Cross-posted from “Epicurean” by @db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com in !epicureanism@lemmy.dbzer0.com
More seriously though, nowadays when people call themselves Epicurean, they mean just the life philosophy stuff, not the physics stuff :D
Cross-posted from “Epicurean” by @db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com in !epicureanism@lemmy.dbzer0.com
More seriously though, nowadays when people call themselves Epicurean, they mean just the life philosophy stuff, not the physics stuff :D
Hmmm, yeah, I suppose broadly (unless souls exists). If a creature evolves like… a dozen photosensitive patches, like a proto-spider, would we say that creature has sight but no eyes? If that’s the case, do compound “eyes” actually count?
I guess now I’m just musing on where the fuzzy line is between a bunch of eyelets and eyes (made up of single-celled photreceptors). I think sight is just what eyes do. Something like “insight” comes from a metaphor (“looking” within) and I… don’t know if there’s a different word for like… what the experience of being a plant and sensing the sun on your leaves would be called?