Objective, Subjective, Confusion, Reconciliation

[firedragon]

Huh? It's objectively true because it has empirical (scientific) evidence to back it up.

You don't understand statements Poly because you are in too much of a hurry to defy.

The statement becomes objectively true because it's an analytical truth. tell me. How in the world can this statement be an analytical truth if there is no scientific experiments done, and a vaccine was developed, then tested, and results were recorded, and rates were presented etc? And people know it. People have seen the results. The have been at least told repeatedly.

Then the statement makes a particular claim, not just a scientific experiment in a lab. This is a claim which is objectively true because of the way it's worded. If someone said "COVID 19 vaccination completely eradicates the virus", we don't know that as a fact as a reader of that statement. So the statement "Claiming COVID 19 vaccination completely eradicates the virus is an unpresented fact" then that becomes an analytical truth.

 

[Augustus]

There are no proper explanations. Most of them are strawman arguments irrelevant to this thread

It's irrelevant to identify mistakes in your use of objective in the OP about objectivity that render one of your key points false?

I disagree.

The joys of subjectivity

 

[firedragon]

It's irrelevant to identify mistakes in your use of objective in the OP about objectivity that render one of your key points false?

I disagree.

The joys of subjectivity

OK.

 

[Tiberius]

What I disagree with your post is calling subjective truths "opinions". It's true that people state their opinions. But even if they don't say their opinion, two different people will secretly have two different experiences with vanilla ice cream. That's subjective.

I honestly do not see how an opinion could not also be called a "subjective truth."

Could you please give me a definition of what you hold "opinion" to mean, and then give an example of a "subjective truth" which does not fit that definition?

 

[firedragon]

I honestly do not see how an opinion could not also be called a "subjective truth."

I didnt say it cannot be called anything. Please read what I said Tiberius.

 

[Polymath257]

No. You have to understand it. Not aim to keep arguing no matter what.

Learn about what philosophers call a mathematical truth, or ask someone.

I have read many philosophers of mathematics and understood them. Your terminology is unusual.

 

[Polymath257]

You don't understand statements Poly because you are in too much of a hurry to defy.

I'm not in a hurry to defy. I am trying to point out where your claims are wrong. You made some claims about
mostly atheists' and I have found those claims to be wrong. I am showing why I think them to be wrong.

If you made claims that I thought were correct, I would say that as well.

The statement becomes objectively true because it's an analytical truth. tell me. How in the world can this statement be an analytical truth if there is no scientific experiments done, and a vaccine was developed, then tested, and results were recorded, and rates were presented etc? And people know it. People have seen the results. The have been at least told repeatedly.

The testing *was* a scientific experiment. Many scientific experiments were done in the development to support the hope that it would work, etc.

Analytic truths are those that are true by definition of through the use of logic. Statements about the real world that are analytic are all tautologies: they give no real information.

So, saying a bachelor is an unmarried man is simply definitional. it says almost nothing about anything in the real world *until* you can establish that someone is an unmarried man and *that* is ultimately an empirical claim also (having to do with how society defines marriage and man).

Then the statement makes a particular claim, not just a scientific experiment in a lab. This is a claim which is objectively true because of the way it's worded. If someone said "COVID 19 vaccination completely eradicates the virus", we don't know that as a fact as a reader of that statement. So the statement "Claiming COVID 19 vaccination completely eradicates the virus is an unpresented fact" then that becomes an analytical truth.

No, it is NOT an analytic truth. It is a scientific, empirical one. it is NOT true merely by definition or by logic.

 

[Tiberius]

I didnt say it cannot be called anything. Please read what I said Tiberius.

That's how it came across.

Specifically, you said, "What I disagree with your post is calling subjective truths "opinions"."

You specifically said that "calling a subjective truth an opinion" was something you disagreed with.

 

[firedragon]

I have read many philosophers of mathematics and understood them. Your terminology is unusual.

Admirable that you have read so much. After all. You are a Phd in Mathematics so that's a very precise doctorate. I would really like to know what your research was on. Nevermind.

In your reading, what did you come across Plato saying about Mathematical truths? How did you interpret it?

 

[firedragon]

I'm not in a hurry to defy. I am trying to point out where your claims are wrong. You made some claims about
mostly atheists' and I have found those claims to be wrong. I am showing why I think them to be wrong.

If you made claims that I thought were correct, I would say that as well.



The testing *was* a scientific experiment. Many scientific experiments were done in the development to support the hope that it would work, etc.

Analytic truths are those that are true by definition of through the use of logic. Statements about the real world that are analytic are all tautologies: they give no real information.

So, saying a bachelor is an unmarried man is simply definitional. it says almost nothing about anything in the real world *until* you can establish that someone is an unmarried man and *that* is ultimately an empirical claim also (having to do with how society defines marriage and man).



No, it is NOT an analytic truth. It is a scientific, empirical one. it is NOT true merely by definition or by logic.

