User Tag List

First 81617181920 Last

Results 171 to 180 of 223

  1. #171
    @.~*virinaĉo*~.@ Totenkindly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    FREE
    Enneagram
    594 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ne
    Posts
    42,333

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Morgan Le Fay View Post
    You keep getting bogged down in semantics. "It is very valuable" means nothing.
    Agreed. Value is subjective, not inherent. It's an orientation.

    The phrase is inherently empty of meaning.

    Quote Originally Posted by erm
    Yes, value has value intrinsically. You can't claim something exists without it inherently/intrinsically existing somewhere, it's a contradiction.
    Meh. You're mixing apples and oranges now.

    Existence is objective; it either exists or it doesn't.
    Value is subjective; it is dependent on the person doing the valuing.

    To whit:
    If I die, you continue to exist [unless I take you with me, mua ha ha].
    But any value I placed in you is gone with me.

    Value dies with the valuer.
    It is inherent to the valuer, not the valued.
    Existence is a different animal altogether.


    Sorta sucks to have to accept that value is a choice, not inherent.
    It took me years to get to that point because I didn't want to accept it.
    But I'd rather have my eyes open than shut.

    Quote Originally Posted by Zarathustra
    If you were to reframe the matter to this point of view, you would see that it is objectively true that to a particular part of the objective universe (the part that, if you were to be framing the issue from the point of view of a clear object/subject divide [the frame you've been working from], you would call the subject), that hamburger is objectively and inherently delicious.

    What you have shown thus far is that you are unwilling to reframe the issue in this way, and thus will not accept the above argument.

    The fact of the matter is that this frame is at least as sound (and possibly more) as the frame from which you are coming.
    Why?

    You've reframed the subjective quality of someone's personal taste in hamburgers to be objective.

    Justify that, and explain why it's still not bs... since two random people using the same "objective standards" might come up with completely different answers, which makes it even pointless to use the words objective/subjective, IMO.

    Anyone can win an argument by redefining terminology to suit their purposes.

    Quote Originally Posted by Zarathustra View Post
    Some would disagree.
    It's an irrelevant statement if subjective/objective have no meaning.
    Agreement and disagreement have no real meaning either.
    "Hey Capa -- We're only stardust." ~ "Sunshine"

    “Pleasure to me is wonder—the unexplored, the unexpected, the thing that is hidden and the changeless thing that lurks behind superficial mutability. To trace the remote in the immediate; the eternal in the ephemeral; the past in the present; the infinite in the finite; these are to me the springs of delight and beauty.” ~ H.P. Lovecraft

  2. #172
    Senior Member Nicodemus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    9,129

    Default

    erm's second sentence is wonderful. Did you see the much existing round square floating around it?

  3. #173
    @.~*virinaĉo*~.@ Totenkindly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    FREE
    Enneagram
    594 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ne
    Posts
    42,333

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nicodemus View Post
    erm's second sentence is wonderful. Did you see the much existing round square floating around it?
    Nice point.

    Yes, along with the round square, we're next going to start asking if God can create a rock that is too heavy for him to lift.
    "Hey Capa -- We're only stardust." ~ "Sunshine"

    “Pleasure to me is wonder—the unexplored, the unexpected, the thing that is hidden and the changeless thing that lurks behind superficial mutability. To trace the remote in the immediate; the eternal in the ephemeral; the past in the present; the infinite in the finite; these are to me the springs of delight and beauty.” ~ H.P. Lovecraft

  4. #174
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    5
    Posts
    1,672

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jennifer View Post
    Meh. You're mixing apples and oranges now.

    Existence is objective; it either exists or it doesn't.
    Value is subjective; it is dependent on the person doing the valuing.

    To whit:
    If I die, you continue to exist [unless I take you with me, mua ha ha].
    But any value I placed in you is gone with me.

    Value dies with the valuer.
    It is inherent to the valuer, not the valued.
    Existence is a different animal altogether.


    Sorta sucks to have to accept that value is a choice, not inherent.
    It took me years to get to that point because I didn't want to accept it.
    But I'd rather have my eyes open than shut.
    I'll continue to ignore the ad hominem arguments.

    Value exists. It has a subjective existence, but it exists. So it is objective by your own definition (and mine, which is the same).

