Philosophy

[Fearzone]

Yes it will, it'll still cause vibrations in the air which will make sound, even though noone's there.

Do air vibrations = sound?

 

[kdragon1010]

Yes it still makes a sound. It doesn't matter if no one was there at the time or not.

 

[kdragon1010]

what is the sound of a falling tree?
*trimmed for entertainment value*

The sound you're looking for is "boom!" [http://translate.google.com/translate_t?hl=en#nl|en|boom]

Spoiler

In this case it represents a funny coincidence of being able to translate a phonetic sound as a word to a suitable word in another language

Back on philosophy.
I usually break it down to smaller bits because i'm too straigtforward to get it with thinking in circles.
My philosophy basic building blocks:

Facts (Safe)
Assumptions (Unsafe)
Common Sense (Extremely dangerous when applied)
Logic (Even more dangerous than Common Sense when applied)



Now, when dealing with facts, we make assumptions on how we percieve said facts. Based on those without the knowledge of cause and effect we end up with common sense that might pass for logic.

Fact: "being hit by a brick hurts"
Assumption: "bricks cause pain."
Common sense: "a brick is an object that transfers pain to a target when it makes contact."

Now i dare you, try Logic!

LOGIC : If I hit someone with a brick it will hurt them!.

How is that absurd?

Common sence is what the world lacks so I'm not sure what point you think your making.

Actually its not necessarily a fact there are people with medical conditions that cause them to not feel any pain at all.

 

[Fearzone]

By the that resonining if you are in a room alone, does anything behind you exists, since there is nothing to witness it? I would say yes, but since, it's philosophy there is probablyno right answer

I think that's a different question. Nobody doubts that when the tree falls air vibrations are produced whether anyone is around or not. I don't doubt that the counter right behind me is still there even though I am not looking at it at the moment.

But, do air vibrations equal sound? I would say the answer is no, and the logic is straightfoward: air vibrations are necessary for sound, but not sufficient.

Sorry Plato, case closed. No further discussion needed. The tree falling in the forest with no one there does NOT make a sound.

 

[Whobajube]

Sound is the way our own brains interpret the vibrations in the air. Without our brains interpretations of the vibrations, sound wouldn't really exist. It takes at least some kind of auditory sensory device to create the interpretation of sound.

 

[Axolotl]

Yes it will, it'll still cause vibrations in the air which will make sound, even though noone's there.

Not necessarily quantum mechanics has noted that matter behaves differently when it isn't being observed.

 

[Fearzone]

How about this one:

What if a dog whistle is blown, and a human is there and a dog is there. Does the dog whistle make a sound?

 

[asiepshtain]

"If a tree falls in a forest, and there is no-one there to hear it, does it make a sound"

Let's talk people. Share your honest thoughts on the subject and don't just blow it off. It'll be interesting to see what a bit of debating can do for the forums.

I love philosophy but this is a bit of a problem.

The question you pose is an kōan ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Koan ) and as such is not a so much a philosophical question, more of a meditation aid.

Like all zen kōan it is meant for you to meditate on, to embrace the subtle differences between awareness and knowing, and nothingness. My favorite kōan is this:
"Without thinking of good or evil, show me your original face before your mother and father were born"

think about it...

 

[Whobajube]

How about this one:

What if a dog whistle is blown, and a human is there and a dog is there. Does the dog whistle make a sound?

Exactly. To humans, the sound wouldn't exist... but it certainly exists to the dog! Our ears can't pick up on the vibrations at the frequency, thus they will never reach our brain, and it will not interpret them as sound.

 

[tthor]

this question brings to mind the question- is what we experience truly reality, or is it some strange sort of dream or maybe even a 'matrix'(or some other idea along those lines)

if we exist in this reality, then the tree will in fact make a sound, whether we are there to hear it or not.

but, if this reality we perceive merely exists in our mind, then the tree would not make a sound, because if this reality we perceive only exists in our mind, then the only things that would exist in this reality are what we 'see' and perceive (i do not believe this idea to be true, tho it still is an interesting concept)

 

[GRoXERs]

Yes it will, it'll still cause vibrations in the air which will make sound, even though noone's there.

Not necessarily quantum mechanics has noted that matter behaves differently when it isn't being observed.

