Still, isn't "If a tree falls ..." just a linguistic trick?

[RonButters at AOL.COM]

Of course, there are those philosophers who would argue that, regardless of
its roots, the question, "If a tree falls in the woods and there is nobody
there, does it make any sound?" IS merely a linguistic game of the sort that <
dcamp> outlined in his original message--as may be most (all?) philosophical
conundrums. In this view, Berkely's puzzlement is merely the result of his own
dim-witted misunderstanding of the nature of language, compounded by a tendency to
resort to "God" as the essential answer to his silly question.


In a message dated 5/12/05 9:40:43 PM, dcamp at CHILITECH.NET writes:


> I was taking issue with his assertion that it was a "philosophical
> conundrum." I had always thought that it was a typical example of how people
> can make a substantive argument over what is in fact a lack of understanding
> of how language operates. His response -- and I am grateful that he deigned
> to post it -- gave me new information about the Berkley background on the
> matter. As he explained it, it was indeed a philosophical conundrum. I am
> enlightened, and I thank you for that.
>
> My point, nonetheless, remains. Many such "conundrums" are simply language
> problems.
>