LQ11

Class Responses and Instructor Comments

>From jp:

More motion in one hand causes different sensations.

>rm says: Well, perhaps it would be better to say that the differing motions (primary qualities) cause different sensations. Still, this question should be answered in greater detail. Connect the experience of the water with the P/S distinction.

>From Avrohom:

its that the water stays the same temperature (primary quality), and that our senses change, which supports the secondary quality claim.

>rm says: Good start; it could be a bit clearer.

>From eddie:

It supports Locke's distinction of primary and secondary qualities. The water's primary quality is its motion, and mass. Meaning we see water and we know that it's a free flowing especially in a river or ocean. That it's also made of different elements. The secondary quality of water is that it could be hot, cold or warm. We don't recognize water for its temperature.

>rm says: Try to separate what we know about the water, on a Lockean view, for example, and how we recognize it. We might recognize water on the basis of its secondary properties even though those aren't the real properties of the water.

> From Mayra:
To know the distinction between primary and secondary qualities would be to say that our senses would be able to determine the difference between imersing our hands into different tempertures of water we would know there wouldn't be doubt about the temperatures we would know the differnces.

>rm says: Here's how to answer this question: Start with explaining exactly what happens in the experiement. Discuss how this generates a contradiction on the supposition that hot and cold are real properties. Extend this point to other sensory qualities. Voila.

>From KAI YU and WAI YAN:

heat and cold are secondary qualities, therefore they are not real so we can't perceive both at the same time. But, water is considered a matter, which is primary quality so we always perceive matter existing.

>rm says: Isn't this backwards? We're peceiving them both, so they can't be real. Also, matter isn't a primary quality; it's what really possesses primary qualities.

Locke Reading Guide 11. How does Locke's discussion of the water support his primary/ secondary distinction?		Back to Locke Reading Guide Back to Philosophy 101 Home Back to First Question
Enter your response to the above question, or to a previous response, in the form below, or use this email link. I will post your response on the right, and comment if I think I can be helpful. When emailing, instead of using the form, please indicate the question number. When using the form below, if you neglect to enter your name or email, I won't know who you are.	Class Responses and Instructor Comments >From jp: More motion in one hand causes different sensations. >rm says: Well, perhaps it would be better to say that the differing motions (primary qualities) cause different sensations. Still, this question should be answered in greater detail. Connect the experience of the water with the P/S distinction. >From Avrohom: its that the water stays the same temperature (primary quality), and that our senses change, which supports the secondary quality claim. >rm says: Good start; it could be a bit clearer. >From eddie: It supports Locke's distinction of primary and secondary qualities. The water's primary quality is its motion, and mass. Meaning we see water and we know that it's a free flowing especially in a river or ocean. That it's also made of different elements. The secondary quality of water is that it could be hot, cold or warm. We don't recognize water for its temperature. >rm says: Try to separate what we know about the water, on a Lockean view, for example, and how we recognize it. We might recognize water on the basis of its secondary properties even though those aren't the real properties of the water. > From Mayra: To know the distinction between primary and secondary qualities would be to say that our senses would be able to determine the difference between imersing our hands into different tempertures of water we would know there wouldn't be doubt about the temperatures we would know the differnces. >rm says: Here's how to answer this question: Start with explaining exactly what happens in the experiement. Discuss how this generates a contradiction on the supposition that hot and cold are real properties. Extend this point to other sensory qualities. Voila. >From KAI YU and WAI YAN: heat and cold are secondary qualities, therefore they are not real so we can't perceive both at the same time. But, water is considered a matter, which is primary quality so we always perceive matter existing. >rm says: Isn't this backwards? We're peceiving them both, so they can't be real. Also, matter isn't a primary quality; it's what really possesses primary qualities.
Write your comments here: Your Name: Your email: