Ayer - 2 and 3: The Nature of Philosophy

What is your answer?

Suppose that we ask about a thing's "real color." Ayer would say that

{ 1 }

{ 2 }

{ 3 }

{ 4 }

<= back | menu | forward =>
Directions: Click on a number from 1 to 4.

1 is wrong. Please try again.

Suppose that we ask about a thing's "real color." Ayer would say that

{ 1 } - a thing has no "real color" -- it consists of colorless atoms.

{ 2 }

{ 3 }

{ 4 }

Good guess, but this isn't what he says. He claims that "real color" in our language has an empirical meaning.

<= back | menu | forward =>

2 is correct!

Suppose that we ask about a thing's "real color." Ayer would say that

{ 1 }

{ 3 }

{ 4 }

People sometimes say that the "real color" of a thing is the color it would appear to have under standard lighting conditions (e.g. sunlight instead of a pink light) to standard observers (e.g. they're sober and not colorblind or wearing sunglasses).

Ayer refines this somewhat by saying that the "real color" of a thing is the color it would appear to have under the conditions that make the maximum discrimination of colors possible.

<= back | menu | forward =>
Before continuing, you might try some wrong answers.

3 is wrong. Please try again.

Suppose that we ask about a thing's "real color." Ayer would say that

{ 1 }

{ 2 }

{ 4 }

He'd reject this as nonsense.

<= back | menu | forward =>

4 is wrong. Please try again.

Suppose that we ask about a thing's "real color." Ayer would say that

{ 1 }

{ 2 }

{ 3 }

Good guess, but this isn't what he says. He claims that "real color" in our language has an empirical meaning.

<= back | menu | forward =>

the end