If a tree falls in a forest and nothing with hearing is around to hear it, does it make a sound?
This is
a question I’ve heard a number of times and I’ve always discounted it because
the obvious answer is, “of course.” Regardless if something with the ability to
hear is present, sound waves still occur and molecules still vibrate. How do I
know this for sure? It is physics and the laws of the universe which occur
whether or not we are present to observe them. Why is this philosophical
question asked frequently? I believe the answer to this is that we tend to define
the universe in terms of our own perception. In other words, this comes from
the thought that if our perception doesn’t occur, then the universe doesn’t
exist. This idea points to a much more egotistical view of us as human beings. The
Earth is the center of the universe. The sun is the center of the universe. The
universe is small and made just for us. Nothing exists unless we perceive it to
exist. It is interesting to evaluate our own narcissistic view of how things
work. This is a classic example of science and philosophy/religion clashing
over myth and fact. This may sound like I’m taking this argument too far for
such a simple question, but I strongly believe that we as a society need to be
more careful about how questions are phrased. Questions like this lead one to
suspend critical thinking in hopes of finding a deeper answer when there isn’t
one. Essentially, this question is asking whether or not our perception guides
the laws of physics. Of course it doesn’t. Now, if the question really is
trying to point out that our perception is an interpretation from our senses,
then perhaps it should be worded something like this: “Do all things with the
ability to hear interpret the sound of a tree falling in the same way?”
