Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum
Jose

Can’t find a way to take a decision using just objective criteria)))

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

9 minutes ago, Jose said:

That I did was not a change, it was a clarification. The question is who does Objectivist interpret reality when you need a subjective fact? What I give was an example, and offer a second one.

Jose, the clarification, additions, and expansions you've randomly inserted into your scenario are in fact changes. Are you denying this as a fact?   

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Jose said:
3 hours ago, MisterSwig said:

How do you know that you "deduct" it? Maybe you don't deduct it. Is it an objective fact that you deduct it?

Why is important who deduct it.

I asked how you know that you deduct it, not who deducts it. You said that you deduct it, and I want to know how you know that you do that. Please stop wiggling around in my trap. I have you. So man up and answer the question.

27 minutes ago, Jose said:

That they are different is a fact.

An objective fact? How do you know they are different? Maybe they're the same.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Repairman said:

Jose, the clarification, additions, and expansions you've randomly inserted into your scenario are in fact changes. Are you denying this as a fact?   

 

Yes, I’m denying it, because explanation is not changing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

19 minutes ago, MisterSwig said:

I asked how you know that you deduct it, not who deducts it. You said that you deduct it, and I want to know how you know that you do that. Please stop wiggling around in my trap. I have you. So man up and answer the question.

An objective fact? How do you know they are different? Maybe they're the same.

It’s common knowledge. I learn about both theories, they told me that they are different, and when I see the equation it made sense to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Jose said:

You can use which criteria do you want to explore ...

I do not want to explore any criteria. You initiated the discussion. You have been throwing word-salad at the well-intending participants on this thread as if we were trying to force you to eat something that doesn't please you. You choose not to engage on any basis of rational argument, but rather you continually alter the direction of the conversation, or change the conversation, with explanations  that you then deed "irrelevant." You are clearly evading any direct engagement, and this is another example of your evasive tactics:

2 minutes ago, Jose said:

Yes, I’m denying it, because explanation is not changing

Explanation is change, when it is data previously omitted from the equation. This is not a winning strategy. What can you possibly gain from this? So far as I can tell, your whole point is that objective decisions are impossible. Is that your fundamental point?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Repairman said:I do not want to explore any criteria. You initiated the discussion. You have been throwing word-salad at the well-intending participants on this thread as if we were trying to force you to eat something that doesn't please you. You choose not to engage on any basis of rational argument, but rather you continually alter the direction of the conversation, or change the conversation, with explanations  that you then deed "irrelevant." You are clearly evading any direct engagement, and this is another example of your evasive tactics:Explanation is change, when it is data previously omitted from the equation. This is not a winning strategy. What can you possibly gain from this? So far as I can tell, your whole point is that objective decisions are impossible. Is that your fundamental point?

Yes clarification is change ... I think I need to clarify my question “how to make a decision when there is no objective way to do it.”

What you don’t want to understand is that, what you complain about is an example.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jose,

It seems obvious that you are as unfamiliar with Objectivism as I assume you are with the Dead Parrot routine. You're circling back to the beginning of a pointless, and otherwise easily solved dilemma, and starting it all over again, as if that might wear down your opponent. I ask you to be honest, and you evade the point like a congressman.

14 minutes ago, Jose said:

Yes clarification is change ...

18 minutes ago, Jose said:

 

 

In this statement, you are admitting to the reversals that expose your lack of concept formation. You had to be confronted with an obvious contradiction.

 

19 minutes ago, Jose said:

 I think I need to clarify my question “how to make a decision when there is no objective way to do it.”

What you don’t want to understand is that, what you complain about is an example.

Objectively, I don't need anything from you. I find this amusing enough. What you don't want to understand is that your losing this argument.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Jose said:

 

1 hour ago, dream_weaver said:

Which one? 

 

1 hour ago, dream_weaver said:

When the pupil is ready, the teacher appears.

 

That still doesn't identify which one.

Edited by dream_weaver

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Repairman said:

Jose, you've already given an example. What I point out is that we are engaging in the Monty Python Dead Parrot routine.

Cause you see not to like the current one. Or at least understand it - you made it the root of you goal-post argument.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, dream_weaver said:

That still doesn't identify which one.

If my example is under defined, yours to. I have two theories of what is going on: you have problems thinking abstract, or you are acting as you don’t understand.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Jose said:

Cause you see not to like the current one. Or at least understand it - you made it the root of you goal-post argument.

