swansont Posted March 29, 2021 Share Posted March 29, 2021 1 minute ago, JohnSSM said: Im sorry, i dont follow. What is your question again? Id rather keep my communications very specific. I have allready tired to answer your pervious question, if I didnt, can you point out why I didnt more specifically? Is there something about my statement you don’t understand? I didn’t ask you about physical objects. I asked you to tell me if shadows and holes are objectively real, or subjectively reasoned. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnSSM Posted March 29, 2021 Author Share Posted March 29, 2021 Just now, swansont said: Is there something about my statement you don’t understand? I didn’t ask you about physical objects. I asked you to tell me if shadows and holes are objectively real, or subjectively reasoned. Well, I Just asked you to ask me a specific question. Then you make another statement. I am confused again, I feel its best if I leave this discussion now. Will I be banned for avoiding a conversation with someone who refuses to answer and ask questions directly? Im sorry. I have no other means for discussion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beecee Posted March 29, 2021 Share Posted March 29, 2021 (edited) 6 minutes ago, JohnSSM said: Faith arguments arent really scientific are they? Can I use faith arguments is a discussion about gravity? You are not making much sense. We all need certain "faith" in certain circumstances. I have faith [for want of a better word] that my bus to my local football club will be on time...I have "faith" that they will have my favourite beer on tap...I have "faith" that the supermarket I go to will have ample supply of toilet paper... That better word is "trust" Edited March 29, 2021 by beecee Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnSSM Posted March 29, 2021 Author Share Posted March 29, 2021 3 minutes ago, JohnSSM said: I asked you to tell me if shadows and holes are objectively real, or subjectively reasoned. In my best effort to find a question, I have stated many times that humans can never know objective reality. If humans can never know objective reality, then they cant answer questions about existence with any certainty of finding any answer and get objective confirmation to objectively verify it for them. What is my evidence. Humans are subjective beings, with no knowledge of objective reality aside from what they can sense and understand. Cant take it any farther than that. And bringing it any closer doesn't change anything about that reality. No details will matter. 14 minutes ago, swansont said: I asked you to tell me if shadows and holes are objectively real, or subjectively reasoned. Can you find any subjective reality, discovered by humans, with a complete confirmation from objective reality? MY point is. Find me anything which our understanding of, isn't subjectively reasoned. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beecee Posted March 29, 2021 Share Posted March 29, 2021 6 minutes ago, JohnSSM said: I have stated many times that humans can never know objective reality. And objective reality shows you are wrong. Just because a small percenatge of ratbags still believe the Earth is flat, in no way detracts from the objective reality that it is most certainly an oblate spheroid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnSSM Posted March 29, 2021 Author Share Posted March 29, 2021 (edited) GOOD FAITH: A “Good Faith” argument or discussion is one in which both parties agree on the terms on which they engage, are honest and respectful of the other person's dignity, follow generally-accepted norms of social interaction, and genuinely want to hear what the other person thinks and has to say. Can we agree to ask specific questions, give specific rebuttal, and move on to the next question? IF not, i cant have this conversation in good faith. 3 minutes ago, beecee said: And objective reality shows you are wrong. Just because a small percenatge of ratbags still believe the Earth is flat, in no way detracts from the objective reality that it is most certainly an oblate spheroid. Who did you talk to in the objectivity information department? Can I get that number please? 5 minutes ago, JohnSSM said: And objective reality shows you are wrong We should discuss, in my opinion, how you see objectivity and subjectivity. We are all human subjects. We did not write the story. We think the story is about us understanding the story. But, ultimately, our experience could all be false, within the guidelines of the story. Who wrote the story of the universe? I dont know, but ONLY THEY will have an objective understanding of what we are experiencing. And they may not even exist. Alas, we are subjects in the story. IF you get the analogy which people learn in literature classes, you could finally understand that a subject cannot prove the story there are in. It's just that simple. Edited March 29, 2021 by JohnSSM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beecee Posted March 29, 2021 Share Posted March 29, 2021 3 minutes ago, JohnSSM said: GOOD FAITH: A “Good Faith” argument or discussion is one in which both parties agree on the terms on which they engage, are honest and respectful of the other person's dignity, follow generally-accepted norms of social interaction, and genuinely want to hear what the other person thinks and has to say. Can we agree to ask specific questions, give specific rebuttal, and move on to the next question? IF not, i cant have this conversation in good faith. Sure! Holes are real and exist in certain circumstances. Some people are mentally unstable and still object to the objective reality of a spheroidal shaped Earth in favour of a flat mythical one. We can and do and must have certain trust in certain things...eg: the deeper insights of GR as evidenced by reputable science and observational and experimental data. And finally philosophy is not the be all and end all of anything, and as per my previous quote, philsophers can make absurd statements/comparisons/analogies etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnSSM Posted March 29, 2021 Author Share Posted March 29, 2021 2 minutes ago, beecee said: Sure! Holes are real and exist in certain circumstances. Some people are mentally unstable and still object to the objective reality of a spheroidal shaped Earth in favour of a flat mythical one. We can and do and must have certain trust in certain things...eg: the deeper insights of GR as evidenced by reputable science and observational and experimental data. And finally philosophy is not the be all and end all of anything, and