    I notice how you accept that value is inherent to the valuer. Since no one, except maybe SS, has claimed value is inherent in the valued, I'll assume you just don't get the point.

    Pain is inherent in the one experiencing the pain, value is inherent in the one experiencing the value.

    Quote Originally Posted by Nicodemus View Post
    erm's second sentence is wonderful. Did you see the much existing round square floating around it?
    Try imagining a round square.

    Try imagining the blue square.

    Notice how you could imagine one, and not the other. Notice how you actually imagined the blue square (AKA imagination exists).

    Sure an image of a car is not a car, but the image of the car still exists. Dreams are the typical example of demonstrating mental objects existence.

  5. #175
    Senior Member Nicodemus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    9,129

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jennifer View Post
    Nice point.

    Yes, along with the round square, we're next going to start asking if God can create a rock that is too heavy for him to lift.
    In one episode of 'The Simpsons', Homer asks: "Can Jesus microwave a burrito so hot that he cannot eat it?" This question was once posed to one of my docents in a logic course. Next week he handed out a paper stating the following:

    The Logical Form of The Burrito Problem - Two Options

    (1) Because of his omnipotence, god can make burritos of any desired hotness.

    (2) Because of his omnipotence, god also possesses the palate to eat burritos of any desired hotness.

    (3) Therefore, god cannot make a burrito that is too hot for god.

    Two ways of reading (3):

    (3a) There is NO burrito for which it is true that it is too hot for god (and that he can make it).
    (3b) There IS a burrito for which it is true that it is too hot for god and that god cannot make it.

    (4) Therefore, god is not omnipotent.

    (2) implies (3a), but (3a) does not imply (4).

    (2) does not imply (3b), but (3b) implies (4).

    (3a) does not imply (3b).

  6. #176
    meh Salomé's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Posts
    10,540

    Default

    Jesus is God?

    That's illogical.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ivy View Post
    Gosh, the world looks so small from up here on my high horse of menstruation.

  7. #177
    Senior Member Nicodemus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    9,129

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by erm View Post
    Okay, your delusional then I guess.

    Try imagining a round square.

    Try imagining the blue square.

    Notice how you could imagine one, and not the other. Notice how you actually imagined the blue square (AKA imagination exists).

    Sure a TV image of a car is not a car, but the image of the car still exists.
    I, too, will ignore ad hominem arguments.

    The difference is very clear: First you say one thing (claim), then you say another (imagine).

    The other difference is just as clear: Your side is talking about res cogitans; the other side is talking about res extensa.

  8. #178
    Senior Member Nicodemus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    9,129

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Morgan Le Fay View Post
    Jesus is God?

    That's illogical.
    Of course, it's theology: Arian controversy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

  9. #179
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    5
    Posts
    1,672

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nicodemus View Post
    I, too, will ignore ad hominem arguments.
    I deleted that because I saw how it could be interpreted as ad hominem.

    It was actually an attack on your argument though, it means what your saying is absurd (which is a certain form of incorrect-ness). Someone who believes an absurdity is classed as delusional in my circles, but not necessarily in other circles.

    However, claiming to know the motivations of the people making the opposing argument is ad hominem. That is what I keep seeing. Some were used against you a while back.

  10. #180
    Senior Member Nicodemus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    9,129

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by erm View Post
    I deleted that because I saw how it could be interpreted as ad hominem.

    It was actually an attack on your argument though, it means what your saying is absurd (which is a certain form of incorrect-ness). Someone who believes an absurdity is classed as delusional in my circles, but not necessarily in other circles.

    However, claiming to know the motivations of the people making the opposing argument is ad hominem. That is what I keep seeing. Some were used against you a while back.
    I fancy ad hominem arguments are the salt in the soup: what you call 'that extra something'.

    This might be interesting to read: Existence is not a Predicate

Similar Threads

  1. THe Power of Love -- Kiss Saves 16 yr old Suicidal Kid
    By Santosha in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 06-24-2011, 09:16 AM
  2. Thoughts on the ending of Death Note (Spoilers be warned)
    By Savage Idealist in forum Arts & Entertainment
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 03-22-2011, 08:10 AM
  3. [MBTItm] The merit of stuffed animals
    By nightning in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 51
    Last Post: 09-29-2007, 10:49 AM
  4. A Note on the Problem of Induction
    By reason in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 09-19-2007, 08:47 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