The Challenge of Abstract Objects (Love, Success, Justice)

Defining abstract objects: no body of their own, dependent on the concrete.

Unlike concrete objects, communication becomes infinitely more complex when we deal with abstract objects.

The fundamental characteristic that defines them is that they do not possess a body of their own; they lack inherent shapes, colors, textures, tastes or sounds that universally identify them.

For this reason, an abstract object cannot be perceived directly by the senses.

In order to exist in our communication, it needs to "possess" a concrete object that serves as a vehicle or representation.

For example, the abstract concept of "peace" is often represented through the concrete object of a white dove. This dependence on the tangible is key to understanding its nature.

The root of the great misunderstandings: radically different perceptions

Herein lies the root of the deepest and most persistent communication problems.

Since abstract objects have no qualities of their own, each individual perceives them in his or her own way, through the filter of his or her own experience and subjectivity.

This brings us face to face with a fundamental question: how can we pool and agree on something that is, by nature, radically different for each person.

When we talk about concepts such as "success" or "freedom," we are not describing an external, verifiable entity, but rather we are trying to share an internal, personal idea.

This inherent divergence in perceptions is the perfect breeding ground for misunderstandings.

Feelings, values, virtues and concepts as abstract objects.

Abstract objects are not a philosophical oddity; on the contrary, they are ubiquitous in our most important day-to-day conversations.

They comprise a vast array of ideas that define our human experience.

They include feelings (such as love or hate), virtues (honesty or prudence), values (justice or loyalty), notions, concepts (the idea of "family" or "home"), and entire disciplines (such as philosophy or medicine).

We constantly exchange ideas about these intangible elements, often without being aware that our interlocutor may have a completely different definition of what we are discussing.

What color is love? What does education taste like?

To understand the magnitude of the challenge, it is enough to ask simple but revealing questions.

What color is love? For some it will be passion red, for others tender pink, and for someone with a broken heart, it could be gray or black.

What does education taste like? Perhaps the smell of an old book, the taste of coffee from a night of studying, or the bitterness of a failed exam.

There is no right or wrong answer, because these questions attempt to assign concrete qualities to concepts that do not have them. Each answer is a reflection of an internal reality.

This exercise demonstrates that in communicating abstractions, we do not describe the world, but reveal a part of ourselves, hoping to find an echo in the other.

Abstract

Unlike concretes, abstract objects do not have a body of their own, so they cannot be perceived directly by the senses. In order to exist in our communication, they need to "possess" a concrete object that represents them.

Herein lies the root of the great misunderstandings, for each individual perceives abstract objects in his own way. When we speak of "success" or "freedom", we are trying to share an internal and personal idea, not an external entity.

To understand the challenge, it is enough to ask: what color is love, or what does education taste like? There is no right answer, for each is a reflection of an internal and unique reality.