Subjective/Objective reallity

[Segev Moran]

I would but it sounds a lot better in my head then when I try to write it out.

Hehe.. I know the feeling
Lets break it down?

"Subjectivity should be the objective of our reality"

What do you mean? how can one change the objective reality into being the subjective reality?
Let take as an example, some falls of a 6th floor, nothing between him and the ground which is covered with rocks (there is no one around that might "catch" the fall) (I intentionally exaggerate for simplicity)

As i see it:

Objective reality: the person will crash to the ground, will probably die on the spot, but might have some "luck" and will manage to survive a bit more.

(possible) Subjective realities:

* while falling, the man stretches his arms and tries to fly.
* someone sees the person fall and prays he will be safe. (with a belief a pray can help in that matter)
* while falling, the man meditate trying to lower his body mass.

 

[Segev Moran]

I happen to think that the earth is a spheroid, but i cant prove it. It might be objective in a contextual argument.

You can actually prove quite easily, more than that we have enormousness number of pictures, videos, eye witnesses, calculations, and so many evidence the earth is spheroid.

No matter how much someone will try to deny that fact, or believe the earth is flat, or disc shaped or whatever it is, the objective (undeniable) truth is the the earth is a spheroid.

But for sake of simplicity, would you say the existence(in the present) of the moon is objectively true?

Atheism and Theism are truths.

no their not.
Atheism is lack of belief in gods (mainly). It will often be accompanied with a skeptic (or other secular) pov.
There is no truth in atheism. there is no claim in atheism.
At times, some clever atheist will claim there is no chance whatsoever for a god. (which is obliviously a false statement)

Same goes for theism, from the other side of the coin

They are subjective by necessity,

Please explain.

and since your op addressed atheism as it concerns objectivity,

Can't recall when i claimed such a thing?
You mean this: "i assume that is why the majority of genuine scientists are atheists (these days)."?
I Claimed objectivity can explain atheism... not the other way around.
Atheism is not a POV, its an outcome.

this fact is important to realize.

Which fact?

 

[Segev Moran]

Not at all.

Thanks

What is the moon?

The Moon is a natural satellite orbiting our planet. there are billions of other moons that orbit other planets.
The moon was created a few million of years ago. It is assumed it might have been created by an impact of a "roaming" plant (that has no orbit) and the force of the impact caused a debris to orbit our earth until it slowly clumped together to form the moon. we are not yet sure about this fact, but it seems to be a very probable explanation.

(is it just a light in the night sky)

Well, it is, although it is not the source of that light (which BTW, that's part of how we know the moon is also a spheroid )

Where is it?

The moon is in orbit around our planet in an approximate distance of 380K km from earth.

(It is not always there and changes to my view) What does it do?

It is "locked" inside earth gravity force and thus it orbits our planet.
It is always there, no matter what time of day you will check, the moon is always there (for now), you fail to see it all the time because earth rotates as the moon is. But if you will fly above the earth fast enough, you can see the moon 24/7.

(If its there it must have effect, what is its effect).

It actually have some effects.
The first one, is that the moon keeps us tilted, thus we can have a seasoning, allowing our atmosphere and weather to be somewhat "steady". We have seasons due to that fact.
The moon also have a magnetic pull on our planet, causing an "in motion" bump on the earths surface. It is mostly notable on the sea as the pull helps create tides.
[/QUOTE]
All these questions would be answerable for an objective object.

Well, what do you know
I guess the moon is indeed objective

To some, myself included the moon is just a pretty object in the night sky, that we happened to have walked on.

Hence my claim that scientist (who have a more objective way to examine things) will probably admit that the moon has no real "magic", rather it is a subjective reality, unlike the existence of the moon, which is objective.

 

[Segev Moran]

@Segev Moran
I'm going to try and translate how I read it.

Thanks

Our reality is made up of individuals each with there own take on things we need to understand this == Subjectivity should be the objective of our reality

I Disagree. If you make the subjective an objective, what about the objective reality?

To live we need to do things, thinking about it isn't going to accomplish anything without doing.

