• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Simple question: What is an object?

Bodhi Dharma Zen

Advaitin
Bodhi Dharma Zen
Joined
Nov 25, 2004
Messages
3,926
To keep things under control, please use this format:

"An object is:

1) a separate entity
2) it existence is independent of observers
3) has different characteristics which are not affected by observers

and so on... "

Change the list with what you believe, of course. I used what I think is the "normal" folk language definition (please do not use dictionaries, just what YOU think an object is).

Thanks, lets see where this little experiment can lead us.
 
Last edited:
Dang, Fishbait got there first.

My wife just answered, "Something acted on by a subject" when I mentioned this thread. I think that is a brilliant answer.

So, you ask, what is a subject? Why, something that acts on objects, of course. And that self-referential reply sums it all up, except for verbs and we all know what happens when you start talking verbs. Not pretty, not pretty at all.
 
Bodhi Dharma Zen said:
... "An object is:

1) a separate entity
2) it existence is independent of observers
3) has different characteristics which are not affected by observers

and so on... " ...
Click to expand...

I think I would stop after (1), Bodhi.

Observer-independence is a criterion for "objectivity", not for an "object".

Objects may be anything we can describe, like a party, or religion, for instance; or friendship, or pi, or the space program, or Peter Pan, or the Pittsburgh Penguins; not just physical objects per se. From my list, only pi would be the same regardless of who was taking part.

Curiously, when we describe an object, it becomes the subject of the sentence. This is I think due to the root meaning of the words: ob-ject (throw in front of); sub-ject (throw beneath). Perceptually, the object is in front of us; grammatically, the object is beneath the words that are describing it, and so subject to them.

It's also interesting that we refer to ourselves as "subject". Psychologically-speaking, we are the contents of our character and experience, subject to them in the same sense a subject in a sentence is fleshed out by its descriptors. Our language seems to reflect this -- perhaps to have predicted it.

Anyway, subjectivity is then the personal reactions one has to objects; objectivity is the standard for consensus about objects arrived at either by logical or scientific protocols, or less rigorously by informed and dispassionate opinion. Objectivity means to describe the object; subjectivity how we feel about it.

Remember, you said no dictionaries, so don't quote me on any of this... I am notoriously myopic without googles. :)
 
Last edited:
An object is anything that has mass and takes up space: a specific piece or collection of matter. This is not the language/grammatical meaning.
 
Steven Howard said:
That's easy. An object is an instance of a class.
Click to expand...

Say, a chair is an instance of the class (objects with this shape that serves this purpose). Thats a good definition. Now, will this lead to some form of platonism? to put in in another words, if humanity ceased to exist, the class would disappear? what about the instance?
 
The specific object may or may not (the instance may or may not). That depends on the manner of humanities disappearance and whether the instance is in a place humanity abandonded prior to it's disappearance and which was not involved in whatever caused that disappearance. And, of course, the length of time it would take the specific object/instance to break down sufficiently that it no longer existed as that object/instance in any notable way.



This refers to post 11 not post 12.
 
Last edited:
First of all, good answer thanks.

blobru said:
I think I would stop after (1), Bodhi. Observer-independence is a criterion for "objectivity", not for an "object".
Click to expand...

Could be semantics, because it is not the same to talk about a number and a chair. Oh well, I think some people would argue that numbers are objective in the same sense a chair is.

blobru said:
Objects may be anything we can describe, like a party, or religion, for instance; or friendship, or pi, or the space program, or Peter Pan, or the Pittsburgh Penguins; not just physical objects per se. From my list, only pi would be the same regardless of who was taking part.
Click to expand...

Would all of them would still be "objects of perception"? like my last answer, can a number exist without being perceived/thought about? Is a friendship more than the feelings of two individuals?

blobru said:
Curiously, when we describe an object, it becomes the subject of the sentence. This is I think due to the root meaning of the words: ob-ject (throw in front of); sub-ject (throw beneath). Perceptually, the object is in front of us; grammatically, the object is beneath the words that are describing it, and so subject to them.
Click to expand...

This is very interesting, thanks for the input. Worth a careful analysis.

blobru said:
It's also interesting that we refer to ourselves as "subject". Psychologically-speaking, we are the contents of our character and experience, subject to them in the same sense a subject in a sentence is fleshed out by its descriptors. Our language seems to reflect this -- perhaps to have predicted it.
Click to expand...

Yes, I do believe language play a predominant paper in here. Would you state that the separation is arbitrary? or absolute? (between subjects and objects).

blobru said:
Anyway, subjectivity is then the personal reactions one has to objects; objectivity is the standard for consensus about objects arrived at either by logical or scientific protocols, or less rigorously by informed and dispassionate opinion. Objectivity means to describe the object; subjectivity how we feel about it.
Click to expand...

Now, if the objectivity is a "consensus of subjectivities" would this imply that we are not describing the object, but our interaction?

blobru said:
Remember, you said no dictionaries, so don't quote me on any of this... I am notoriously myopic without googles. :)
Click to expand...

So far this is the best answer to the OP. :)
 
Last edited:
fuelair said:
An object is anything that has mass and takes up space: a specific piece or collection of matter. This is not the language/grammatical meaning.
Click to expand...

I think also that this is the typical accepted everyday definition. Some people have been playing with the grammatical or syntactical meaning, which is not that bad, but I thought my question was transparently asking for the definition of "object" like a chair or a table.
 
fuelair said:
The specific object may or may not (the instance may or may not). That depends on the manner of humanities disappearance and whether the instance is in a place humanity abandonded prior to it's disappearance and which was not involved in whatever caused that disappearance. And, of course, the length of time it would take the specific object/instance to break down sufficiently that it no longer existed as that object/instance in any notable way.
Click to expand...

I'm dizzy :p ok lets be more specific. Say a virus kills every human on the planet in one week from now. In two weeks, would the chairs still be chairs?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom