Fit the first, poll post:
https://spiralsheep.dreamwidth.org/666133.html"You know what to do with your fear of a mask - but how do you begin to approach the bones that hold it up?"
Humans are mostly the only animals who can choose to think about their surroundings using more than one conceptual framework. Most of us do this naturally all the time without consciously mode-switching (and a surprising percentage of people become confused or scared if they become aware of this typically unconscious mode-switching).
And, yes, capri0mni was correct to note that my "when is a boat not a boat" poll is related to the classic argument about the Ship of Theseus because it's a question of the identity of a non-conscious object.
I think there are two possible arguments in play: one about context and human perception; and one about objective versus subjective physicality.
1. Context and human perception
1a. I encountered the boat in the context of a museum where it's presented as an individual boat with a traceable history. But as a museum exhibit it's also representing the idea of a boat and of all the other historic boats that aren't present.
1b. If I'd encountered the boat in the context of an art gallery where it was displayed as conceptual art of a boat, with an explanation of the concept (as is usual in those circumstances) then its primary meaning shifts from "being a boat" to "being a concept of a boat" in whatever way the artist intends (if they're a convincing artist, obv, as I have seen both convincing and unconvincing art, lol).
1c. If I'd encountered the boat as a wreck on the strand next to a fleet of working fishing boats then perhaps it would have been un-boated or at least its boat-ness reduced by comparison ("Is a retired fisherman still a fisherman?" "Yes, he retains all his professional knowledge and personal experience but, no, because he doesn't actually fish."). It also wouldn't have survived long as the weather and people seeking lumber would've unmade it much faster than in a museum where it's actively preserved. So it might have remained a boat briefly but would soon be a pile of lumber and then only the memory of a pile of lumber.
2. Objective versus subjective physicality
What is "boat"*? My basic argument would begin at: "boat" is a floating object that can carry another unfloating object on/above/through* water. So to the perceptions of any animal other than a human the object under discussion is not "boat". But to a human this unfloating uncarrying object can be understood to be a boat because another human, even one unknown to us, communicated their intention that this pile of actively collected and shaped materials should be a boat and should be experienced as a boat. So we are honouring that unknown person's intention by sharing their understanding that this is a boat, even after it ceases to float and carry. Humans expend a lot of time and energy on honouring each others' intentions in ways that most other animals don't most of the time. The next question is, of course, whether an object intended to be a conventional fishing boat but built incompetently so it has never floated and carried could be argued to be "boat" because I don't think many people would honour that intention however well meant....
* If a submarine is "boat" then "through water" (without unintentionally sinking) must be included.