philosophy

Is an idea a true copy of the real thing that it represents? Sensation is not a direct interaction between bodily objects and our sense, but is a physiological process involving representation (for example, an image on the retina). Locke thought that a "secondary quality" such as a sensation of green could in no way resemble the arrangement of particles in matter that go to produce this sensation, although he thought that "primary qualities" such as shape, size, number, were really in objects.

yarayara said:

Is an idea a true copy of the real thing that it represents?

Click to expand...

I would say probably not.

yarayara said:

Is an idea a true copy of the real thing that it represents? Sensation is not a direct interaction between bodily objects and our sense, but is a physiological process involving representation (for example, an image on the retina). Locke thought that a "secondary quality" such as a sensation of green could in no way resemble the arrangement of particles in matter that go to produce this sensation, although he thought that "primary qualities" such as shape, size, number, were really in objects.

Click to expand...

It's important to keep in mind that Locke was an idiot. Aquinas is much better to rely on for sound philosophy.

There are essential and accidental qualities of things.

I'm not sure that there is any type of object which is essentially red (as an example), although "redness" certainly has a discreet essence. I'm not sure whether how redness is perceived is an essential or accidental quality (and it may be impossible to tell, given that there is no way to describe what a color looks like without referring to another color).

yarayara said:

Is an idea a true copy of the real thing that it represents? Sensation is not a direct interaction between bodily objects and our sense, but is a physiological process involving representation (for example, an image on the retina). Locke thought that a "secondary quality" such as a sensation of green could in no way resemble the arrangement of particles in matter that go to produce this sensation, although he thought that "primary qualities" such as shape, size, number, were really in objects.

Click to expand...

The "primary qualities" of height, width, depth, are the three (3) dimensions.

Otherwise I do not see any answer to that, but I do have such a story of my own to add.

A friend of mine is "scientific" and he told me that the grass is not green and the sky is not blue, so of course I disagreed because I accept the vision of my eyes.

His reasoning being scientific (photosynthesis) that the grass actually absorbs all the light colors from the sun (sun light) except the grass does not absorb the color green, and that is why the grass looks green because the grass is rejecting the color green while it absorbs all the other colors in light, and therefore the grass is NOT green.

The sky is really black as night - no - the sky is colorless, in that the small particles of dust and water vapors make the sky to look blue but that blue is just a reflection from the dust and water vapors which give the appearance of a blue sky when the sky itself is NOT blue.

I still maintain my own perception in that I see green grass and blue skies and therefore they are green and blue - my philosophy of perception.