Water is wet

Well, I'm certainly very happy that we are both so eager to read each other's ideas. As I am in the 'pro' position, I shall first put forward my argument, in the form of a deductive syllogism. 1. That which is 'wet' is that which is "consisting of, containing, covered with, or soaked with liquid" [1][2][3] 2. Water is a liquid* Conclusion: Water is wet. (*I assume 'water' refers to the liquid form of H20 rather than simply H2O, as it is conventional to describe 'gaseous water' as 'water vapour / steam' and 'solid water' as 'ice'.) I do not believe this argument can be shown to be false; however, in good spirit I shall discuss the points you made. Initially, I notice that you discuss 'wetness' only in terms of the 'sensation of wetness', while 'wetness' is also verifiable by chemical experimentation, such as by adding anhydrous copper (II) sulfate, and by vision. One is usually able to tell that a wet bench is wet before sitting on it if one looks carefully, or failing that, place the aforementioned white copper compound on the bench and observe a colour change to blue. [4] I think that certainly is an objective way to verify 'wetness'. I feel somewhat that we should be debating 'the Mona Lisa is beautiful', because I think 'X is beautiful' is certainly a subjective statement, which is what you have been trying to argue that 'water is wet' is. 'Is this wet?' is a question which I have argued can be answered objectively; however, a question concerning whether something is or is not beautiful can only be answered subjectively. So, if I, for the purpose of argument, grant you that 'Is this wet?' is a question which can only be answered subjectively, I nevertheless remain dissenting to your conclusion, which appears to be that subjective answers are wrong provided that a contrasting and equally subjective answer can be put forward in honesty. I propose that subjective statements need only be subjectively true to be considered 'true', i.e. a truthfully (honestly) expressed subjective statement is true. Does this mean that two conflicting statements can be true? Yes. Should someone tell me that Enigma produce ugly music, I will think this is not true, for if I thought it was true, I would agree. [5] As they are being honest, they will of course find their statement true. Some people are mature enough to consider that the appreciation of music is 'simply opinion', and I agree; it is absurd to apply objective standards of truth to subjective statements. The truth of a subjective statement is instead relative to the honesty, or truthfulness, of the person expressing the statement. Should someone say 'Neutral Milk Hotel is the best band of all time, and no one can disagree', that would be an objective statement, and therefore subject to the laws of objective truth. Thank you for reading; I enjoy that the debate appears to be centred on objectivity, subjectivity and truth immensely. [1] http://www.merriam-webster.com... (accessed 26/06/2013) [2] http://www.thefreedictionary.com... (accessed ") [3] http://oxforddictionaries.com... (accessed ") [4] http://en.wikipedia.org...(II)_sulfate (accessed ") [5] http://www.youtube.com... Reference [5] is the YouTube video - Enigma's 'Goodbye Milky Way'. Largely irrelevant, of course.