/facepalm
Go read Brian Greene's The Elegant Universe, or the wikipedia article on Schrödinger's Cat. Since the prevailing theory of quantum mechanics is probabalistic (and therefore may be generalized by logic), if we see something happen a certain way every time we observe it, we can make an excellent guess as to what's going to happen if we observe it again, and since this doesn't really involve any collapsing probabalistic waveforms (as in Schrödinger's Cat) because we KNOW what happens whenever it is observed, we can say with some certainty that it does indeed make a sound.
EDIT: Or at least a vibration. The difference is only semantics, anyway...

 

[talon92]

Until you can prove to me otherwise, I acknowledge nothing but my own existence.

Everything other statement has a chance of being false.

Rational philosophy > Emotional (humanist) philosophy
imho

 

[Rolling Thunder]

All things being subjective, I must disagree. And in response to the tree- If there was no-one there to witness it, how do we know the tree fell down at all?

 

[DannyDamage]

Yes it does. The animals and the earth hear it though.

But seriously; I'm so glad you started a philosophical thread. You're so smart and deep and I now feel a little less stupid than I did before I turned on my laptop.

I get the impression you got your 'deep question' from a Christmas cracker or something. Awesome

 

[MoganFreeman]

"If a tree falls in a forest, and there is no-one there to hear it, and it hits a mime, does anyone care?"

Fixed.

 

[DolAaghr]

Rules=/=Logic

Hey, here's some another home-made equation:

(Philosophy / Logic) - (rules x 2)^Rational Thinking = Tree + Fall * Sound = Don't give a f***

 

[Axolotl]

/facepalm
Go read Brian Greene's The Elegant Universe, or the wikipedia article on Schrödinger's Cat. Since the prevailing theory of quantum mechanics is probabalistic (and therefore may be generalized by logic), if we see something happen a certain way every time we observe it, we can make an excellent guess as to what's going to happen if we observe it again, and since this doesn't really involve any collapsing probabalistic waveforms (as in Schrödinger's Cat) because we KNOW what happens whenever it is observed, we can say with some certainty that it does indeed make a sound.
EDIT: Or at least a vibration. The difference is only semantics, anyway...

But the best we can make is an educated guess of what will happen, there is no way of knowing with complete certainty, I was referencing quantum mechanics as a precedent for matter behaving differently when not observed.

 

[ioxles]

Rational thinking > Philosophy

Why can't rational thinking be part of philosophy?
But your right. I'll take hard evidence over metaphysical ramblings any day of the week.
Nicola Tesla > Friedrich Nietzsche

...

you're both kidding, right? critical reasoning is central to philosophy... the word itself roughly translates to "the pursuit of wisdom" from Latin...

philosophy is not about "metaphysical ramblings" but the quest for knowledge and meaning in our existence... trying to say that science is more important is really narrow minded in my view... philosophy must be informed by science in order to be relevant; it shouldn't be viewed as opposed to the scientific process...

Totally agreed. It took me a while to fully realize some people were equating philosophy with religion.

 

[Snowalker]

Ok, lemme beat the person who came up with that riddle over the head, one moment please.

Now that that is done. First off, if the forest is not some werid ass forest where no habitat is stable, animals will hear it, so yes it has a sound. Second, whoever stated it does because of vibartion, is correct. Third, logic always prevails over ramblings,otherwise known as Philosophy, but when you get down to it, I suppose since there is no factual evidense, no it does not make a logical "sound," but logically it does. Try to figure that one out.

 

[Metonym]

One big "function" of philosophy is to act as framework to the sciences (all of em) and as such it´s very rigid and built on rational reasoning and logic. And contrary to popular belief its fruits are very useful and can actually be applied in the field.

Rational reasoning is understood to be different compared to the normal reasoning process, eg everday reasoning, motives, and decision making, as these are usually not carried out with a logical framework, in the rigid sense(!.

Normal non rigid "reasoning" is instead seen as belonging to the sphere of psychological reasoning and it´s usually very filled with human "flaws" and/or systematical misstakes as well as personal belief systems and derived cultural adaptions. even advanced practioners of math and logic are subject to these flaws in everyday reasoning and life.