Skip to main content
Philosophy

You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.

We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.

3
  • If a private investigator buys the hat to sneak into a Michael Jackson lookalike contest, is that a tool? A crowbar bought to break into the theater definitely would be. Is it a social rather than physical purpose that's a distinction, or is it something else? Commented yesterday
  • @R.M.: Again the distinction we have to look at is the 'found object' (one-off use) aspect. A proper tool (at least in colloquial usage) is a reusable item fabricated to repeatedly perform a consistent effect on demand. Things we use once for a purpose and discard should probably be called 'implements'. i.e., we might say that if we need to drive a nail a nearby rock will do as an implement, but a hammer is better as a tool. I mean, I wouldn't mind calling them ad hoc tools (as opposed to proper tools) if that makes you happier, but the point pertains… Commented yesterday
  • @R.M.: if you want to go a step deeper, every tool is a mental construct, not a physical object. For example, we have the mental concept of 'cutting' as an effect, and we create mental concepts of 'objects that cut': knives, swords, or any sharp-edge thing. We then either find or create a material object that fits the bill. The object-concept is what's consistently reusable, and we often prefer that material objects mirror that reusability. In your PD's case, the object-concept being used is 'disguise' (using appearance as a tool), an the hat is an ad hoc implement that serve in that tool. Commented yesterday