LQ9

Class Responses and Instructor Comments

>From anna grier:

Have you ever heard the phrase,"What you see is what you get"? Well,this applies to everything else too.Without sight,sound,smell,taste and odor,there is nothing to excite our sensations from these particular secondary qualities and they are reduced to their causes.

>rm says: I would have thought that 'what you see is not what you get' would be more appropriate, here!

>From anna grier:

O.K so delete what you say is what you get, because things are not always what they seem to be.

>rm says: This is Locke's point about the secondary qualities, only.

>From eddie:

From what I take from this, is that we are left with the sense of touch. All our ideas and experience would be based on this one sense. Meaning all we would know is if an object is hard,soft,hot,cold,tall,and short. This limits or constricts our world and ability.

>rm says: But even the ideas we get from touch are called into question. The smoothness of the surface of an object would also vanish, and certainly hot and cold would, as well.

>From mayra Diaz:

If our senses were not to function so that we could not be able to identify between primary or secondary qualities Then I would say that we would be like robots who just move about without perception of knowing what is true or what is false.

>rm says: This is interesting about the robots. Would robots have secondary sensations, in the ways that we do? (How would we try to generate those perceptions?) More importantly, could robots successfully navigate the world without our sensory perceptions?

>From KAI YU and WAI YAN:

smell, color, odor, taste, and sound are all qualities that can be taken away from matter, because they are secondary qualities. Bulk, figure, and motion are primary qualities that exist in the objects themselves.

rm says: Yes, though to be picky, I wouldn't say that they're taken away from matter, since they are and were no part of matter!

Locke Reading Guide 9. "Take away the sensation of them; let not the eyes see light or colors, nor the ears hear sounds; let the palate not taste, nor the nose smell, and all colours, tastes, odours, and sounds, as they are such particular ideas, vanish and cease, and are reduced to their causes, i.e. bulk, figure, and motion of parts." (§17) Explain.		Back to Locke Reading Guide Back to Philosophy 101 Home Next 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 anna grier: Have you ever heard the phrase,"What you see is what you get"? Well,this applies to everything else too.Without sight,sound,smell,taste and odor,there is nothing to excite our sensations from these particular secondary qualities and they are reduced to their causes. >rm says: I would have thought that 'what you see is not what you get' would be more appropriate, here! >From anna grier: O.K so delete what you say is what you get, because things are not always what they seem to be. >rm says: This is Locke's point about the secondary qualities, only. >From eddie: From what I take from this, is that we are left with the sense of touch. All our ideas and experience would be based on this one sense. Meaning all we would know is if an object is hard,soft,hot,cold,tall,and short. This limits or constricts our world and ability. >rm says: But even the ideas we get from touch are called into question. The smoothness of the surface of an object would also vanish, and certainly hot and cold would, as well. >From mayra Diaz: If our senses were not to function so that we could not be able to identify between primary or secondary qualities Then I would say that we would be like robots who just move about without perception of knowing what is true or what is false. >rm says: This is interesting about the robots. Would robots have secondary sensations, in the ways that we do? (How would we try to generate those perceptions?) More importantly, could robots successfully navigate the world without our sensory perceptions? >From KAI YU and WAI YAN: smell, color, odor, taste, and sound are all qualities that can be taken away from matter, because they are secondary qualities. Bulk, figure, and motion are primary qualities that exist in the objects themselves. rm says: Yes, though to be picky, I wouldn't say that they're taken away from matter, since they are and were no part of matter!
Write your comments here: Your Name: Your email: