-->
@Dr.Franklin
ok sure, you should also be proud of where you came from
Why?
You had nothing to do with that.
What I realized
Posts
Total:
449
-->
@Tarik
the existence of human beings is CONCRETE AND DEMONSTRABLE.
-->
@Theweakeredge
The human brain is empirically demonstrable.The human mind is merely apparent.Hate to steal your line, but that was well stated
Thanks, take what you want when you want.
INTELLECTUAL =/= PROPERTY
-->
@3RU7AL
No I’m arguing that moral belief is religious belief. The term link implies in regards to morality theirs a separation from religion their isn’t.
And what are concrete and demonstrable things?
-->
@Tarik
And what are concrete and demonstrable things?
Can you see it?
Can you smell it?
Can you touch it?
Can you taste it?
Can you hear it?
OBJECTS ARE EMPIRICALLY DEMONSTRABLE.
-->
@Tarik
No I’m arguing that moral belief is religious belief.
This is false.
Moral belief predates religious belief.
Apes demonstrate (social) moral behavior.
Apes are not religious believers.
-->
@3RU7AL
OBJECTS ARE EMPIRICALLY DEMONSTRABLE.
I’m not disputing what your saying I just want you to be more specific, what are empirically demonstrable things?
Apes demonstrate (social) moral behavior.
Perhaps I should’ve been more clear, I was specifically speaking in regards to human beings.
-->
@Tarik
OBJECTS ARE EMPIRICALLY DEMONSTRABLE.I’m not disputing what your saying I just want you to be more specific, what are empirically demonstrable things?
Can you see LOVE?
Can you smell LOVE?
Can you touch LOVE?
Can you taste LOVE?
Can you hear LOVE?
LOVE IS NOT AN OBJECT.
LOVE IS AN ABSTRACT CONCEPT.
Can you see MORALITY?
Can you smell MORALITY?
Can you touch MORALITY?
Can you taste MORALITY?
Can you hear MORALITY?
MORALITY IS NOT AN OBJECT.
MORALITY IS AN ABSTRACT CONCEPT.
-->
@Tarik
Apes demonstrate (social) moral behavior.Perhaps I should’ve been more clear, I was specifically speaking in regards to human beings.
Humans that are born without religious beliefs are still capable of moral acts.
Morality causes religion.
Religion does NOT cause morality.
-->
@Tarik
Sorted then...And move on.
-->
@3RU7AL
MORALITY IS AN ABSTRACT CONCEPT.
So is math, is math subjective?
Humans that are born without religious beliefs are still capable of moral acts.
Moral acts mean don’t mean belief, I was speaking in regards to belief.
-->
@3RU7AL
When it is defined as the opposite of "subjective", it can be objective.
Every thought and action a human being is capable of is FUNDAMENTALY SUBJECTIVE (SAMPLE BIASED).NOTHING YOU CAN SAY OR DO IS "UNBIASED".
I agree. Which is precisely why no morality of men can ever be authoritative and legitimate. The only truly objective morality would be one not sourced from humans beings.
-->
@zedvictor4
How is that responsive?
-->
@ethang5
I agree. Which is precisely why no morality of men can ever be authoritative and legitimate. The only truly objective morality would be one not sourced from humans beings.
Phenomenal.
Just show me this "objective" moral OBJECT.
pLEASE?
-->
@Tarik
MORALITY IS AN ABSTRACT CONCEPT.So is math, is math subjective?
Mathematics is INTERSUBJECTIVE.
Mathematics is TAUTOLOGICAL.
-->
@3RU7AL
its yours though
-->
@3RU7AL
Mathematics is INTERSUBJECTIVE.
Intersubjective is defined as “Existing between conscious minds; shared by more than one conscious mind.”
As far as I can tell this term is meaningless because it doesn’t address the nature of what exists between multiple minds, I can easily counter this with objectivity exists between conscious minds, now what?
So again I ask, is mathematics subjective?
-->
@Tarik
I can easily counter this with objectivity exists between conscious minds,
You're going to have some trouble finding a definition that matches your naked assertion.
