is water wet?

Sort:
theBookwormerwillprevail

no its not. The actual, chemical reaction that happens is wet.

BUT thats just in a scientific view.

Philosophically, because water makes things wet it could be considered wet by association.

Its kinda like asking if a falling tree makes a sound if there is nobody there to hear it. Scientifically, we know it does because thats how sound waves and motion works. Philosophically, no one really knows.

So really it just depends on how you define "wet"

NIVEK1000

🙄

Peskybird1234
#41
So ur basically saying that scientifically, water is wet, it is just up to common folk to decide whether or not to agree, even if it means they are wrong?
Peskybird1234
Cuz that’s that I’m getting at
ChishTheFish

The question of whether water is wet depends on how you define "wet."

If you define "wet" as something being covered or saturated with water, then yes, water could be considered wet because it is liquid and can make other objects wet. But if you're thinking of "wet" as a description of the sensation or condition of being in contact with water, water itself wouldn’t necessarily be wet because it is the substance causing the wetness.

So, it’s a matter of perspective!

Peskybird1234
I think that water is wet, and anyone who says differently is wrong
kenzo-trxppin

nuh uh

theBookwormerwillprevail
Peskybird1234 wrote:
#41
So ur basically saying that scientifically, water is wet, it is just up to common folk to decide whether or not to agree, even if it means they are wrong?

kind of.

what im saying is that scientifically, Water is not wet.

but yeah technically it depends on how the "common folk" to define what "wet" is lol

Peskybird1234
I think of wet as ‘being quenched or actively containing a liquid’
Hot_Rash

1 molecule is never wet

Peskybird1234
Water is always wet
Muffin_Soul
Peskybird1234 wrote:
I’m confused

There can’t be more water inside a water molecule because a water molecule is the smallest possible concentration of water.

And yes, it is like asking if a proton has a proton inside it.

Peskybird1234
But a proton does have a proton inside it
All 100% of the inside is a proton, so it has a proton inside
Muffin_Soul
Peskybird1234 wrote:
But a proton does have a proton inside it
All 100% of the inside is a proton, so it has a proton inside

That’s like saying there’s another human being inside me because I’m 100% human.

Peskybird1234
Yes
Peskybird1234
Cuz it’s true
Muffin_Soul
Peskybird1234 wrote:
But a proton does have a proton inside it
All 100% of the inside is a proton, so it has a proton inside

The whole of an object is not synonymous with its inside.

Peskybird1234
Yes it is
Peskybird1234
And until you can factually prove otherwise, then I’m correct
Peskybird1234
‘Innocent until proven guilty’