Jose, here is my "goal-post argument": You have no argument. You do not approve of Objectivism, and are by no mean the first, and not likely that last to try to dissemble Objectivism. I will say that this was so far, the worst attempt I've ever seen. As I've stated earlier: You lose.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Repairman said:

Jose, here is my "goal-post argument": You have no argument. You do not approve of Objectivism, and are by no mean the first, and not likely that last to try to dissemble Objectivism. I will say that this was so far, the worst attempt I've ever seen. As I've stated earlier: You lose.

Good that you answer all my question, and to lock holes on my claim. You win, the price of the worst explained ever.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Jose said:

when I see the equation it made sense to me.

You didn't actually see the equation, right? There is no equation in objective reality that you saw with your own eyes, because there is no such thing as objective criteria. The equation is merely a subjective preference in your head. In reality there might only be one universal equation and all other "equations" are mere subjective fragments or distortions in your mind, isn't that right?

Edited by MisterSwig

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Jose said:

If my example is under defined, yours to. I have two theories of what is going on: you have problems thinking abstract, or you are acting as you don’t understand.

Let's let this and the popcorn thread  serve as the basis for letting others draw an objective conclusion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Jose said:

Good that you answer all my question, and to lock holes on my claim. You win, the price of the worst explained ever.

Well, I suppose that's that. The only thing near to an explanation I offered was to explain what Objectivism is not. Jose was not seeking an explanation, none were offered.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, MisterSwig said:

You didn't actually see the equation, right? There is no equation in objective reality that you saw with your own eyes, because there is no such thing as objective criteria. The equation is merely a subjective preference in your head. In reality there might only be one universal equation and all other "equations" are mere subjective fragments or distortions in your mind, isn't that right?

I don’t understand, are you implying that objective criteria is very hard to come by.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, dream_weaver said:

Let's let this and the popcorn thread  serve as the basis for letting others draw an objective conclusion.

That is an ad hominem, you are evaluating an argument using completely irrelevant facts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Repairman said:

Well, I suppose that's that. The only thing near to an explanation I offered was to explain what Objectivism is not. Jose was not seeking an explanation, none were offered.

Please count the number of questions I answer vs the questions I ask with no answer ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, Jose said:

I don’t understand, are you implying that objective criteria is very hard to come by.

Not at all. I'm just asking if you saw the real, objective equation out there in the external world, or if by "equation" you simply mean the idea in your mind that you like to believe that you have. Let me give you an example. Sometimes I look at your posts on this forum, and I wonder to myself, "Do these posts actually exist in objective reality, or do I just like the idea of them existing? Maybe they are mere figments of my imagination." Then I ask my girlfriend if she can see them, and she always says yes. But then I can't help wondering, "Does my girlfriend actually exist in objective reality, or do I just like the idea of her existing? Maybe I'm schizophrenic. There is no girlfriend, and I'm just telling myself what I want to hear. On top of that, I might just prefer the idea of being a schizophrenic human being, but in real reality I'm one of those weird aliens that people on DMT experience in the machine world.

Is that sort of what you're talking about?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, MisterSwig said:

Not at all. I'm just asking if you saw the real, objective equation out there in the external world, or if by "equation" you simply mean the idea in your mind that you like to believe that you have. Let me give you an example. Sometimes I look at your posts on this forum, and I wonder to myself, "Do these posts actually exist in objective reality, or do I just like the idea of them existing? Maybe they are mere figments of my imagination." Then I ask my girlfriend if she can see them, and she always says yes. But then I can't help wondering, "Does my girlfriend actually exist in objective reality, or do I just like the idea of her existing? Maybe I'm schizophrenic. There is no girlfriend, and I'm just telling myself what I want to hear. On top of that, I might just prefer the idea of being a schizophrenic human being, but in real reality I'm one of those weird aliens that people on DMT experience in the machine world.

Is that sort of what you're talking about?

Based on this is imposible to know if something is inside or outside your head.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Jose said:
6 hours ago, dream_weaver said:

Let's let this and the popcorn thread  serve as the basis for letting others draw an objective conclusion.

That is an ad hominem, you are evaluating an argument using completely irrelevant facts

From the other thread someone said that contradiction are possible and impossible at the same time. I try to know what he means and he start trolling. The solutions I give were that he was using a contradiction resistant logic, later I think that he is meaning a kind of Hegelian dialectic.

In this thread, people went out of there way to evade my concern and even said that subjective criteria, could be used but don’t give a guidelines of when.  Or when I explain the example said that I was moving the goal post. I really try to learn who Rand’s handle this scenario because is extremely simple so it was logical for me to look at what I’m missing.

After both threads my only way to understand what is going on is that you guys just ignore and sweep under the rug everything that do not fit in your worldview.

Edited by Jose

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...