Well, if you look up Ayn Rand Objectivism you will find the same effect as the ones you describe in effect.
So to me, it is not about religion as such. It is about the ideas of The True Good and Right Life. And that is not unique to religion.
Okay. Well, since I am not a materialist nor an idealist, we could properly go a round or two about materialism. Or rather what we actually know about objective reality in itself.
Yes, I get it. You are subjective there and talking to me subjectively, that I subjectively have to keep the 2 part. I do get it. You will always as a human end in how you make sense of the world and you just did that.
The point of this exchange to not eliminate the objective part of the world...
I have reported you to the Council for Counter Revolutionary Activities and you will now be picked up and thusly executed. The proof of how it is in New York, is that you will never post here again.
And that you are now soon dead, assures me that the revolution will never stop. ;)
Long live the...
Yeah, the problem is that if I see a cat and tells you it is multicolored, you could see that too under certain conditions. But you can't see a physical object. That is an mental abstract idea in your mind.
Now you can as you do describe how you experince and understand something, but that is...
No, the problem is that everything is not an objective relationship between a certain cognitive state in a brain and observable measurents and data.
That is the core philosophical assumption in your model. That which you do in a subjective sense as a behaviour in effect in your brain, is in...
Yeah, it is not known in the sense of the hard natural science as such, since it rests on the assumption that culture is in effect mental processes in brains.. But rather the classical version is by Alexander Luria. Look him up, if you have to. The broader field is culture psychology
So you don't actually know if a human is a male or woman, if you meet one. That doesn't make sense. Let me explain, since you use science in effect as XX and XY.
If you were given a series of photos of humans, facial ones and general frontal ones and asked to rate male and female, you could do...
Yeah, but all of your experinces are not just objective as per your defintion of objective.
Consider how come we have the word subjective, if it was not the case that we actually experinced that. If subjective is a part of being a human, then you can't really be objective all the time.
That is...
Yeah, but all of our processes are not just the 5 senses as thus objective.
When you say something makes sense to you, you don't use your external interaction with the rest of reality. You experince how a part of your brain works as your brain. I.e. you evaluate as you.
Yeah, but your informed and uninformed might both be relative and neither universal. That is the problem. If your informed is still subjective and relative to your understanding, it is not universal.