Say two people see colors differently. One person sees red in an apple, and the other person sees what the first would consider blue. However in his brain, that color is still red. Because they both agreed on what red looks like, even if they can't verify through each others eyes. Even if perception can vary, there is still truth that can be agreed upon.
>>26261943 Reality is objective. You cannot hold your personal feelings above reality, as reality will remind you that you are in its grasp. The fact is that this thinking has only ever benefited people who can't handle being wrong about something.
Kind of like with a clock and someone thinking three minutes passed while the clock states that five minutes have passed. Your feelings are irrelevant as it has been five minutes regardless, and reality will punish you accordingly for suspecting that only three have passed, i.e., being late to an appointment.
When you hold feelings above the objectivity of reality, you are saying that basically the world revolves around you and your assumptions. No real truth can ever exist and this, as I have said, benefits only the people who are constantly wrong and people who not interested in pursuing any sort of truth.
>>26262664 Calling something an opinion does not make it an opinion. Your feelings about my post are irrelevant. The clock we are both looking at, if we were in the same room together, has stated five minutes have passed. This cannot be disproved by feelings because the clock has rendered feelings irrelevant through its objectivity.
A nine would require a support to stay upright, a six, assuming the base was made of the same material as the tail, would be able to stand upright. So it's a six unless you want to stand there holding it up.
>>26262969 It is not my notion of objectivity because objectivity does not require notion, but is simply experienced regardless of acknowledgement of it. The better question to ask would be for you to disprove the objectivity of reality without relying on personal feeling. I can do this myself simply by asserting predictions based on *my* reality that involve *your* reality. If both are objective then they should have the same results regardless of your interpretation vs my own.
If I were to punch you across the face while you were unprepared, it would hurt you, my hand, and you may even fall to the floor, creating a thud. This is my prediction based of my experience of reality which then, if reality is subjective, should appear and feel differently to your reality, which it would not and you cannot deny this would happen based off of your own experience of reality due to it being the same as my own. This absolves any "notion" of reality or objectivity because it uses both your experience and my own, producing the same result.
I can make predictions based off the objectivity of reality about you now even, as you are typing out your responses, a plastic or mechanical noise is being made as you respond. If, again, it was subjective I would not be able to make these statements and have them be true as I'm involving you and your reality in the assumption.
>>26263215 That's a really paltry response so I'll stop now since I'm gaining nothing from this.
I know it's objective because I can make accurate predictions based on my experience toward someone else's experience. If I couldn't gauge someone else's experience only then it would be subjective because we are obviously having very different outcomes of actions, thus having subjective results. That fact is we don't.
>>26263350 Because it is a shared experience that has multiple confirmed outcomes and the outcomes have been confirmed by two (or more) separate experiences of reality which can then relay that information to each other on a common basis.
Are you ever going to make a statement rather than a question? or would you have to accept objectivity to make one? Oops!
>>26263330 But I'm saying that the ability to sense or view objective reality is irrelevant as reality exists objectively regardless of one's experience.
>>26263557 I have made a point not involve any sort of "feeling" this whole time. Nothing I said had to do with feeling. It was objective action and reaction, cause and causation. An event occurred and there was a result due to it, experienced equally by all parties involved.
This difference between us is that I know and you never will because you keep telling yourself you can't.
>>26263768 Deny, deny, deny, deny, deny, deny -- never affirm.
Useless, useless, useless.
I'm not interested in the useless.
You're failing to either grasp, or you just don't want to grasp, that feeling and experience is separate from reality. Reality works on its own, regardless of your interpretation, and will continue to work on its own based on objective factors.
>>26263788 It does mean you can't have an objective analysis of anything and can't accurately say whether something is objective or subjective though.
>If that is the case, then prove this statement wrong Are you denying that you had the potential to be wrong? Are you saying that the accuracy of any given statement reflects on the accuracy of all statements? Are you arrogant enough to think that anything you say is right as long as you believe really hard that it is?
Hopefully you'll answer "no" to all of these and see that it can only be an opinion, whether it's right or not.
>>26263870 >You're failing to either grasp, or you just don't want to grasp, that feeling and experience is separate from reality. Until it's proven, I can't be settled on it either way. I'm actually interested in finding truth, not just going with whatever feels right to me. If you're happy with believing your feelings, then fine, but realize that your feelings don't mean much in a discussion unless you can support them somehow.
On a completely abstract level it's correct but what's the point of thinking like that? Think in terms of the world you perceive and you'll actually get a little living done. Or in our case be a little less depressed about how much nothing matters
>>26264296 You're still not getting this and I don't understand why it's so difficult for you. YOU have the potential to be wrong. Anything YOU say could potentially be wrong. You can't know that anything you're saying is right or wrong with absolute certainty, hence everything you say is your opinion. I mean this really is simple.
>>26264574 >Except I can. You could have just answered me earlier when I asked >Are you arrogant enough to think that anything you say is right as long as you believe really hard that it is? Would have saved me the trouble.
>>26264853 No, they're all about "liiike, your own personal truth, maaaan."
They want to impose moral relativism because it's easier to justify fucked up shit, and it absolves them the burden of acknowledging that primitive cultures can be savage, or even primitive, to begin with.
>>26261943 This is such a retarded quote. If I turn a light on, it is on, whether you think it is on or not is irrelevant to the fact that it is on. and in your stupid example, the symbol is either a 6, a 9, or a made up symbol. When it was written by whoever wrote it, there was intent and the creation was done as something which is either an accepted understandable symbol or made up thing. Intent is not the only thing governing what something is, just as random paint thrown on a canvas is not inherently art although the artist intended it to be defined as art ever since that kind of crap was disseminated into American culture by the CIA (not tinfoil conspiracy, declassified CIA documents show this was done for cultural subversion of the Soviet Union). The pic is like the glass half full half empty thing; it is not a perspective thing there is in fact a reality to it. If you poured the water in, it is half full, if you poured water out, it is half empty.
The only kind of philosophy not based upon a persistent and universal reality that I think holds any water is solipsism
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the shown content originated from that site. This means that 4Archive shows their content, archived. If you need information for a Poster - contact them.
If a post contains personal/copyrighted/illegal content, then use the post's [Report] link! If a post is not removed within 24h contact me at email@example.com with the post's information.