I Agree.
That is, for example, an objective reality. you cant think about doing something all day long. if you don't go and do it, it wont happen by itself.

We need to us what around us for our survival now and not wait or cry about the things we don't have.==Objectivity should be the subject of our existence.

I Think i understand what you are trying to say.

It seems you are talking about how one interprets the events of his life.
I Agree with you that you should try and be more optimistic about things, but being optimistic is sometimes not enough.
We can fantasize that life on earth are only getting better, while the fact is we are heading for a very bad future unless we learn to face the objective truth of our societies, our governments, our universe, our planet and selves.

In my opinion at least my best try.

Thanks I appreciate that. I Hope i got it right

 

[Segev Moran]

Once a person thinks, "I need to do the dishes." (Subjective), the (objective) task gets done.

Neurons fire (objective), thought occurs (subjective).

Oh, Ok.. of course.
The objective also affects the subjective....
Can you please explain what the argument?

 

[Segev Moran]

I'd say that is exactly why the more we think we know, the less we do. The more out of touch we are with the subjective, the more dissociated from reality we become.

How so? Can you please give an example?

 

[Desert Snake]

You can actually prove quite easily, more than that we have enormousness number of pictures, videos, eye witnesses, calculations, and so many evidence the earth is spheroid.

No matter how much someone will try to deny that fact, or believe the earth is flat, or disc shaped or whatever it is, the objective (undeniable) truth is the the earth is a spheroid.

But for sake of simplicity, would you say the existence(in the present) of the moon is objectively true?

no their not.
Atheism is lack of belief in gods (mainly). It will often be accompanied with a skeptic (or other secular) pov.
There is no truth in atheism. there is no claim in atheism.
At times, some clever atheist will claim there is no chance whatsoever for a god. (which is obliviously a false statement)

Same goes for theism, from the other side of the coin

Please explain.

Can't recall when i claimed such a thing?
You mean this: "i assume that is why the majority of genuine scientists are atheists (these days)."?
I Claimed objectivity can explain atheism... not the other way around.
Atheism is not a POV, its an outcome.

Which fact?

Atheism is an opinion, not an objective outcome. A personal objective outcome, for example, is theism. Both of these are actually subjective.
Your use of the words objective and subjective, in your premise, isnt accurate for your argument.
Youre using the word objective when it is actually subjective. This might be a problem with non-explicit atheism, in general. Ie, you can only claim atheism in a stated position.

 

[Segev Moran]

Bahaha. Is that what subjective means to you?

Yep. To me subjective is something that is true in my POV.
Objective is what is true no matter your POV.

Sounds like you've been listening to too many atheists. Atheists are usually wrong.

Lol

Let's say all the astronauts who went to the moon said it was made out of green cheese, not blue.

Ok.

Next, the twenty scientists who examined the material brought back said they found green cheese in part of that which was brought back.

Ok.

This is subjective. What is the truth in this situation?

The truth is that astronauts went to the moon and believe they saw green cheese.
The truth is that 20 scientist that examined the evidence, also found that it is a green cheese.
That is the objective truth.
Now, we need to think what is the probability of it being true.
If every test, observation, calculation etc points to the fact that the moon really is made of green cheese, than it is most probably, ta da... green cheese.
If at one of the test, it will contradict the entire idea of the moon being made of green cheese, our understanding of the objective truth will become greater.
eventually, there are things that no matter how we try to deny the evidence, the objective truth is just that. objective.

What's important in looking for the truth is not determining what statements are subjective vs objective, but a cause.

That's a dangerous way of thinking.
What's important is basing your truth on facts that are objective and "leaning" that objective truth from as much subjectivity.

The religious say that everything that comes to be must have a cause.

That's quite a weird statement. Its exactly like saying there is no god for a fact.

It is the first principle of causality.

On what does this rule apply?

