Jose
Regulars-
Posts
118 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Everything posted by Jose
-
This is my whole point, I came up with an escenario where is not posible to take a decision in just objective facts (the fact that is lunch is irrelevant, you can change it to cover any aspect of life, you can ask me of a realm and I’ll adapt the scenario) So if there is no criteria of when to use subjective criteria to move forward there is limited application of that worldview.
-
If there are no limits, why do I know that I have to use just objective criteria to interpret reality, and when subjective criteria are a good criteria. You are right, but it is rooted in there are multiple ways to interpret reality. Yes, and again there is a root of having multiple ways to interpret reality. As an example, Plato believe that soul exist while Rand’s no. You cannot use someone philosophy with just the part that fits your philosophy and ignores the rest.
-
Good that you are not a teacher. His goal is to convey concept X, is he does not try to explain the concept until understood he is doing a poor job. Your statement entails that there is just one form to interpret reality, and despite of that is a good strategy to learn that way instead of just mindlessly imitating what others do.
-
I never claim that it was a desiring making criaturita, it’s a way of life and decision making is part of life. No, you? I just want to understand the philosophy better. As far as I understand it being Objective is a fundamental part of Rand’s philosophy, what are the limits of her claim? Given that my understanding is correct.
-
If we are talking about something that we do not agree on the definition is to start with one if I do not understanding is your work to reexplaining it to me. My definition of Objectivity is 1 1 of https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/objective and Subjective all that is not Objective And I use it and it prove my point. And I did not understand it or do not address my question.
-
The problem is that Rand’s philosophy is based on reaching decision just Objective criteria, and my understanding of Subjective is not Objective (I try to get a definition of Objective so we talk about the same thing without success). If it is easier to you read not Objective where it said Subjective.
-
That is the reason I’m asking for her definition... I have my definition, you are right, and is different than Rand’s one. So we need to agree on a definition so we are talking of the same concept. My definition of “objectivity” can be everything that is green, and I can have an answer to all the questions pointed above. That do not help us to have a successful conversation.