Philosophically, is there a need to subdivide the term things into physical things and things of appearance only?David wrote:
When you analyze the matter closely, you can see that a thing derives its form from countless other factors which are external to it. For example, a shadow gains its form from factors like the angle of the sun, the shape of the object casting the shadow, the topography of the ground, etc.
Its form and existence is wholly derived from these other factors. So not only does the appearance of the shadow change from moment to moment, but it also doesn't possess any form of its own.
I’ve been pondering this because I do not believe the above is totally accurate in relation to actual physical things. Although a shadow is a thing it is unlike most other “real†things.
The issue I have with the above is that physical things have causal power that things like shadows do not have.
While what David says is correct for the concept of a shadow it is not correct for physical things. A shadow isn’t a physical thing, it is just a name, rather the things upon which a shadow appears are things with new appearances as a result of blockages of levels of light that would normally be expected.
What David said cannot be true for physical things. If a things form and existence is wholly derived from “other factorsâ€, then these other factors must hold causal power, they must possess causal form of their own. If a caused thing did not have this causal power, then the Totality becomes a magical God that causes things to appear, rather than the things themselves causing other things to appear.
I have stated before that no fundamental effects actually exist, that they are illusions of causal staticness. A shadow is an effect that does not lead to flow on causes. It has nothing of its own that can do so. Although a decrease in light and heat can be ascribed to the concept of a shadow, we know this to be false as these outcomes are held not in the shadow, but by what creates the shadow and what the shadow appears on.
One has to be reasonably logical, otherwise one falls into inane mental traps like Schrodingers Cat. Shadows are just less strong lighting than the lighting which surrounds it. An apple on a table in a dark room is still an apple, regardless of the degree of light shining on it, yet we do not refer to such an apple as being in shadow, we call the room dark.
If physical things have causal power then their current form impacts on other forms – there are actions and reactions by both parties, the internal and the external. To have an impact it must own some quality. That its current qualities all came from other things, does not mean that it has no causal power of its own, but rather that its form is always changing, including segregating and combining.
While it is true that at some past time (or configuration of the universe) all individual things were as non-existent as any form of thing, I do not find this to be relevant to discussions about present existence. When things did not exist or cease to exist as things with form then the content that makes up the thing still exists as part of the infinite causal forces (the void).