If you look for a cause why the astronauts and scientists were involved, then you may find that one of the reasons for the mission to the moon was to see what it made of, how much oxygen was present and to check on whether it provided any source of food or water. Or if you buy a frozen pizza from the store and leave it in the freezer. The next day, you go to have the pizza but it's half eaten and the leftover is in the fridge. Do you go look to find the objective truth in this situation? No, you look for the cause./QUOTE]
How can you look for a cause without being objective?
And i am a bit confused... what do you mean when you say cause?
case as the events that caused an outcome? or cause as a purpose for something?

 

[Segev Moran]

Naturally, they do, all the time. So, keep them in their separate containers. Don't try to mix them up.

I Agree.
But still, what if one contradicts the other and based on that you consider your actions?

No cheese there (for sure).

Agreed

We have made bricks out of Moon and Mars sand.

Never heard of it

Non-existent, like God.

There is no god? man...

 

[Segev Moran]

final analysis is the transcending of the apparent duality of subjective and objective experiences of reality to realize non-dual reality.

What?

 

[Segev Moran]

Mother nature is objective we are subjective to that. This is not that hard, it's nearly impossible for us to understand that. I have used a very subjective telelogical term "mother" but I could say logos,tao, physical cosmos etc and they all can be either telelogically expressed emotionally, or telelogically expressed un emotionally "nature as a car engine" and I then could have the fantasy belief that's objective. I could exist in the fantasy of emotional detachment as "objective" but it is religious fanaticism called reductionism its nonsense and call itself "science". Bs bad science and bad religion.

So you are nothing but subjectivity?

 

[Segev Moran]

Atheism is an opinion

Agree.
[/QUOTE]not an objective outcome. [/QUOTE]
I Said outcome, not objective outcome.
It is an often outcome of objective evidence.

A personal objective outcome, for example, is theism.

Theism is subjective.
Ask 1000 people, you will get at least as half definitions of a god.

Both of these are actually subjective.

Atheism is not objective.
Theism is not objective.

Your use of the words objective and subjective, in your premise, isnt accurate for your argument.

Can you please redefine them?

Youre using the word objective when it is actually subjective.

I Don't, though it seems you interpret it like so.
So i'll try to explain better:

Subjective reality: Any interpretation of reality that is a personal pov and not necessarily based on evidence.
Objective reality: The reality of our universe.

Objective Moon: A Natural satellite of our planet, orbiting it and reflecting light from the sun.
Subjective moon: A romantic sky light that when full, causes weird supernatural things (example).

At the end, there is only one objective reality, while we can have endless subjective ones.

This might be a problem with non-explicit atheism, in general. Ie, you can only claim atheism in a stated position.

Atheism is the lack of belief in god. that's all i can say about it.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

What?

Transcending the duality of subjective objective reality means the mind is apprehending reality without thought, it is a meditative state.

For example, a mind that is sequentially or simultaneously considering an object seen through the eyes as being external, and what is felt about that same object seen through the eyes as being internal, that is a mind functioning in the dualistic state. A mind in transcendence apprehends what is present without judgement, without thought, a non-dual state, a mind in the quiescent state.

 

[Twilight Hue]

Oh, Ok.. of course.
The objective also affects the subjective....
Can you please explain what the argument?

You quired in the last paragraph of your OP as to the more objective the findings, is the subjective diminished as a result.

My argument is that it wouldn't likely be the case due the relationships, subtile at times, involving the objective and subjective.

 

[Windwalker]

How so? Can you please give an example?

Objective reality is only understood individually through our subjective realities. How our minds interpret the world is 100% through the subjective filters we use, regardless if those are shared filters with others of our culture. The more you ignore self-knowledge, and self-awareness, the more blind you are to just how subjective we really are, how colorized what we see is by that. The more self-unaware you are, the more out of touch you are with reality, which includes the subjective, not excludes it. We are humans, not robots crunching numbers.

 

[bobhikes]

Thanks

The Moon is a natural satellite orbiting our planet. there are billions of other moons that orbit other planets.
The moon was created a few million of years ago. It is assumed it might have been created by an impact of a "roaming" plant (that has no orbit) and the force of the impact caused a debris to orbit our earth until it slowly clumped together to form the moon. we are not yet sure about this fact, but it seems to be a very probable explanation.