-->
@Tarik
So again I ask, is mathematics subjective?
Yes.
It's an abstract system of (intrinsically) meaningless squiggles that follows a set of logical AXIOMS.
When two or more people agree to the "rules of the game" then it becomes INTERSUBJECTIVE.
Many people mistakenly believe things like, "mathematics is the language of nature".
This couldn't be further from the truth.
The TAUTOLOGICAL nature of mathematics makes it SEEM "objective" (unbiased).
HoWEver, it is important to remember that everything a human does is in the pursuit of E-MOTION (biased).
With this in mind, mathematics is simply a tool.
Like a hammer.
The hammer doesn't tell you what to do.
The function of the hammer is a slave to the E-MOTION of the carpenter.
Here's a good example, [WEAPONS OF MATH DESTRUCTION]
-->
@Dr.Franklin
ok sure, you should also be proud of where you came fromWhy?You had nothing to do with that.its yours though
In what way is it "yours"?
Do you own it like property?
Did you make it yourself?
Did you earn it?
Can it be taken away?
It makes zero sense to be "proud" of something you never earned.
-->
@3RU7AL
You're going to have some trouble finding a definition that matches your naked assertion.
I’m sorry but what am I asserting exactly?
The function of the hammer is a slave to the E-MOTION of the carpenter.
But if the subject is hammers and their existence then whatever the emotion of the carpenter is is irrelevant, it doesn’t mean hammers have emotion. The existence of hammers by your logic is concrete and demonstrable, making it objective.
-->
@Tarik
I’m sorry but what am I asserting exactly?
the quoted text:
I can easily counter this with objectivity exists between conscious minds,
-->
@3RU7AL
Are you denying that objectivity exists between conscious minds? Am I the only person you heard utter a word about objectivity? The term wouldn’t be a word if people didn’t believe in it.
-->
@Tarik
But that doesn’t mean hammers have emotion and the existence of hammers by your logic is concrete and demonstrable, making it objective.
Except that mathematics is not an OBJECT.
Look,
Mathematics is not a CONCRETE NOUN.
Mathematics cannot "do" anything.
Mathematics cannot "make decisions".
Think about what imaginary "advantage" "mathematics" would have if you could hypothetically say, "mathematics is objective".
Why does it matter to you if you can say, "mathematics is objective"?
What does the statement, "mathematics is objective" actually mean to you personally?
-->
@3RU7AL
Except that mathematics is not an OBJECT.
I never said it was, you can’t just move the goal post here and expect me to follow, when you mentioned hammers I thought that was the narrative but since you want to go back to mathematics then fine.
If I say 1+1=2 is that a fact?
-->
@Tarik
Are you denying that objectivity exists between conscious minds? Am I the only person you heard utter a word about objectivity?
Objectivity is defined as "unbiased".
Human experience is fundamentally SAMPLE-BIASED.
The term wouldn’t be a word if people didn’t believe in it.
There are a lot of words that refer to logically-incoherent concepts.
-->
@Tarik
If I say 1+1=2 is that a fact?
It is empirically demonstrable that you typed that sequence of characters. That is a FACT.
The statement itself (specifically "1+1=2") is TAUTOLOGICAL (merely coherent with systemic AXIOMS).
For example,
Would you say the statement, "BRANGLEDOG + RAMPLESAM = PLOMBLEGUM" is "true" or "a fact"?
You'd probably ask me to please, "make your definitions and AXIOMS explicit".
-->
@3RU7AL
Human experience is fundamentally SAMPLE-BIASED.
Objectivity isn’t solely in regards to human experience, the earth being round is an objective fact regardless of humans and their experiences.
There are a lot of words that refer to logically-incoherent concepts.
But objectivity isn’t one of them, look if you have some form of adequate proof I’m willing to listen but even proof in itself is objective.
So what about the example I just used, is the earth being round a fact?
-->
@Tarik
the earth being round is an objective fact
I'm pretty sure you meant to say, "Oblate Spheroid".
-->
@Tarik
Objectivity isn’t solely in regards to human experience,
In order to entertain a concept, any concept, that concept must be related to human experience.