as per my previous quote, philsophers can make absurd statements/comparisons/analogies etc. What question were you answering? Mentally unstable poeple mixed in with good faith argument discussions? Im sorry, you lost me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beecee Posted March 29, 2021 Share Posted March 29, 2021 11 minutes ago, JohnSSM said: GOOD FAITH: A “Good Faith” argument or discussion is one in which both parties agree on the terms on which they engage, are honest and respectful of the other person's dignity, follow generally-accepted norms of social interaction, and genuinely want to hear what the other person thinks and has to say. Can we agree to ask specific questions, give specific rebuttal, and move on to the next question? IF not, i cant have this conversation in good faith. Who did you talk to in the objectivity information department? Can I get that number please? We should discuss, in my opinion, how you see objectivity and subjectivity. We are all human subjects. We did not write the story. We think the story is about us understanding the story. But, ultimately, our experience could all be false, within the guidelines of the story. Who wrote the story of the universe? I dont know, but ONLY THEY will have an objective understanding of what we are experiencing. And they may not even exist. Alas, we are subjects in the story. IF you get the analogy which people learn in literature classes, you could finally understand that a subject cannot prove the story there are in. It's just that simple. Sometimes philsophical jargon, goes against objective reality.eg: A spheroidal shaped Earth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnSSM Posted March 29, 2021 Author Share Posted March 29, 2021 Just now, beecee said: Sometimes philsophical jargon, goes against objective reality.eg: A spheroidal shaped Earth. I dont understand what you are referring to now. I really want to understand you. PLease explain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beecee Posted March 29, 2021 Share Posted March 29, 2021 Just now, JohnSSM said: What question were you answering? Mentally unstable poeple mixed in with good faith argument discussions? Im sorry, you lost me. I'm simply saying as I said to you before, that you will never convince all people all of the time, no matter how objectively real or genuine something is. That does not detract from that objective reality though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnSSM Posted March 29, 2021 Author Share Posted March 29, 2021 Just now, beecee said: I'm simply saying as I said to you before, that you will never convince all people all of the time, no matter how objectively real or genuine something is. That does not detract from that objective reality though. So, how do you know how real something objectively is? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beecee Posted March 29, 2021 Share Posted March 29, 2021 2 minutes ago, JohnSSM said: I dont understand what you are referring to now. I really want to understand you. PLease explain. I'm sure you do. Understand that is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnSSM Posted March 29, 2021 Author Share Posted March 29, 2021 Just now, beecee said: I'm sure you do. Understand that is. No, using your words, I do not see the meaning in them that you put there. Honestly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beecee Posted March 29, 2021 Share Posted March 29, 2021 Just now, JohnSSM said: No, using your words, I do not see the meaning in them that you put there. Honestly. I'm saying basically that sometimes philosophical jargon, as you seem to be engaging in, is absurd. Must leave now...catch a bus that I trust will be on time. back later I trust! [I substitute the word trust for faith] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnSSM Posted March 29, 2021 Author Share Posted March 29, 2021 Subjectivity wont allow it. You will have to put much energy into getting more and more precise in detail and for what? Its a fractal of sorts. You will run out of energy as you approach the same point, over and over from different subjective perspectives to find the same details...you cant know objective truth now matter how obvious it seems to you and any amount of consensus. Just now, beecee said: I'm saying basically that sometimes philosophical jargon, as you seem to be engaging in, is absurd. Must leave now...catch a bus that I trust will be on time. I know what you are saying. And when my friends all believe that physics is mathematical jargon, I tell them, believe me, it does have its purpose. So does philosophy. We dont have the details. We have models of the details. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swansont Posted March 29, 2021 Share Posted March 29, 2021 56 minutes ago, JohnSSM said: Well, I Just asked you to ask me a specific question. Then you make another statement. I am confused again, I feel its best if I leave this discussion now. Will I be banned for avoiding a conversation with someone who refuses to answer and ask questions directly? Im sorry. I have no other means for discussion. I asked you to tell me if shadows and holes are objectively real, or subjectively reasoned. (that’s a direct quote from my earlier post) If you really need this phrased as a question: are shadows and holes are objectively real, or subjectively reasoned? (But I’m shocked you can’t get from one to the other. Are you being obtuse?) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beecee Posted March 29, 2021 Share Posted March 29, 2021 (edited) 1 hour ago, JohnSSM said: ...you cant know objective truth now matter how obvious it seems to you and any amount of consensus. Nonsense. This is what I see as philosophical absurdity. Are you a flat Earther? Why should the overwhelmingly evidenced greater majority, give any consideration to such nonsense? 1 hour ago, JohnSSM said: I know what you are saying. And when my friends all believe that physics is mathematical jargon, I tell them, believe me, it does have its purpose. So does philosophy. We dont have the details. We have models of the details. Mathematics is the language of physics. Because I don't understand another language, does not invalidate or make it any the less objective. Edited March 29, 2021 by beecee Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iNow Posted March 30, 2021 Share Posted March 30, 2021 Oh, hey look. Another thread where JohnSSM has driven all conversation away from the actual topic of the OP. I see, however, the mods have already addressed this. Thx team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts