Objective, Subjective, Confusion, Reconciliation

[Augustus]

You mean if they are colour blind or due to their ancestral development of some sort?

That could be.



Could be.

I mean what we all see with our vision is a subjective truth, hence we are fooled by optical illusions, our brain is filling in gaps and making guesses from past experience as it is more energy efficient.

We also only perceive some of 'reality' with our vision, other animals see different parts.

So, if you want subjective truth to be a meaningful concept, then it is rather than "could be".

 

[firedragon]

I mean what we all see with our vision is a subjective truth, hence we are fooled by optical illusions, our brain is filling in gaps and making guesses from past experience as it is more energy efficient.

We also only perceive some of 'reality' with our vision, other animals see different parts.

So, if you want subjective truth to be a meaningful concept, then it is rather than "could be".

True.

There is also a colour recognition difference in different people. Not that they are colour blind, but that they are developed to recognise some colours due to their environment, and to not recognise some colours.

There are people who as a whole don't see the difference between one shade of green, to a shade of blue. It's the same for them. This is not an optical illusion. This their subjective experience. Being that, they see varying shades of the colour green and recognise them vividly, while also having different names for those shades. They consider them different colours. But we are unable to recognise such subtle differences.

Sometimes, objective truths could be changed in our minds by our "by" our subjective truths. One psychologist described it as a person pouring coffee into a cup through a filter. It filters certain things, and what you get in the cup is something different. The cup does not know what has taken place, or what was left in the filter. (I don't think that works with new instant coffee). So renown psychologist Lacan in the early 60's said that a professional should not send the patient in a particular direction, but take the patient’s subjective truth out and bring to the front. I don't believe truth is relative or subjective. The existence of subjective truths does not mean truth is subjective, unless that gets caught in a composition fallacy. Truth is objective. Objective truth exists. Subjective truth also exists.

 

[Tiberius]

The OP is not about telling you the difference between opinion and subjectivity. I never told anyone anything of the sort.

This does not answer my question.

Check the OP. It has examples of subjectivity. If you work hard you can claim they are opinions if you want. Upto you.

If I work hard? Please. Showing that they are opinions is the easiest thing in the world.

The guy from Ethiopia says, "In my opinion, Jesus is black."

The guy from the USA says, "In my opinion, Jesus is white."

The American who lived some time ago said, "In my opinion, that mountain over there is the tallest mountain in the world."

The Sherpa said, "In my opinion, that mountain there is the tallest mountain in the world."

Read the book I gave you without being outright needing to insult as your argument.

You didn't give me squat.

You told me the name of an author and said he'd written a book. You couldn't even be bothered to tell me the title of this book. You provided no links to an online version. So what, do you expect me to go and try to find what books this guy has written, pick one of them, HOPE it's the one you happened to be talking about, purchase it with my own money and hope that it says what you claim it says?

Please.

You want me to read a particular book, then either provide a link to a place I can read it online, or purchase a physical copy and mail it to me (I will be happy to provide a mailing address to you if you decide to do this). But I'm NOT going to waste my own money because you say it will prove your point.

 

[Tiberius]

Okay. Is that an objective truth? You just defined it.

So what? I never disagreed with you about objective truths, did I?

That's called a subjective truth. One day he might learn he was wrong.

What, exactly, is the subjective truth? The fact he thought that the mountain in America was the tallest? Perhaps, but it's also an opinion. Or are you saying my claim it was an opinion is the subjective truth?

A taste of orange as an experience or/and satisfaction is not just someones opinion. It's his subjective truth. A mother's smell is a babe's longing. That's subjective to that baby. Another mothers baby will like his or her mother. That's a subjective truth.

T-R-U-T-H is a funny way to spell EXPERIENCE.

Those are SUBJECTIVE EXPERIENCES.

Read about subjectivity in the philosophy of mind or the study of consciousness.

You want me to read something, then provide a link.

What ever mountain you find is the tallest or shortest after extensive research and you establish as fact, you will know. You missed the whole point.

You missed my point.

Nope. That's a paradigm shifts.

Are you now resorting to buzzwords to try to make it sound as though your position is correct?

In any case, that's just a fancy way of saying he changes his opinion.

 

[firedragon]

If I work hard? Please. Showing that they are opinions is the easiest thing in the world.

Tiberius. If people work hard, they can reconcile anything with insistence. Many missionaries do that.

The guy from Ethiopia says, "In my opinion, Jesus is black."

Nah. That's a composition fallacy to "believe" that all subjectives are all opinions. Of course not considering your insertion of the word opinion there to support your necessity. Anyway, what you are basically saying is that you believe only in objective truth and you do not accept the term subjective truth.

Your wish.

You didn't give me squat.

I did. Not squat of course because I assume you know how to squat.

 

[firedragon]

What, exactly, is the subjective truth? The fact he thought that the mountain in America was the tallest?

Absolutely. There are many other things in the OP, not only that. And look around you will find more.

You want me to read something, then provide a link.

There are no links for books.

Are you now resorting to buzzwords

Not at all. It's just very averagely used all the time.

 

[Tiberius]

Nah. That's a composition fallacy to "believe" that all subjectives are all opinions. Of course not considering your insertion of the word opinion there to support your necessity. Anyway, what you are basically saying is that you believe only in objective truth and you do not accept the term subjective truth.

I'm putting the word in there to show you that stating them as opinions is perfectly rational.

And if you'd bothered to pay attention to my posts, you'd understand that my argument has been that what you call "opinion" and what you call "subjective truths" are both the same thing. They are SYNONYMS.

