Describe Gravity as a property of reality in to an Absolute irrefutable definition ! Be an empiricist and solve the matter once and for all...

Sorry. I don't understand what you are saying, nor why you are saying what you are saying.

Absolute irrefutable condition

What is an absolute irrefutable condition?

Existence is a broad concept, and so when we say that something is in existence, or that something exists, we should take notice of what that something is existing within or what it's related to.

I don't think that the concept of existence is an especially broad concept. How is it broader than the concept of object, or the concept of frying pan. I guess I don't know what you mean by "broad" here. In any case, When I say that horses exist, but unicorns do not, I don't see that I am saying anything in particular about the universe. I am offering a description which applies to something (no doubt in the universe) and another description which does not apply to something in the universe.

I don't understand why you say that when I sing about America as the land of the free and the home of the brave I am not expressing a concept or an opinion just as much as when I say that America is the land of the free and the home of the brave, I am expressing an opinion. But I don't understand what that has to do with the issue anyway.

Existence is a broad concept in the sense that the word encompasses any and all things that make up reality. There really is no disagreement here, so this is a none issue.

The post that you are responding to was in response to Zetherin's question of what it means to say that an idea or a song exists. I didn't say or imply that the sentence "America is the land of the free and the home of the brave", whether sung or spoken, is not an opinion.

Yes, everything exists, and nothing does not exist. But that does no mean that the concept of existence is broad. It means something quite specific.

What it means to say that a song exists is what it means to say about anything that it exists. It means that the song has properties.

Yes, everything exists, and nothing does not exist. But that does no mean that the concept of existence is broad. It means something quite specific.

What it means to say that a song exists is what it means to say about anything that it exists. It means that the song has properties.

In closing, to say that something exists is to say that it is an object that has a causal relationship to the universe. To say that something doesn't exist is to say that it is only a concept or an idea that is not a part of reality.

That depends on what you mean by song. The sounds are real, but the words and opinions are not.

Why aren't words and opinions real? There are seven words in this sentence. And my opinion that we should try to say meaningful things as well as true things is my real opinion. It is not fake.

Concepts or ideas are real. What makes you think they are not? Ideas often influence all kinds of things. Think of the idea of democracy, or of Communism. Those have had enormous causal influence.

This really needs to be clarified. Just because something has an enormous causal influence does not make it real. For example, the concept of deities has had an enormous affect on people, but the deities are not real. In philosophy, when we say that something is real, we are saying that something is an objective feature of reality that is independent of an observer, that is if you're a realist like me. Concepts and ideas, like democracy and communism, are composed of opinions and sentiments of the human species. Economic and political systems are only real as functions.

The deities may not be real, but what has that to do with the concept of the deities? Nothing, that I can see. The concept of deity was (and is) an objective feature of reality. Deities may not be. But how does that matter? You are confusing concepts of X with X, I am afraid. You are right. Clarification is in order.

With all due respect, I believe that the confusion lies with your understanding of reality. As I said before, "In philosophy, when we say that something is real, we are saying that something is an objective feature of reality that is independent of an observer, that is if you're a realist like me". Concepts and ideas are abstractions.

So they are. But they can be of concrete things. You said that what is real has causal influence. Do you really believe that the concept of communism has not had causal influence? And concepts are independent of any particular observer ("an observer). Just as pain is real, and pain is independent of any particular observer. Or do you think that pain is not real? (Christian Science makes exactly that confusion).

What I said was that to say that something exists is to say that it has a causal relationship to the universe. Furthermore, realizing that I needed to be more exact, I proceeded to clarify what I mean when I say that something exists by saying "In closing, to say that something exists is to say that it is an object that has a causal relationship to the universe. To say that something doesn't exist is to say that it is only a concept or an idea that is not a part of reality". I will proceed further by saying that to say something exists is to say that it is an object with actual physical properties.

Concepts are not independent of an observer, also known as a subject. The word green is not an actual physical property, it's a word and words are abstractions. Words are abstract concepts that are used to represent reality (or fiction), but they are not properties of the mind-independent, physical world. Pain is a sensation that can be deduced to the central nervous system. It is a secondary, psychic phenomenon.

With all due respect, I believe that the confusion lies with your understanding of reality. As I said before, "In philosophy, when we say that something is real, we are saying that something is an objective feature of reality that is independent of an observer, that is if you're a realist like me". Concepts and ideas are abstractions.

I think what you mean is that to say that X does not exist is to say that although the concept of X exists, what the concept purports to refer to does not exist. And I think that is right. For instance, to say that unicorns do not exist is to say that the concept of unicorn has no referent in the world. But, it is not to say that the concept of unicorn does not exist. The concept and what the concept purports to refer to are different, and either might exist without the other. As I pointed out, it is important to keep separate, concepts and objects. And, of course, words and things I agree that the word "green" is not a property (except of a sentence that contains it, of course) but certainly green, what the word "green" refers to, is a property. Pain is a sensation, but it is (like all sensations) mental entities. (Of course, it may be that mental entities are physical).

So concepts do exist. Ideas do exist. My idea of a ball point pen exists as I observe color, shade, shape, and depth, which I understand to be properties of the pen. These properties change as I move my head and see the pen from a different angle. I don't think the new set of properties belong to a new pen, because the idea of the pen is unchanging. I allow the properties associated with the pen to change, as the the idea of the pen stays the same.