little book. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
yes, it makes a sound. it goes NNNeeeeeeeoooo....BOOM!!!!! |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
heheh whaley.....tis good to know you NEVER stop learning......no matter where you are. now if you EVER call me from the CAN.....you're dead. *click* ehheheh btw.....if we all eat like a meal thats 10,000 calories....and we ALL agree that there were only 100 calories......will that MAKE IT SO ?? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
hehe, ok, no one, including any kind of homosapiens is in the woods then! ;) but if i ask you this: if no humans only arent in the woods, would he sound that you (personally) would normally hear (the tree falling down) exist? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
well the zen master would expect an actual answer from the monk in training (or whatever the term) but if he got some speculation on ears he would probably not be satisfied. i think the answer doesn't mean so much as does the knowingness of the buddha nature that comes across in the way it's said... i don't know this cause i've not studies too much zen, but think i'm not far off at least. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
youre still thinking about the fact that, does something really happens if there's no witnesses... |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
lol, you ARE buddha! cortex... to get away from the zen, imo, the sound that we hear is a form of the sound. the essence of what the sound is lies in it's very vibration, which is expereinced by all in the vicinity. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
in other words, vibration is essential. that's why funk soul manifests as wave motion in the ass! |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
i cant really reply because im not familiar with this zen master thing. but imo, the answer isnt as important as (1) the reasons that lead you to give such an answer, the justification and (2) the impact your answer has had on the way you perceive the world, or the reality. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
In times of overwhelming confusion like this I look to God for the answer. Behold : Luke chapter 12, verse 7 - 'But even the very hairs of your head are all numbered. Fear not therefore: ye are of morevalue than many sparrows'. In other words, "God sees all sparrows fall". Nothing escapes his giant I. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
yes, the air vibrations should still be there, but that's not what constitutes the sound, it's some kind of 'sound potential', and much more. when the vibrating air hits your ears ans is interpretated by your brain will there be an actual sound (in your head). |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
when we hear, we are not creating what the sound is, we are simply using the natural biotech of our nervous system to expereince and appreciate something that is, with or without us present. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
got to sleepy now... until tomorrow |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
You know. The sounds that something makes, its all in your head. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
The Science of Sound, Third Edition states: "The word sound is used to describe two different things: 1. an auditory sensation in the ear. 2. the disturbance in a medium that can cause this sensation." question answered |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
well .. the problem with existentialism (/phenomenology) is that (in a crude sense) it is based on the cogito, Decartes' "i think therefore i am" .. the problem with this is that it presupposes the "i". I = I. It doesn't actually solve the problem of consciousness (or "i-ness") - ofcourse, if you assume this - you are then faced with the problem of solipsism. If you are a consciousness - how do you have access to other consiousnesses. Descartes solves this problem by using God, Sartre uses "the look" etc .. but the cogito is still lurking in the background. So - the tree falls in the woods, does it make a sound? If you were a realist the answer would be yes. But then there is no way to "test" realism .. so ... |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Zeus: you still need to assume realism to accept definition 2. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
in terms of physics, the tree makes a sound upon ground impact from its fall, but the sound waves dissipate beyond a certain range, and those who are outside such a range cannot hear it. i hereby argue that a sound not heard does not denote that it is nonexistent, but that such a sound may occur undetected. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Obnoxious question demands obnoxious reply: "If a tree falls in the forest and no one is there to hear it, does it make a sound?" The question supplies the answer in that it establishes the existence of the tree, it establishes the existence of the forest, it establishes the act of the tree falling. The act of a tree falling is a process that includes the generation of sound. You cannot communicate the act without removing the observer regardless of how hypothetical the situation is. If you want to be clever and ask the deeper question of "What is the nature of a tree falling in a forest", then you go off and join the monestary... "If a tree like manifestation undergoes a questionable process, is the questionable nature of the process a definable nature?" Light 'em up, and blow them out... |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
deadw. nicely put - the joys of language |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
cut and paste is for losers ;-P |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Of course, the squirrels will hear it while they gathers their nuts. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
the tree dosen;t make a noise but you can hear all the little animals and insects complaining about the mess |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
quantum mechanics shows that some sub-atomic particles only exist cos we are there to measure the fact that they exist. Same with the tree! |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
yeah .. quantum mechanics rox - draws solipsistic consequences from realistic assumptions ! yeah baby |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
ok .. i've just been sussing out this essay on popper who despises quantum mechanics - so that should provide adequate "context" to explain my ... |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
that makes no sound for the stone or the mushrooms only tiny vibrations |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
... "uncalled for enthusiasm" .. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
this question is sssooo stupid it remains me about that other topic about that a man cannot know one more thing as what's in his head that's pathetic |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
But it actually calls for questioning the whole notion of truth and objective reality. How do you "know" for sure facts that you can not experience with your senses? Is it not more honest to say you "believe" than to say you "know" these things? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
its like that one how are u sure that the red colour is red for me ??? good one no? but still hard way stupid |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Exactly, you get it, it's all about the language. It may sound stupid, talking about trees in the forest, but it all makes sense when you know George Bush is getting ready to attack Iraq because "we have no proof that Iraq does not have weapons of mass destruction". It's the same thing: saying "we know" instead of "we believe". |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
some Baudrillard seeping in here? Meho is on the spot here :) |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Bush doesn't know a shit about nothing he doesnt even know that theres a country where i live !!! usa power did and will always sucks they kill they destrruct they re complaining, what is this shit about billions of trillions the 11 sept victim's parents are demanding???????? that's unbelievable as they surely will have this fucking money... ;o)jjj |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Always ready and willing to prove that seemingly meaningles academic debates actually relate to real life. And death. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
:) .. definetly |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
|
Messageboard index
|
|||||||||
