User Tag List

First 3456 Last

Results 41 to 50 of 57

  1. #41
    Lex Parsimoniae Xander's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    9w8
    Socionics
    INTj
    Posts
    4,463

    Default

    I have a theory, it worked on my cat. I'm going to stick a bell on your brain Mr Wildcat. That way I can tell where you're thinking.
    Isn't it time for a colourful metaphor?

  2. #42
    Senior Member wildcat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    3,619

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Xander View Post
    Mirrors don't do a thing except reflect. Using mirrors is a poor analogy anyway because the image is turned upside down by the eye looking at the mirror.

    Thought is objective... it may not produce objective results but that's in a different arena is it not? Would it not be true to say that it would be objective in the context of the internal world regardless of if it is in the external world. Ergo concept would be objective at least initially.

    Oh and those numbers... a component is one a dichotomy is one... so the component which must by nature consist of elements of both sides of the dichotomy also equals one? If only such were believable.
    The image does not turn. This is what you said.
    Correct.

    The eye turns the image?
    It looks like it.

    The eye does not turn anything.
    Look is not objective.

  3. #43
    Senior Member wildcat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    3,619

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Xander View Post
    I have a theory, it worked on my cat. I'm going to stick a bell on your brain Mr Wildcat. That way I can tell where you're thinking.
    How do you find home if you are lost?
    Direction is subjective.

    Science is about meaning.
    A road is a way home.

    Object does not divide.
    Therefore it never turns.

    Mathematics is not about what is out there.
    It is about what is in here.

  4. #44
    Senior Member Llewellyn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    MBTI
    INtj
    Enneagram
    9w1
    Posts
    330

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Siegfried View Post
    Definantly these are some coherent definitions from linguists. The one that catches my eye though, objectivity=shared subjectivity, it sounds an adequate definition in most situations, but it can prove questionable. For example Galileo, believed the earth was round, if we take this definition of objectivity, the Earth was flat. Galileo was being subjective.

    To take CaptainChick's quote. A lie is a lie even if everyone believes it. The truth is the truth even if nobody believes it." - David Stevens. (Great quote btw )

    Shared subjectivity couldnít change the fact the Earth is round, so if objectivity is the closest thing to truth, this perspective is contradicted by factual scientific observation. So who is really objective here? Its an interesting question, if we take the position that objectivity is shared subjectivity then that means subjectivity doesnít have to be emotion filled, it is logical, in certain variables.
    So: truth <> (unequals) objectivity (nor shared subjectivity).

  5. #45
    Senior Member Llewellyn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    MBTI
    INtj
    Enneagram
    9w1
    Posts
    330

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Xander View Post
    Woudl it be true to say that thought is objective but the conclusions it draws are not?
    Thoughts (including the conclusions) are always translations and interpretations (Except, or less so, when you go automatic writing). First there is the specific language you use. It's an interpretation of information that we sense in some way. There is no language 'out there', not like there are trees (or there is, in an uninterpreted way).

  6. #46
    78% me Eruca's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    MBTI
    INxx
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Posts
    941

    Default

    It seems to me this thread is moving towards a conclusion I made a while ago. My conclusion was that few areas,such as maths, can have true objectivity applied to them. For most areas in this illogical world we require a sort of all-encompassing subjectivity, and, importantly, an understanding of its subjective nature.

    The world is like a piece of art, if you are unwilling to be subjective you will never appreciate or understand the entire painting.

    So maybe thought isn't objective because someone who thought entirely objectively would be unable to understand our world.

    Hell, maybe this is why some NTs are so depressed.
    I hope I'm wrong, but I believe that he is a fraud, and I think despite all of his rhetoric about being a champion of the working class, it will turn out to be hollow -- Bernie Sanders on Trump

  7. #47
    Senior Member wildcat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    3,619

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Xander View Post
    I have a theory, it worked on my cat. I'm going to stick a bell on your brain Mr Wildcat. That way I can tell where you're thinking.
    You create your thoughts?
    You are a creation of thoughts.

    Life is what is left.

  8. #48
    Filthy Apes! Kalach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Posts
    4,318

    Default

    Thought objective?

    Which "thought", the product or the process?

    And what "objective, the one where your thinking is unclouded by personal bias or the one where you think things that really are true?

    Somebody read Wittgenstein's Private Language argument and report back. I think it goes: if the language inside my head were truly private--that's to say, created by me and me alone, without at least some objective reference to something genuinely "shared" by other persons--aka "subjective"--then it will be private even from me too. Which is to say, a private language is impossible. Without an independent, perceivable, identifiable object of some kind, there is logically no basis for identifying the meaning of any of the terms of the language. You won't be able to tell yourself what words mean. Something like that.

    Next, you have to assume that God didn't fill up your head with a bunch of meanings and set you loose to roam around inside your apparent head with your supposed body and a bunch of other seeming people. Because he could have done that, and really you're just a Matrix-blob in an isolation tank. But you know what? If that's the way it worked, if some outside agency plugged a bunch of subjective facts into your head and made you dream a reality, then there is still something out there...

    So... yeah, thought is objective.

    Or at least it has a chance to be.

  9. #49
    Minister of Propagandhi ajblaise's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    7,917

    Default

    Thought is the rational and objective utilization of the mind, so yes. What we think about can be influenced by feelings, perceptions, interpretations, etc. but the thought itself is still thought.

  10. #50
    Senior Member wildcat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    3,619

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ajblaise View Post
    Thought is the rational and objective utilization of the mind, so yes. What we think about can be influenced by feelings, perceptions, interpretations, etc. but the thought itself is still thought.
    Understanding is in the beginning.
    Somebody says something, or you read something.. you do not get it.
    Suddenly you say: Heureka! Now I get it!
    You are back.

    Is a thought process rational in itself?
    Only when thought has returned to the thinker.
    Understanding is a catch.

    Under-stand. Ver-stehen. Capire?

    Not to stand. Nicht zu stehen. Capire.

    Thought is rational when nothing stands in the way. Then the mind is quiet.
    Who stands in the way? You do.

Similar Threads

  1. Why is nihilism "objective" when subjectivism technically is?
    By danseen in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 02-18-2014, 12:10 AM
  2. Replies: 8
    Last Post: 06-03-2009, 06:11 AM
  3. Order is Independent of Thought
    By wildcat in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 63
    Last Post: 12-08-2007, 07:02 AM
  4. To understand the object of study is to leave it
    By wildcat in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 11-23-2007, 03:18 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO