Basis of Belief

[mikkel_the_dane]

It's a forum for general religious discussion, so that topic is the main focus yes. that doesn't mean atheists are only sceptical about religion, only that they only sceptical of religion in a forum for debating religion.

You didn't even quote my whole posts and made it clear that you have made a cut.

 

[AppieB]

I give up. I don't have the words to describe that not everything is objective in the everyday world, because like and don't like are subjective

Until here we seem to agree.

And you don't seem to understand that act of objectively describing something subjective, doesn't make the subjective something objective.

And here we seem to agree again.
I never said that the "act of objectively describing something subjective" makes "the subjective something objective."

, yet you obsess with the fact that it can be objectively described.

Yes, it can be objectively described. And you seem to agree.

The following can be objectively described
1. some people having blue eyes
2. people having preferences
3. some people liking coriander
4. some people not liking coriander.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Until here we seem to agree.


And here we seem to agree again.
I never said that the "act of objectively describing something subjective" makes "the subjective something objective."


Yes, it can be objectively described. And you seem to agree.

The following can be objectively described
1. some people having blue eyes
2. people having preferences
3. some people liking coriander
4. some people not liking coriander.

#1 is objective. #2 - #4 are all subjective, because preference, like and not like are all depending on feelings in some sense.

 

[Sheldon]

Yeah and your definition of religion is not absolute and nor is mine and I use another one than you. So religion is not the same for us.

Nothing at all to do with what I said? You claimed atheists here are only sceptical about religion, my response was:

It's a forum for general religious discussion, so that topic is the main focus yes. that doesn't mean atheists are only sceptical about religion, only that they only sceptical of religion in a forum for debating religion.

If you want to ignore what I've said fine, but I'm not chasing any more of your straw man arguments as it's pointless and exhausting.

 

[RestlessSoul]

You're talking about his feelings, I'm talking about the objective effect of having your head chopped off. Your example is clearly a straw man, as I made no such claim. However even in your example it is objectively harmful to have your head chopped off, it ends the life instantly. Unless you think ending someone's life is not objectively harmful? No one is suggesting objective facts are absolutes either, only that they exist. It is an objective fact that the world is not flat, it is also an objective fact that all living things evolved from common or shared ancestors. They are objective facts because they are not solely reliant on someone's feelings or opinions.

A matter of perspective. To a Samurai, an honourable death was the defining moment of a warrior’s life, his noblest ambition and crowning achievement; so no, decapitation was not objectively bad. Here are two Jisei (death poems) , composed in the moments before death, to illustrate the point;

The sharp edged sword, unsheathed,
Cuts through the void-
Within the raging fire
A cool wind blows

- Shiaku Sho’on

Both the victor
And the vanquished are
But drops of dew,
But bolts of lightning-
Thus should we view the world

-Ouchi Yoshikata

 

[Sheldon]

Yeah, his feelings are subjective. That is the point. Now for objective you have to explain what defintion you mean.

I just did in the same post you just responded to?

You're talking about his feelings, I'm talking about the objective effect of having your head chopped off. Your example is clearly a straw man, as I made no such claim. However even in your example it is objectively harmful to have your head chopped off, it ends the life instantly. Unless you think ending someone's life is not objectively harmful? No one is suggesting objective facts are absolutes either, only that they exist. It is an objective fact that the world is not flat, it is also an objective fact that all living things evolved from common or shared ancestors. They are objective facts because they are not solely reliant on someone's feelings or opinions.

 

[Sheldon]

#1 is objective. #2 - #4 are all subjective, because preference, like and not like are all depending on feelings in some sense.

Nope. it can be objectively evidenced that some people like coriander, and that some people do not, and it can be objectively evidenced that people have subjective preferences.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Nothing at all to do with what I said? You claimed atheists here are only sceptical about religion, my response was:



If you want to ignore what I've said fine, but I'm not chasing any more of your straw man arguments as it's pointless and exhausting.

As for me, I learned to be critical about religion, yet I don't consider it wrong or any of these other beliefs. But I also learned to be critical about science and philosophy and as absurd as it may be, yo be critical about being critical. That is what makes me a global skeptic.

On the other hand most skeptics here are only critical of religion and the philosophy they consider wrong and use philosophy to support their beliefs in science, rationality, critical thinking, evidence and so on, beyond what those can actually do.
In other words, they are critical about everybody else's subjectivity in some cases, but not their own.

Yeah, I wrote nothing about atheists and I should have written at least one skeptic and not most.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Nope. it can be objectively evidenced that some people like coriander, and that some people do not, and it can be objectively evidenced that people have subjective preferences.

