Talk:Primary–secondary quality distinction

Philosophy: Metaphysics / Epistemology Mid‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy articles

Mid

This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Associated task forces:
/
	Metaphysics
	Epistemology

History

The 'history' section belongs on Wikiquote. Cosman246 (talk) 02:39, 27 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Colourless Apple?

I can imagine an apple without a defined colour but it would be impossible for an apple to be colourless. wouldn't it be more accurate to say "a specific colour". 83.70.219.86 19:33, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Texture

How is texture a secondy quality? The stitching on a cloth is still there even if no one is touching it. The individual threads still exist seperate from one another... They don't blend together and become smooth when no one is feeling it. Same with the holes in a sponge, the bumps on tree bark, and grains on sand paper.

Rationally we know that the qualities remain even when no one is looking. But they remain only as “permanent possibilities of [someone’s] sensation.” See John Stuart Mill’s An Examination of Sir William Hamilton’s Philosophy, Chapter 11 and appendix to Chapter 12. Only when someone is looking at them are they known in the way that they appear to that spectator. When they are not seen, they do not exist in the way that they affect anyone’s sense organs and brain. They might exist as something like sub-atomic particles or waves, but these can't be seen and are theoretic speculations.Lestrade (talk) 02:26, 17 February 2014 (UTC)Lestrade[reply]

Mechanics

If "mechanics" means "material bodies in motion," how did Newton's prism experiment prove that "the colour we see can be understood mechanically," as is said in the caption of the image?Lestrade (talk) 20:01, 29 October 2008 (UTC)Lestrade[reply]