Q&A: Objects
Objects
Question
A few things:
A – Both “speed” and “horse-ness / the status of a married woman” are things that exist in reality, but speed exists as a property of something, while the others exist as an object, an entity. Is there any implication to this distinction beyond what you said there regarding contradictory properties in your article about legal status?
B – Is there an idea of a broom / a cow? Is there also a legal status for them? Suppose I designate a broom as something to scratch my back with, or a cow as a chair—do they change, so that it becomes a strange back-scratcher, or is it still a broom that one scratches one’s back with? (Do owners determine the essence of the object, or only its use?)
Thank you.
Answer
A. I don’t know. Is there any implication to the distinction between a spaceship and a cat?
B. Legal status deals with legal matters. What does that have to do with a broom? I don’t understand your hair-splitting.
Discussion on Answer
As stated, this is just hair-splitting for its own sake. If I take a broom to scratch my back, then I’ve changed the use of that particular broom. What does that have to do with the idea of a broom? At most, that broom is not an instantiation of the idea. And even that is debatable, of course, since it is fit for sweeping even if I don’t use it for that purpose. But this is just semantics.
Are objects essentially something in themselves—meaning, is there such a thing as the idea of a table, and therefore it will always remain that even if I relate to it differently—or does it depend on my wishes, so that if I use it for a different purpose it will no longer be a table but whatever I decide?