Read on Twitter
Hang on, got one...
No, "everything" is *not* "a chemical". https://twitter.com/ChemistCraig/status/1311743131814068224
No, "everything" is *not* "a chemical". https://twitter.com/ChemistCraig/status/1311743131814068224
Let's go through it.
"Is 'law' a chemical?"
"No. Of course not!""Okay, then everything that is not an abstraction is a chemical."
"Is a 'human' a chemical?""No. Of course not! A human is made of chemi-""Okay, then everything that is not an abstraction nor an emergent object is a chemical."
"Is a 'photon' a chemical?""No. Of course not! But-""Okay, then everything that is not an abstraction nor an emergent object but is still matter is a chemical."
"Is a 'proton' a chemical?""No. Beca-""Okay, then everything that is not an abstraction nor an emergent object but is still matter but condensed into atoms is a chemical."
So we're actually left with "Everything that is not not a chemical is a chemical", which is a far less impressive statement.
And that's before getting on to how it fundamentally misunderstands the objection it's meant to refute.
And that's before getting on to how it fundamentally misunderstands the objection it's meant to refute.
