Skip to content

Instantly share code, notes, and snippets.

@tyre
Last active March 11, 2016 23:14
Show Gist options
  • Save tyre/80a14870315b9adfff64 to your computer and use it in GitHub Desktop.
Save tyre/80a14870315b9adfff64 to your computer and use it in GitHub Desktop.

@comaddox Question for the philosopher: If you give a congrats on Twitter to someone who is not on Twitter, did you give a congrats?

Great question! This stems from George Berkeley's A Treatise Concerning the Principles of Human Knowledge. The root of it comes down to whether we can truly say something exists without direct experience of it. In the case of whether an unheard tree falling in the forest makes a sound, the answer is no. It makes vibrations, which would be percieved as sound were someone listening.

Now to your question. What is the essence of a congratulations? In your case, the congratulations is heard, just not by she who is being congratulated. Does that matter? Perhaps. As a consequentialist, I would ask you what your intention was. It seems there could be three possibilities (and likely more):

  1. You wanted her to feel congratulated
  2. You wanted others to hear your congratulations about her, to raise their awareness of her greatness
  3. You wanted others to hear your congratulations about her, to raise their estimation of your caring

If you were going for (1), then no, you did not congratulate her because the intended consequence, the essence of what you meant by congratulations, was to affect her. It is possible, of course, that she finds your congratulations by other means (friends linking it to her, etc.), so this not-congratulations may yet become one! If you were going for (2) (or 3, but that seems unlikely), then you would have succeeded in congratulating her.

(1) is a more humananist definition of congratulations, since it deals with your effect on the person in question. (2) is more ethical, as it deals with whether someone gets the credit they deserve for an action.

My thoughts here are that you went for (1) but, with this specific tweet, failed to congratulate. Quick! Text her a link!

@tyre
Copy link
Author

tyre commented Mar 11, 2016

An addendum:

As to which of the three definitions—and there may well be others—define your actions, I rely on the existentialists. Humans are the only thing whose existence (being born into the world) proceeds their essence (being defined.) We create and define ourselves and our purpose. Your congratulations, as created by you, is yours to define. I cannot tell you which was your intention; only you can define the essence of your congratulations.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment