GENIUS FORUMS

It seems that it might be a childish sort of concept, but if every single life form in the universe recognized a certain orange that was sitting on my bedside table to be actually an apple, would it be an apple? Would it change the very nature of the orange, or only our perception of the orange? Or would knowing that it was previously an orange make that impossible (unless every life form recognized that an orange could change to an apple if every being believed it so)? Could belief actually change the elements and compounds in an orange or just our perception of the orange? If that were possible than there could be no FACTS, only what each being who knows a thing beieves-COMPLETELY-about that specific thing.

i don't see how a nature would change by believing

Borommakot wrote:It seems that it might be a childish sort of concept, but if every single life form in the universe recognized a certain orange that was sitting on my bedside table to be actually an apple, would it be an apple?

I presume that since all lifeforms in the universe recognize it as an apple then you recognize it as an apple as well.

The answer to your question is that it depends on whether you wanted a God's-eye view, as it were, or were satisfied with whatever was experienced by lifeforms.

Would it change the very nature of the orange, or only our perception of the orange?

To "God" it would be an orange, and to lifeforms it would be an apple.

Or would knowing that it was previously an orange make that impossible

Who would be thinking that the apple was previously an orange?

The answer to your question is that it depends on whether you wanted a God's-eye view, as it were, or were satisfied with whatever was experienced by lifeforms.

if we put god into the equation then it is impossible. because god wouldnt let every life form commit such an act of fallacy as to change the very nature as he intended it. and if he did allow it, and being a logical being as well as caring, he should rectify his position on wether or not it was an apple or an orange, but he would have to be wrong before he could be right in order to BECOME right.

Who would be thinking that the apple was previously an orange?

if they knew that they had changed it frum an orange, than they would know that it was previously an orange.

Borommakot wrote:being a logical being as well as caring,

What evidence do you have that God cares?

Borommakot,

It seems that it might be a childish sort of concept, but if every single life form in the universe recognized a certain orange that was sitting on my bedside table to be actually an apple, would it be an apple?

For your question to make sense, we'd have accept that a thing is more then simply the totality of it's appearances. Whereas there is reason to think that things-in-themselves might exist, it's commonly accepted by philosophers that when we talk of an "apple" or an "orange" we're simply talking about the object as it appears. Given this, one could answer your question by suggesting that the the object would be an orange as a thing-in-itself, but it would be an apple as a thing-as-it-appears. Or, to use Kantian terms, you'd have a noumenal orange but a phenomenal apple.

It seems that it might be a childish sort of concept

It strikes me as a proper philosophical sort of concept. Although philosophers are nothing if not childish. I'd like to think being childish is often a good thing, but that's ultimately a value judgment a fella's gotta make for himself. :)

I'll add to my last reply since it seems to only have restated the question. The appearance of the object wouldn't change it's nature as a noumenon if we understand such a division to exist. If we hold that all appearances are directly reflective of noumena, or that there are no noumena, then we'd have to conclude that the object itself would change as it's appearance did. The reason why I'm not giving an opinion either way is because, as the philosopher Kant pointed out, we can't know anything about noumena. We only ever experience phenomena, so it's seemingly impossible to say one way or the other as to how indicative of noumena phenomena are.

If we hold that all appearances are directly reflective of noumena, or that there are no noumena, then we'd have to conclude that the object itself would change as it's appearance did.

It seems as though there would be an expirement to test my theory/question, but it still wouldn't tell us wether or not the noumena changed, or even if there was one.

If a group of people found something completely alien to them, and then COMPLETELY brainwashed themselves using some sort of technology that we dont possess now, to make them know that some vegetable from a different planet was actually a green bean, and then let a third party come in and inspect the plant from mars and see that they found a green bean plant on MARS then found the brainwashing technology at the site, then they would know (or at least have a rough grasp of) what happened.