snake321 wrote:
See AG, I fail to see how this postmodern "nothing is real" thinking is helpful for anyone, either for the individual, or for the collective effort of the community. In what POSSIBLE way is this helpful? I mean besides a security blanket of irrational over-philosophy to protect ignorance?
Well, that is due to your value set. If values, and desires, and so on and so forth are subjective, then I really don't have to give a reason, as the reasons are based upon the subject. Not only that, but my criterion wasn't helpfulness, but rather a claim that any "truth" must be based upon arbitrariness, but that arbitrariness undermines the ability of anyone to claim something true.
Quote:
The ability to seek truth is within everyone, but most just aren't strong enough to break past their conditioning. Which is ok, I'm not here to judge anyone.
And my point is a disagreement with that. The ability to seek truth does not exist, and cannot be known to exist.
Quote:
I've heard all this before from various people on this forum, so bear with me as I try to go inside the collective mind here. But at some point this "how can you determine facts unbiasedly without having walked in someone else's shoes" sh** only goes so far too, before it just becomes plumb irrational and illogical.
The issue is that my claim is not based upon subjective experience, but rather is straight-up skepticism against anything. I can make an argument that applies only to logic(regress argument), I can make an argument that applies only to empirical evidence(brain in a vat), the only thing I can think of that cannot be falsified is subjective experience, and that element of truth is the one that few people care about when speaking of the grand ideal of truth.
Quote:
I can put myself in another person's shoes, do I know EXACTLY what their life is like? No, but I know enough to make a rational decision.... Example, just because I'm not Christian doesn't mean I can't understand why it's wrong for Christians (or people of any faith) to force feed their beliefs onto secular society through legislation. Just because I'm not a poor black man in the ghetto doesn't mean I'm not in a position to call Al Sharpton or Jesse Jackson racists. That doesn't mean I jump to the other extreme and march in the kkk either. So...That also doesn't mean I can't criticize myself equally. Criticism is not a horrible thing, it's mere logical deduction.
Not really my argument. I don't care about the differences of opinion between groups. Not only that, but I would argue that *you* cannot apply logical deduction, for whatever reason, it is impossible for you. Your emotions prevent it from happening, you don't have all of the necessary variables to make a valid logical deduction, I could even argue so far as to say that logic does not necessarily exist objectively or with the absolute validity most people give it.
Quote:
Truth doesn't know a doctrine, it doesn't know a race, nation, gender, political theory, culture, etc. It doesn't take sides in human affairs. It is independent of human emotions. So seeking truth requires not putting an emotional investment into any other peoples' opinions. Being an individual, standing alone basically (because truth isn't ever popular). That's all it takes, is to not put an emotional investment into other peoples' opinions/beliefs (or even in my own, gotta be willing to admit if I make a mistake somewhere, truth progresses over time). And a thirst for knowledge and wisdom. That's all.
On the contrary, truth is a doctrine, it is a political theory, it may even be a culture, and it certainly is not neutral to all opinions. Truth may very well be independent of human emotions, but human beings CANNOT be independent of their own emotions, they are hard-wired into our very nature, and so a truth independent of human emotions cannot be reached and known to be reached by an emotion-laden human being. If the nature of truth-seeking demands a lack of emotional investment into any theory, then the qualifications are beyond human nature as it is known by the best of our truth-seeking instruments. Therefore, the truth if it can be assessed states that the truth cannot be accessed, and any notion of finding truth is self-contradictory.
Quote:
Logic is my referee between the emotions of the hive minds, in determining where the truth lays when a fence is set. I try to call things fairly, evenly. All this postmodern "nothing is real" thinking can't possibly help anyone. You get way to overkill-philosophical to the point where it's not even rational or logical dude. Honestly. There's a point where philosophy goes overboard and throws the baby out with the bath water. What this is, is a way for people (in general) to have a security blanket to protect their ignorance and to deny common since. There has been a cultural attack on common since and rationality as long as the 2000 generation rolled in. So it comes as no surprise if by now, people can't any longer comprehend common since. That's just how much people have been dummied down (no offense, I say that in the most respectful way I can).
And logic never escapes emotions, at least, not in any healthy human being. If help is also subjective(which is an easy argument to make, given a lack of teleological principles governing man), then *ANYTHING* can help somebody, no matter how absurd. The funny issue is that my position is an application of logic, which you argue to be a referee. To me, it seems a logically apparent truth, that logic cannot make truths logically apparent, a paradox that I am fine with. "Common sense" has never been in style in the first place. Not only that, but if common sense is incomprehendable, then why suppose that it exists? It seems as if this is a solipsistic revelation.
Quote:
It's a product of a psychopathic culture intent on living in illusion and in a state of utter Babylon until theyr so far in the hole they can't climb out. They try to use over-philosophy postmodern new age "nothing is real" crap so nobody can ever be right or wrong, so nobody gets offended. But it doesn't usually work that way, now does it?...... And you don't see the danger in people being cut off from reality, and living in psychopathic delusions? It really is a psychopathic culture.
I don't care about offending anyone. If people are already fundamentally cut off from reality, and live in psychopathic delusions, then I don't see the problem. Heck, you are the conspiracy theorist out of the group, to the rest of us, you are the psychopathically deluded.
Quote:
Dude, I'm not gonna waste my time in these circular, nowhere-going arguments with you AG because it's pointless. I'm just making my statement and leaving it at that. YOU can't expect YOURSELF to be honest, which obviously tells me your not that hungry for knowledge or wisdom at all. But you brag about your ego. I'm not gonna argue dude, I just wanted to say my piece and that was it. I've argued with you before, it goes nowhere, it's an endless loop.
So.... your final position is an argument from psychoanalysis? I would argue that if you trust yourself to be honest, then you are not that hungry for knowledge or wisdom at all, for the knowledge and wisdom sweeping modern society is that we cannot be trusted to be honest. It goes nowhere because it ends at your assertion "X is true", not because of any fault of mine.
08 Oct 2008, 8:46 pm
