After one of my philosophy classes, a student asked me if water is wet. Being a philosopher, I had to apply some thought to this question. On the one hand, this is an easy question to answer as it just requires looking up the definition of “wet.” The Merriam-Webster dictionary defines “wet” as consisting of, containing, covered with, or soaked with liquid (such as water). So, by the dictionary definition, water is wet since it consists of liquid. Unless it is ice, then it is solid and would not be wet in that state. Unless it was subject to wetting.

Wetting is the ability of a liquid to maintain contact with a solid surface by displacing another substance or material – either a gas, or other liquid not miscible with the wetting liquid – due to the differential strength of intermolecular interactions with the surface. So, there can be no wetting of liquid water by liquid water, but there can be a wetting of solid water (ice) by liquid water.  

On the other hand, dictionary definitions do not settle substantial disputes. For example, the philosophical debate over what it is to be a person is not resolved by looking in a dictionary. Nor is the dispute over the definition of “art.”  So, there can be a philosophical debate about whether liquid water has the quality of being wet, but this requires working out a philosophical definition of “wet.” It might turn out that the dictionary definition suffices as the philosophical definition. That is, there is no meaningful dispute over “wet” that requires a deeper definition as is required in disputes over what it is to be a person or what it is to be art.

As always, a philosopher could turn to looking at the matter by using an analogy, with fire as a good choice. If we ask, “is fire hot?” the answer would seem to be that it is, and it also makes other things hot. But if we ask, “is fire burnt?” then it would be reasonable to answer that while fire burns other things and can make them burnt, fire itself it not burnt. If wet is like hot, then water is wet. If wet is like burnt, then water would not be wet. This does not exhaust the possibilities as the question “is water wet” does point towards interesting questions about qualities.

 

A Philosopher’s Blog is Now on Substack!

You can subscribe and read for free.

https://aphilosophersblog.substack.com/

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes:

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>