Although I disagree with the premise of this article and would aver that a tree falling in the forest does indeed make a sound even if noone hears it, nevertheless my worldview is this: I perceive that "all that there is" is God's will and is unknowable in its fullness, that the physical realm is a manifestation of that reality. Thus concerning math and physics I am Platonist. And concerning politics and ideology, I am Christian conservative.
IOW, in my worldview everything in space/time is contingent per se because it is a manifestation, i.e. finite "reality" is an illusion (albeit a persistent one as Einstein said).
The boundaries of materialism are stiffling to investigation both within and outside science. Many correspondents dismiss the non-physical, non-corporeal, non-spatial, non-temporal with a handwave, i.e. that pain/pleasure, red/green, mathematical structures, consciousness, geometry, information and such do not "exist" in nature. Jeepers...
Strange, but true: if you deny the non-physical with a handwave, then you have the absurd situation where you are, in fact, denying the very laws of logic upon which the metaphysical naturalists have built their very imposing castle. For the very laws of logic are non-physical, non-corporeal, non-spatial, and non-temporal. The metaphysical naturalist has built his castle on a foundation that, in his eyes, does not even exist! Ergo, metaphysical naturalism is illogical.
Even using a naturalistic premise for the conducting of empirical research is illogical: "Assuming there is no supernatural intervention of any kind, how did this "thing" come into existence?" Such a question is already absurd, even as an assumption, because there is no logical way to absolutely rule out supernatural explanations. It is an article of anti-faith, nothing more.
As a contrast, a logical premise for investigation could be simply "How did this "thing" come into existence?" Assuming only that it, at one time, did not exist and now it does. If our powers of observation are sufficient to find causality, then fine. If not, then we have to look beyond that which can be observed with our five senses, and start using our rational minds. Our minds have this strange ability, which can be easily proven, to perceive FAR more than what the five senses are telling us...
We need some help here to get our arms around this issue. Although I disagree with the premise of this article and would aver that a tree falling in the forest does indeed make a sound even if none hears it, nevertheless my worldview is this: I perceive that "all that there is" is God's will and is unknowable in its fullness, that the physical realm is a manifestation of that reality. Thus concerning math and physics I am Platonist. And concerning politics and ideology, I am Christian conservative.
My goodness A-G, you just gave away the whole show! By stating your worldview for all to see, we can then draw conclusions about your observations based upon your "filter." It would be so very, very nice if everyone else in this world were to be so honest. How much "objectivity" is really objective? Of course I don't believe in true, absolute objectivity in this life, for all of us, even scientists and journalists (especially journalists), have some sort of framework (i.e. "worldview") which pre-determines just how we perceive things.
Hence, if your worldview states that trees make noise when the fall down, whether or not their is an observer to hear the sound, then it is the equivalent of saying that human observers are not needed for something to be true. To that extent I agree with you.
However, how about this thought experiment: all humans are born deaf--no ears. As a matter of fact, no living animal or beast any kind on the planet has ears. Now, if the tree falls in the forrest, does it make a sound? Again, I would argue no, because if there is no way to perceive sound, then sound does not exist. (At least for us mere mortals!) All a human could do is denote a minute change in air pressure, and might even need an instrument to measure it.
But does that mean sound does not exist absolutely--that there can be no being anywhere in the universe that is unable to perceive sound? Then the answer is yes, sound exists-- because there are beings somewhere that understand what sound is.
Can we see sound or hear light? No, not anyone I know has that ability. Does that mean there are no creatures anywhere that would be unable to do such a bizzare thing? Probably not.