I did. Not squat of course because I assume you know how to squat.

No you didn't.

I can't help but notice that you failed to respond to the rest of what I said, because apparently all you can do is be contrary to whatever I say, you can't actually show why I'm wrong.

 

[Tiberius]

Absolutely. There are many other things in the OP, not only that. And look around you will find more.

It is objectively true that he had a subjective opinion.

Not at all. It's just very averagely used all the time.

Meaningless. what does it mean to "use something averagely"?

 

[firedragon]

I'm putting the word in there to show you that stating them as opinions is perfectly rational.

I think I have told you multiple times that an opinion can be a subjective truth, but all subjective truths are not mere opinions. You are committing a composition fallacy

No you didn't.

I can't help but notice that you failed to respond to the rest of what I said, because apparently all you can do is be contrary to whatever I say, you can't actually show why I'm wrong.

David Chalmers
George Graham

 

[Tiberius]

I think I have told you multiple times that an opinion can be a subjective truth, but all subjective truths are not mere opinions. You are committing a composition fallacy

You have failed repeatedly to show me an example of a subjective truth that can not be expressed as an opinion.

David Chalmers
George Graham

Oh good, you know some names. Is that supposed to mean something?

 

[firedragon]

You have failed repeatedly to show me an example of a subjective truth that can not be expressed as an opinion.

A subjective truth that cannot be expressed as an opinion? What you really want to hear is a subjective truth that cannot be expressed at all, because you will as you said "work hard" to argue that anything expressed is an opinion.

Oh good, you know some names. Is that supposed to mean something?

You asked, I gave you. So read up.

 

[Tiberius]

A subjective truth that cannot be expressed as an opinion? What you really want to hear is a subjective truth that cannot be expressed at all, because you will as you said "work hard" to argue that anything expressed is an opinion.

No, I simply want you to to give me an example of some subjective truth that is not an opinion, since you said that such subjective truths exist.

You asked, I gave you. So read up.

You gave nothing.

If you want me to read something, then either give me a direct link to what you want me to read, or purchase the book and mail it to me (I am perfectly happy to provide a mailing address). If you can't be bothered to do either of those, then you got nothing. Or do you expect me to do the hard work for you? Please, I don't take homework assignments from you.

 

[firedragon]

No, I simply want you to to give me an example of some subjective truth that is not an opinion, since you said that such subjective truths exist.

Why?

You gave nothing.

Two books. So that you could understand what this is all about. But if you don't wish to that's fine with me.

 

[Tiberius]

Why?

Why do I want you to do this? I told you why. Were you not paying attention? You claimed that subjective truth and opinion had two different meanings. I literally stated that in what you quoted.

Two books. So that you could understand what this is all about. But if you don't wish to that's fine with me.

Where did you give me two books? You gave me two AUTHORS, and said that something that they wrote is applicable. Do you expect me to look through the list of everything they've ever written, try to figure out which books you were referring to, spend my own money on them, and then hope that there's something in there that will change my mind because if there isn't I've wasted my money?

Please. I'm not going to waste any of my time doing anything for you. You want me to read it, you provide it directly.

 

[firedragon]

Why do I want you to do this? I told you why. Were you not paying attention? You claimed that subjective truth and opinion had two different meanings. I literally stated that in what you quoted.

It's not relevant. I have told you many times that you will not accept anything. Composition fallacy aside.

Where did you give me two books? You gave me two AUTHORS

Okay.

1. David Chalmers - Philosophy of mind
2. George Graham - The Disordered Mind

 

[Tiberius]

It's not relevant. I have told you many times that you will not accept anything. Composition fallacy aside.

So you can't.

Okay.

1. David Chalmers - Philosophy of mind
2. George Graham - The Disordered Mind

Are these available on line? If so, please provide a link.

Do they have to be purchased? If so, please purchase them and I will provide an address for you to mail them to me.

 

[firedragon]

So you can't.

Why?

Do they have to be purchased? If so, please purchase them and I will provide an address for you to mail them to me.

No. Such cheap people will not open their eyes anyway. Telling people to pay for books. Lol. Cheap character.

Ciao.

 

[Tiberius]

Why?

Why can't you? Because you are wrong.

No. Such cheap people will not open their eyes anyway. Telling people to pay for books. Lol. Cheap character.

Ciao.

So you make a claim but refuse to provide an example to show that your claim is true. You claim that there is a source which supports your view, but refuse to provide that source.

Your argument is a joke, and you are desperate for any reason to not have to support it, because you know that if you do have to support it, you will fail.

 

[gnostic]

I think I have told you multiple times that an opinion can be a subjective truth, but all subjective truths are not mere opinions.

No, firedragon.

All opinions are “subjective”, regardless if the opinion are “true or not”.

Every examples you have given, in the OP and elsewhere in your thread, were all examples of opinions.

What you haven’t given, are examples of what you repeatedly referred to as “subjective truth”. You provided no such examples.

That’s what I and others have been saying this to you: you only have only shown examples of opinions, not examples of opinions that were the “truth”.

We’re at impasse.

My guess is that you don’t know how to worded the examples that show opinions that were also true, so we keep arguing round and round. We are stuck because you don’t understand what we are explaining to you, and you are refusing to understand where you went wrong, so we cannot move forward.

 

[firedragon]

All opinions are “subjective”, regardless if the opinion are “true or not”.

So? Ill tell you what. I will cut and paste the statement once more. Read it carefully.

"an opinion can be a subjective truth, but all subjective truths are not mere opinions."