Well, it is, although it is not the source of that light (which BTW, that's part of how we know the moon is also a spheroid )

The moon is in orbit around our planet in an approximate distance of 380K km from earth.

It is "locked" inside earth gravity force and thus it orbits our planet.
It is always there, no matter what time of day you will check, the moon is always there (for now), you fail to see it all the time because earth rotates as the moon is. But if you will fly above the earth fast enough, you can see the moon 24/7.

It actually have some effects.
The first one, is that the moon keeps us tilted, thus we can have a seasoning, allowing our atmosphere and weather to be somewhat "steady". We have seasons due to that fact.
The moon also have a magnetic pull on our planet, causing an "in motion" bump on the earths surface. It is mostly notable on the sea as the pull helps create tides.

All these questions would be answerable for an objective object.[/QUOTE]

What is a natural satellite, if there are billions of moons, are they different, are they the same. What is the difference between a moon and an asteroid circling the planet. It was assumed to be created by, If you use assume you are not sure, probable is not objective.

Why is the distance approximate doesn't sound objective, I also thought I heard it will eventually spin away from earth. When it starts traveling the galaxy is it is no longer earth's moon that wouldn't be objective. What is the earth.

Can you quantify or prove any of your effects so that they are objective.

 

[james bond]

Yep. To me subjective is something that is true in my POV.
Objective is what is true no matter your POV.

Lol

Ok.

Ok.

>>The truth is that astronauts went to the moon and believe they saw green cheese.
The truth is that 20 scientist that examined the evidence, also found that it is a green cheese.
That is the objective truth.<<

Yes. The first is subjective truth. After the latter, it's the objective truth. I think that's what you meant.

Now, we need to think what is the probability of it being true.
If every test, observation, calculation etc points to the fact that the moon really is made of green cheese, than it is most probably, ta da... green cheese.
If at one of the test, it will contradict the entire idea of the moon being made of green cheese, our understanding of the objective truth will become greater.
eventually, there are things that no matter how we try to deny the evidence, the objective truth is just that. objective.

>>That's a dangerous way of thinking.
What's important is basing your truth on facts that are objective and "leaning" that objective truth from as much subjectivity.<<

Ha ha. No, it's the way to look at exploring and searching for the truth. Where do you get this objective and subjective philosophy? I've heard it through Karl Popper. While we do not disagree, it's more philosophy than a science. I would apply it to law and business since proof is less rigorous than science.

12th grade Philosophy of Science
Karl Popper & Scientific Objectivity ~Lazar & Deven

>>That's quite a weird statement. Its exactly like saying there is no god for a fact.<<

The very opposite with Kalam's Cosmological Argument.

>>On what does this rule apply?<<

That everything material in the universe has a cause.

God and the Laws of Science: The Law of Causality

Sir Francis Bacon - Father of Scientific Method
Francis Bacon (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)

 

[Pudding]

We all have our subjective reality.
Above all that, we have an objective reality.

Please explain what do you mean by "subjective reality" and "objective reality".

 

[Aupmanyav]

But still, what if one contradicts the other and based on that you consider your actions?

Never heard of it

There is no god? man...

It is simple, Segev. We should act according to the reality that we live in - the subjective. In 'Advaita' Hinduism, it is known as 'Vyavaharika Satya' (Pragmatic reality). You run if a lion attacks, though you and the lion both are not the 'Paramarthika Satya' (Absolute reality).

Yes, NASA has made bricks out of compacted Martian soil. Just google for it.

Yes, there is none.

 

[Willamena]

The truth is that astronauts went to the moon and believe they saw green cheese.
The truth is that 20 scientist that examined the evidence, also found that it is a green cheese.
That is the objective truth.

>>The truth is that astronauts went to the moon and believe they saw green cheese.
The truth is that 20 scientist that examined the evidence, also found that it is a green cheese.
That is the objective truth.<<

Yes. The first is subjective truth. After the latter, it's the objective truth.

What is the difference you are making between a subjective truth and a fabrication of truth?