Since you are sure of the answer for yourself, maybe instead you should spend time trying to figure out why some very smart people have thought otherwise. It wouldn't be a philosophical staple if there wasn't something to it.
The answer is obviously "yes" if you think "sound" is the physical vibration in air caused by, say, a falling tree. But the answer is equally obviously "no if you think that physical vibrations are not what is meant by "sound" but rather "sound" is a perception. (It opens to broader philosophical implications if you think that the only door to meaning is by perception -- with this understanding of the world, it is meaningless to speak of an unheard sound.) There are deeper reasons to argue in favor of either definition, but you cannot prove one or the other a fallacy.
It is a problem of how you define the word. Defining the word one way proves nothing about alternate definitions.
2006-09-30 11:17:51
·
answer #1
·
answered by C_Bar 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
I'm not sure there's a fallacy here or not. In a philosophical sense, a point can be made either way. Your statement, "If a tree falls in the forest and nothing is there to hear it, it DOES make a sound", is true. This can be explained by the laws of nature (sound, thermodynamics, etc), but actually the answer has less to do with hard science.
First, you say a sound is made, so the sound exists. This is your own statement of belief. Perception isn't necessarily required for belief, but it helps. Although you never heard the sound, you believe it exists by way of logic and science. Since you believe the sound was made, even though you didn't perceive it, it did exist.
Perception helps form Belief, but it's Belief that defines Reality.
The sound wasn't given existence because of vibrating molecules and such. The REAL existence was generated the moment you believed the falling tree and it's vibrating molecules generated the sound. If you believe, it is.
Conversely, if you don't believe, it doesn't exist. If someone doesn't perceive the sound and doesn't formulate the belief that the sound exists, then it doesn't. Some may think this foolish because they've already convinced themselves the sound exists and any other belief can't change theirs, especially one without perception to reinforce the changing of their belief.
You say the falling tree makes a sound, and you are right because you believe it to be true. But belief that it doesn't make a sound isn't necessarily a fallacy; it's just a different belief and therefore a different framework of Reality. Reality isn't a hard, fixed thing, unchanging. It's different things to different people.
The answer to this falling tree riddle is dependant on the belief of the answerer. If someone answers according to their beliefs, it must be a true answer to them, regardless of the opinions of others. So the answer isn't always "makes a sound".
2006-09-30 21:16:24
·
answer #2
·
answered by Adashi 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
why it makes a sound: when a tree falls a vibration is caused, we call it sound. no one needs to hear it.
why it is a falacy: it's not really. you see in order for that to be true many many many people would have to believe that when a tree falls in the forest it makes no sound. I don't believe, you don't and i bet all the people who are going to answer this question don't either.
2006-09-30 18:08:00
·
answer #3
·
answered by hey_finny 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
As the tree falls it concusses against other objects and therefore creates percussions in the surrounding atmosphere. These percussions radiate outward from the source in molecular 'ripples' or waves of the air in varying wave lengths. That is sound. And if your not around to hear it then too bad.
If the forest were in a vacuum then the tree would not make a noise.
2006-09-30 18:14:56
·
answer #4
·
answered by dudezoid 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
In Quantum mechanics, the position of a particle, or whether something appears as a particle or a wave depends on the observer. This is not philosophy. This science nearly three quarters of a century old. Einstein's theories of relativity (general and special) and Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle would lead one to believe that if the tree falls in the forest with nothing there to observe it, the waves and/or particles it emits behave differently than when there is someone/thing there to observe.
2006-09-30 18:32:43
·
answer #5
·
answered by Rico Toasterman JPA 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
How do you know it makes a sound?
If no one is there to hear it, then no one has first hand knowledge that it makes a sound.
You claiming it is a falacy and your claim to know that it does in fact make a sound is illogical.
2006-09-30 18:09:11
·
answer #6
·
answered by p_rutherford2003 5
·
0⤊
2⤋
just because you aren't there to hear the sound - doesn't mean it doesn't mak a sound. All of the animals in the forest will still hear the sound
2006-09-30 18:30:44
·
answer #7
·
answered by Agent99 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
Only something with consciousness can identify sound. All living cells have consciousness so then can indeed hear. All living cells are that which makes up everything that grows old and dies and then recreates itself. We call this a open system.
2006-09-30 18:12:26
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
oo this ones a famous one. i never did find out the answer to it though. but here's my guess. it does make a sound because even though nothing is around, the tree that fell is there. so therefore, a sound is made. but overall, i guess it depends on how we all interpret "sound".
2006-09-30 18:10:58
·
answer #9
·
answered by Tree 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
It does not make a sound in the conventional sense. Our hearing is a necessary component to the making of a sound.
2006-09-30 18:05:37
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