Can you explain what analytical truth is because you keep saying something is not?

So please define it in your own words.

Thanks.

 

[firedragon]

Specifically, you said, "What I disagree with your post is calling subjective truths "opinions"."

calling truths "opinions" does not mean "calling opinions truths".

Truths are not merely opinions. But opinions can be truths.

 

[sayak83]

Can you explain what analytical truth is because you keep saying something is not?

So please define it in your own words.

Thanks.

General meaning of analytically true sentence are those that are known to be true by virtue of the meaning of the words alone and no external information apart from the word meaning are required to determine their truth values .
The Analytic/Synthetic Distinction (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)
Eg. All bachelors are unmarried.

 

[firedragon]

General meaning of analytically true sentence are those that are known to be true by virtue of the meaning of the words alone and no external information apart from the word meaning are required to determine their truth values .
The Analytic/Synthetic Distinction (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)
Eg. All bachelors are unmarried.

Fabulous. Thank you very much.

 

[Augustus]

Can you explain what analytical truth is because you keep saying something is not?

So please define it in your own words.

Thanks.

It's good to do people the courtesy of actually reading their posts before making demands of them

Half of the post you replied to was explaining this

Analytic truths are those that are true by definition of through the use of logic. Statements about the real world that are analytic are all tautologies: they give no real information.

So, saying a bachelor is an unmarried man is simply definitional. it says almost nothing about anything in the real world *until* you can establish that someone is an unmarried man and *that* is ultimately an empirical claim also (having to do with how society defines marriage and man).

No, it is NOT an analytic truth. It is a scientific, empirical one. it is NOT true merely by definition or by logic.

 

[firedragon]

It's good to do people the courtesy of actually reading their posts before making demands of them

Half of the post you replied to was explaining this

thanks for the commentary. Nice.

So please read this post and get some information out of it. Thanks.

#112

 

[gnostic]

Lol. Okay. Forget about a mountain.

How much sea can be seen on the surface of the earth? Is it more than land?

I am only speaking about what can be seen. Is it more than 70% sea? Is that an objective truth or a subjective truth?

I am not geographer, so I wouldn't know the total surface areas of land vs sea. You would have to ask the person who did the measurements and calculations with such questions, but if such a person can provide these data, then it would be objective truth.

If I was to make a guess, without knowing the total surface areas, then any number or percentage given would be subjective.

All opinions and all beliefs are subjective.

Objective is when you have the evidence and data to support claim (about land vs sea), which I don't have.

 

[firedragon]

I am not geographer, so I wouldn't know the total surface areas of land vs sea. You would have to ask the person who did the measurements and calculations with such questions, but if such a person can provide these data, then it would be objective truth.

If I was to make a guess, without knowing the total surface areas, then any number or percentage given would be subjective.

All opinions and all beliefs are subjective.

Objective is when you have the evidence and data to support claim (about land vs sea), which I don't have.

Okay.

Which finger on your right hand is the longest?

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

I thought not.

How do you quote a post within a quoted post?

Using the above as an example ...

1. I go to the post (or posts) that I wish to imbed, e..g., my post #63.
2. I select {"+Quote ...} bottom right, located just next to the { <-- Reply} button.
3. I then Reply to your post #68.
4. I place my cursor between the closing brace and the first word of your post.
5. I then select the option {Insert Quotes ...} found as the bottom left of my response box.

I hope that was at least marginally clear. My recommendation would be to start a thread in the Journal Forum and play around with the {"+Quote ...} option.

 

[firedragon]

Using the above as an example ...

1. I go to the post (or posts) that I wish to imbed, e..g., my post #63.
2. I select {"+Quote ...} bottom right, located just next to the { <-- Reply} button.
3. I then Reply to your post #68.
4. I place my cursor between the closing brace and the first word of your post.
5. I then select the option {Insert Quotes ...} found as the bottom left of my response box.

I hope that was at least marginally clear. My recommendation would be to start a thread in the Journal Forum and play around with the {"+Quote ...} option.

Thanks a lot JS. It's a nice way to represent someone's post with context. Maybe I shall cut and paste your instructions on a text document and keep for future reference.

Thanks again.

 

[Polymath257]

Admirable that you have read so much. After all. You are a Phd in Mathematics so that's a very precise doctorate. I would really like to know what your research was on. Nevermind.

I won't give specifics, but it was in abstract harmonic analysis, studying what are known as thin sets.

I did research in other areas since then, of course.

In your reading, what did you come across Plato saying about Mathematical truths? How did you interpret it?

Of course. He used mathematical objects as both examples of and motivation for his theory of Forms. He used math and his parable of the cave to justify this theory. As an interesting example, he regarded all education as inspiring memory of what is already known and used a mathematical example with a slave to justify this claim.

But, I am not a Platonist, either in math or more generally. I think the theory of forms to be one of the worst philosophical mistakes ever made. In math, I am mostly a formalist.