Moderator: Carleas
Mr Reasonable wrote:my mundane babble is philosophical chat i just think that a lot of people aren't able to see that because they lack the necessary insight
Gloominary wrote:Only kidding, I appreciate iam's talks on dasein, it's good to be reminded of how subjective everything can be.
iambiguous wrote:Gloominary wrote:Only kidding, I appreciate iam's talks on dasein, it's good to be reminded of how subjective everything can be.
Since this is will soon be mundane babble, I'll let it go.
But, if this were the philosophy board, I'd have to explain to him [yet again] the distinction between those things that we encounter in our day to day interactions with others that are readily able to be demonstrated as true objectively for all of us, and those things which would appear to be the embodiment of subjective/subjunctive opinions rooted in political prejudices derived from dasein.
Indeed, let him create that thread on the philosophy board. Let him note a set of circumstances in which conflicting goods manifest themselves through conflicting behaviors. Then we can delve into those things able to be agreed upon by all rational human beings as in fact true for all of us...and those things in which both sides are able to note arguments that are reasonable only given conflicting sets of initial assumptions.
For example, Donald Trump is now the president of the United States vs. Donald Trump is a great president. Or the issue can be capitalism vs. socialism or abortion or gun control or any other context in which objective facts are there to be demonstrated... along with subjective opinions regarding right and wrong behaviors.
It's really not a difficult distinction to grasp.
It's just that with the moral and political objectivist among us, there is no real distinction at all. You either agree that their own value judgments are in fact objectively right or you are objectively wrong.
If not a complete scumbag.
Gloominary wrote:Mundane Babble is a cool, catchy title, Non-Philosophical Chat is lame.
Gloominary wrote:+ It makes no sense, Non-Philosophical Chat could include all the forums besides Philosophy.
Gloominary wrote:iambiguous wrote:Gloominary wrote:Only kidding, I appreciate iam's talks on dasein, it's good to be reminded of how subjective everything can be.
Since this is will soon be mundane babble, I'll let it go.
But, if this were the philosophy board, I'd have to explain to him [yet again] the distinction between those things that we encounter in our day to day interactions with others that are readily able to be demonstrated as true objectively for all of us, and those things which would appear to be the embodiment of subjective/subjunctive opinions rooted in political prejudices derived from dasein.
Indeed, let him create that thread on the philosophy board. Let him note a set of circumstances in which conflicting goods manifest themselves through conflicting behaviors. Then we can delve into those things able to be agreed upon by all rational human beings as in fact true for all of us...and those things in which both sides are able to note arguments that are reasonable only given conflicting sets of initial assumptions.
For example, Donald Trump is now the president of the United States vs. Donald Trump is a great president. Or the issue can be capitalism vs. socialism or abortion or gun control or any other context in which objective facts are there to be demonstrated... along with subjective opinions regarding right and wrong behaviors.
It's really not a difficult distinction to grasp.
It's just that with the moral and political objectivist among us, there is no real distinction at all. You either agree that their own value judgments are in fact objectively right or you are objectively wrong.
If not a complete scumbag.
I tend to agree.
That being said, that the western intellectual establishment neatly places all phenomena into one of just two boxes: matters of fact, and matters of opinion, with (next to) no overlap, is also rather subjective.
The intelligentsia wants to ensure you only think within the facts, never outside them, and every year the list of facts grows larger while the list of acceptable opinions shrinks.
For example, Donald Trump is now the president of the United States vs. Donald Trump is a great president. Or the issue can be capitalism vs. socialism or abortion or gun control or any other context in which objective facts are there to be demonstrated... along with subjective opinions regarding right and wrong behaviors.
Mr Reasonable wrote:can we not all just agree on "mr reasonable's house of reason" and move on
Users browsing this forum: No registered users