Posy McPostface
What is the difference between the fact that grass is green and the green grass?
The discussion centers on the linguistic and philosophical nuances between the phrases "the fact that grass is green" and "the green grass." The former asserts a universal truth about grass, implying all grass is green, while the latter suggests the existence of grass that may not be exclusively green, allowing for variations in color. Participants explore the implications of these phrases in the context of observation and language, ultimately concluding that the distinction lies in the interpretation of the statements rather than their grammatical structure.
PREREQUISITESPhilosophers, linguists, students of language, and anyone interested in the subtleties of communication and observation in language.
Not sure of your question. When you write "the green grass", do you mean some actual grass, or do you mean a reference to it, i.e. someone saying or writing "the green grass"?Posy McPostface said:What is the difference between the fact that grass is green and the green grass?
haruspex said:Not sure of your question. When you write "the green grass", do you mean some actual grass, or do you mean a reference to it, i.e. someone saying or writing "the green grass"?
That's a bit clearer.Posy McPostface said:Just basically, the fact that grass is green as opposed to saying something upon an observation that the grass is green. Sorry if there's still confusion there; but, I can't make it any more simple.
haruspex said:Is there a context for this question? Are we discussing philosophy, epistemology, logic...?
This statement implies to me that all grass is green.Posy McPostface said:the fact that grass is green
This implies to me that there is, or may be, also grass with other colors.Posy McPostface said:the observation that there is green grass.
jtbell said:This statement implies to me that all grass is green.
This implies to me that there is, or may be, also grass with other colors.