Full Idea
It is an open question whether the clouds that we call 'angry' are literally F, for any F other than 'such that it would be natural and proper to regard them as angry if one were going to attribute emotions to clouds'.
Gist of Idea
'The clouds are angry' can only mean '...if one were attributing emotions to clouds'
Source
Stephen Yablo (Does Ontology Rest on a Mistake? [1998], XII)
Book Reference
Yablo,Stephen: 'Things: Philosophical Papers vol. 2' [OUP 2010], p.135
A Reaction
His point is that it is TRUE, in those circumstances, that the clouds are angry. Thus fictions are a valid and useful part of ordinary sensible course, giving real information. I like it.