Yeah so a part of the world is subjective.

 

[Sheldon]

A matter of perspective. To a Samurai, an honourable death was the defining moment of a warrior’s life, his noblest ambition and crowning achievement; so no, decapitation was not objectively bad. Here are two Jisei (death poems) , composed in the moments before death, to illustrate the point;

The sharp edged sword, unsheathed,
Cuts through the void-
Within the raging fire
A cool wind blows

- Shiaku Sho’on

Both the victor
And the vanquished are
But drops of dew,
But bolts of lightning-
Thus should we view the world

-Ouchi Yoshikata

Indeed, but it is a still a straw man example, as I never used it. Try this, would you agree that it is objectively harmful to someone to have their heads chopped off, regardless how they subjectively viewed it? I think you already agree that objective facts exists anyway, so I don't want to get too bogged down in this one counter example to a general point. However I'd be interested in your answer.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

I just did in the same post you just responded to?

Yeah ,harmful is not objective, since it is derived from a subjective feeling.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Indeed, but it is a still a straw man example, as I never used it. Try this, would you agree that it is objectively harmful to someone to have their heads chopped off, regardless how they subjectively viewed it? I think you already agree that objective facts exists anyway, so I don't want to get too bogged down in this one counter example to a general point. However I'd be interested in your answer.

No, I don't agree with objectively harmful. To me it is subjective harmful.

 

[Sheldon]

Yeah, I wrote nothing about atheists and I should have written at least one skeptic and not most.

You've lost me sorry, you did write a generic comment about atheists, that they were "only sceptical about religions". I pointed out that was probably only because that is the topic of this forum, this doesn't mean those atheists are not sceptical about anything else. I know my scepticism forms a part of my rationale, and I try to treat all claims without bias or prejudice.

 

[AppieB]

#1 is objective. #2 - #4 are all subjective, because preference, like and not like are all depending on feelings in some sense.

Earlier you answered "yes" to the following questions:
1. We agree that's it's true that human beings have preferences. Would you call that a descriptive statement? "Yes"
2. Would you call it a fact of the everyday world? "Yes"

How is a true descriptive statement (fact) about the everyday world subjective?

 

[Sheldon]

Yeah ,harmful is not objective, since it is derived from a subjective feeling.

So you don't think chopping someone's head off harms then objectively, you think that's a matter of personal opinion?

I have to say I disagree.

 

[AppieB]

No, I don't agree with objectively harmful. To me it is subjective harmful.

Harmful, harm, detrimental, bad: those are words Sheldon and I use in the following meaning I posted earlier in this topic:
In case of the following sentence: "detrimental to health" I mean: It affects health in a way that leads to a less healthy body and/or when these affects get stronger could eventually lead to death.

That's all what I mean by detrimental/bad in context of health and well being.

 

[RestlessSoul]

Indeed, but it is a still a straw man example, as I never used it. Try this, would you agree that it is objectively harmful to someone to have their heads chopped off, regardless how they subjectively viewed it? I think you already agree that objective facts exists anyway, so I don't want to get too bogged down in this one counter example to a general point. However I'd be interested in your answer.

That having your head removed is harmful, is not a controversial statement, even if it does imply a value judgement of sorts. Still, by any definition of harm, violent death is harmful to a living organism, yes.

I believe the Samurai example proves the point that perspective goes a long way in determining what is good or bad. And such perceptions will always be subjective, since we have no other way of addressing the material world; which to a Samurai devotee of Zen Buddhism and the Bushido Code, would be seen as illusory and without substance anyway. But that's another question, or set of questions - what is real? And what is of enduring value?

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Harmful, harm, detrimental, bad: those are words Sheldon and I use in the following meaning I posted earlier in this topic:
In case of the following sentence: "detrimental to health" I mean: It affects health in a way that leads to a less healthy body and/or when these affects get stronger could eventually lead to death.

That's all what I mean by detrimental/bad in context of health and well being.

But that death is bad, is subjective. That someone dies, is objective, but that is bad, is subjective.

 

[AppieB]

But that death is bad, is subjective. That someone dies, is objective, but that is bad, is subjective.

Isn't death the result when someone dies? Where did I mention that "death is bad"?
Why are you so eager to add a subjective 'stamp' on to whatever I say? You did this multiple times in order to make a point that something is subjective while I didn't use a subjective term.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Isn't death the result when someone dies? Where did I mention that "death is bad"?
Why are you so eager to add a subjective 'stamp' on to whatever I say? You did this multiple times in order to make a point that something is subjective while I didn't use a subjective term.

Yes, sorry. I shouldn't confuse you with Sheldon.