Philosophy 160
Fall 2004
Observation and Meaning
Here are some claims:
A. Water is H2O.
B. Water and ice are the same stuff.
C. Water freezes at 0 ˚C and 1 atm pressure.
D. Water will melt the Wicked Witch of the West. (Fortunately, we now have
her in captivity.)
E. Water is not a good conductor of electricty.
Which of these claims would you say are synthetic? Which are analytic?
Why are you inclined to classify them this way? (Here's what I'd say about them.)
Now let’s do a thought experiment.
It’s the year 1600 and we are intrepid scientists. We also have an
interplanetary transporter.
We have discovered a planet very much like ours called Twin Earth. We go
there and discover that the rivers, lakes, streams, and aqueducts are filled with
a liquid that the Twin Earthlings drink, cook with, bathe in, swim in, etc.
We take a sample back to our laboratory.
Question: Is this stuff water? (How do we decide?)
(Remember that in 1600, not only are we without fancy equipment to make an elemental
analysis of this stuff, but we don’t have a concept of “element”
beyond the earth-air-fire-water framework.)
The thought experiment continues:
The intrepid scientists in 1600 had the foresight to stash some samples of the
liquid from Twin Earth. It’s now 1785. You’re a scientist,
working in the laboratory of Lavoisier, the discoverer of oxygen. Your task
in to determine the elemental composition of water. You take a sample of
the stuff in the Seine. You find that you can change that liquid (by way
of an electrolysis set-up) to two volumes of hydrogen gas and one volume of oxygen
gas. Next, you take one of the samples of liquid recovered from Twin Earth.
Electrolysis of that liquid yields a different elemental composition (call it
XYZ).
Question: Is the stuff from Twin Earth water? Why or why not?
A slightly different version of events:
The intrepid scientists in 1600 had the foresight to stash some samples of the
liquid from Twin Earth. It’s now 1785. You’re a scientist,
working in the laboratory of Lavoisier, the discoverer of oxygen. Your task
in to determine the elemental composition of water. You take a sample of
the stuff in the Seine. You find that you can change that liquid (by way
of an electrolysis set-up) to two volumes of hydrogen gas and one volume of oxygen
gas.
Due to poor lab-keeping, however, the reserved sample of liquid from Twin Earth
can’t be found in 1785. Instead, it’s rediscovered in 2004.
Elemental analysis of this liquid yields a different elemental composition (call
it XYZ).
Questions: What assumptions about the stuff from Twin Earth would you
have been inclined to make in 1785 based on the available data? With the
additional data in 2004, how would you want to explain (or revise) those earlier
assumptions?
A shocking discovery! In 2004, it is discovered that the water
in certain lakes, rivers, and streams in the Southern Hemisphere has an elemental
composition of XYZ. (No one bothered to check before.) In all other
respects, this stuff behaves just like the rest of Earth water (and like that
stuff from Twin Earth).
Question: Is XYZ water? Why or why not?
