Why is Water Wet?

[CynthiaCypher]

Water is NOT wet! Wet is being satured with or covered by water (or other liquid). If a bucket is full of water, the bucket is wet, not the water. If you put your hand in the water, your hand is wet, not the water. Water cannot saturate or cover itself.

So why does water wet?

 

[FunctionalAtheist]

So why does water wet?

Ah, good question.

How do you know the water exists? How do you know the wetted subject exists? Does it matter if they exist? Is existence nothing more than our interpretation of our sensory input, i.e. our experiences? Does water wet merely because of the coincedence of the proximity of water and our sensation of wettness? Is wettness the result of our awarness, or is it independent of our mind? Can you think of any other Sans-A Qs I may have left out?

 

[ImmortalFlame]

Ah, good question.

How do you know the water exists? How do you know the wetted subject exists? Does it matter if they exist? Is existence nothing more than our interpretation of our sensory input, i.e. our experiences? Does water wet merely because of the coincedence of the proximity of water and our sensation of wettness? Is wettness the result of our awarness, or is it independent of our mind? Can you think of any other Sans-A Qs I may have left out?

*Raises hand*

How about, "How much water is in a cup?"

 

[CynthiaCypher]

Ah, good question.

How do you know the water exists? How do you know the wetted subject exists? Does it matter if they exist? Is existence nothing more than our interpretation of our sensory input, i.e. our experiences? Does water wet merely because of the coincedence of the proximity of water and our sensation of wettness? Is wettness the result of our awarness, or is it independent of our mind? Can you think of any other Sans-A Qs I may have left out?

How would you know that the water isn't a simulation? You forgot that one.

 

[CynthiaCypher]

*Raises hand*

How about, "How much water is in a cup?"

8 fluid ounces.

 

[CynthiaCypher]

Ah, good question.

How do you know the water exists? How do you know the wetted subject exists? Does it matter if they exist? Is existence nothing more than our interpretation of our sensory input, i.e. our experiences? Does water wet merely because of the coincedence of the proximity of water and our sensation of wettness? Is wettness the result of our awarness, or is it independent of our mind? Can you think of any other Sans-A Qs I may have left out?

So science cannot answer the question why does water wet?

 

[FunctionalAtheist]

So science cannot answer the question why does water wet?

Of course it can, but you do not like the answer. Water wets because 'wet' is the association between water and a thing.

 

[CynthiaCypher]

Of course it can, but you do not like the answer. Water wets because 'wet' is the association between water and a thing.

So wet is a coincidence. How is this science again?

 

[ImmortalFlame]

So wet is a coincidence.

How did you get that? What's coincidental about wetness being a description of what water does?

 

[CynthiaCypher]

How did you get that? What's coincidental about wetness being a description of what water does?

Prove causality.

 

[Ouroboros]

So wet is a coincidence. How is this science again?

The English word "wet" comes from old English waet, waetan, and water. Waetan means water, and waet means "what-weatan-feels-like". So really, there's no mystery. Whatever water feels like is "water feel", i.e. wet. If water felt like fire, we'd call it fire instead of water.

Words only describe the feelings and senses that we have about these things. There's no objective, universal, absolute essence of what an element.

I wonder how dry water would feel like? Dret?

 

[CynthiaCypher]

The English word "wet" comes from old English waet, waetan, and water. Waetan means water, and waet means "what-weatan-feels-like". So really, there's no mystery. Whatever water feels like is "water feel", i.e. wet. If water felt like fire, we'd call it fire instead of water.

Words only describe the feelings and senses that we have about these things. There's no objective, universal, absolute essence of what an element.

I wonder how dry water would feel like? Dret?

I didn't ask how. I asked why.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

Prove causality.

What? What does that have to do with wetness as a property of water being coincidental? What's the point of this thread?

 

[CynthiaCypher]

What? What does that have to do with wetness as a property of water being coincidental? What's the point of this thread?

So water causes wetness for no good reason?

 

[ImmortalFlame]

So water causes wetness for no good reason?

No, water causes wetness because wetness is a word we use to describe the property that water has when it interacts with something that isn't water (or sometimes even when it doesn't).

Again, how is this a coincidence?

 

[CynthiaCypher]

No, water causes wetness because wetness is a word we use to describe the property that water has when it interacts with something that isn't water (or sometimes even when it doesn't).

Again, how is this a coincidence?

How is this science again? Because if I were to stick my hand in a bucket of water and it came out wet...it must be a coincidence.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

How is this science again?

What? Where did I say what was science?

Because if I were to stick my hand in a bucket of water and it came out wet...it must be a coincidence.

coincidence
noun
noun: coincidence; plural noun: coincidences; noun: co-incidence; plural noun: co-incidences
1. a remarkable concurrence of events or circumstances without apparent causal connection.

water
noun
noun: water; noun: the water; plural noun: waters
1. a colourless, transparent, odourless, liquid which forms the seas, lakes, rivers, and rain and is the basis of the fluids of living organisms.

wet
adjective
1. covered or saturated with water or another liquid.

 

[CynthiaCypher]

What? Where did I say what was science?

So science can't answer the question?

 

[ImmortalFlame]

So science can't answer the question?

I don't think you understand how conversation works. Normally, one person says something, then the other person responds depending on or considering what the other person just stated. They do not just completely ignore what the person just said and make a load of assumptions out of thin air based on nothing that was previously stated. Conversationally, that's considered quite rude.

 

[CynthiaCypher]

I don't think you understand how conversation works. Normally, one person says something, then the other person responds depending on or considering what the other person just stated. They do not just completely ignore what the person just said and make a load of assumptions out of thin air based on nothing that was previously stated. Conversationally, that's considered quite rude.

The question is simple: why does water wet? Just admit that science can't answer the question.