Objective, Subjective, Confusion, Reconciliation

[firedragon]

I did.

I see no difference between a "subjective truth" and an "opinion."

Alright.

 

[firedragon]

I think you may need to read over it again.

I was saying that your post was rude.

Regardless of what the other person has posted, there's no excuse for rudeness.

Lol. Thanks for your commentary.

 

[rational experiences]

A subjective truth.

Object earths dusts.

The amount of energy is immense to own the presence of the dust. Yet most of it is unseen and Gods own.

Whose God?

The unseeable. The unknown. The original creation destruction as sin creator!

Oh so God as science O made formed sin holes as gods power to cause the creation of the dust?

Yes.

Is it humans truth?

No. As I don't own the natural history.

Ownership. Human greed your own dishonest truth.

Subjective truth.

 

[gnostic]

For me, my wife is prettier than Salma Hayek. I Enjoy coffee by the river. There are different people in the world who associate different things to a colour. For a lot of people Blue is an unpleasant colour when it comes to food. It spoils their want for food. A daughter will love her father's smell while the neighbour might hate it.

These are not options alone. they are actually human subjective truths.

Most of those have to do with peronsal taste or personal preference, which I considered to be personal opinions, therefore they are all subjective.

 

[Augustus]

see no difference between a "subjective truth" and an "opinion."

Probably because the examples given are confusing as some (if not all) are also opinions as presented.

A subjective truth is something that you perceive as being true.

An opinion is a subjective truth, for example,
"my wife is prettier than X"

How we perceive colour is a subjective truth that isn't really an opinion.

An orange might be orange and and apple green to me, but to a colourblind person they might be the same colour.

Or:

Is The Dress blue and black or white and gold? The answer lies in vision psychology | Marie Rogers

There is an object with objective light refracting properties, but how we perceive this in terms of colour is a "subjective truth".

 

[firedragon]

Most of those have to do with peronsal taste or personal preference, which I considered to be personal opinions, therefore they are all subjective.

They are all subjective. But not necessarily just opinions. Maybe you should read the OP and address that.

 

[gnostic]

Please do read a little bit on philosophy prior to making such bizarre statements.

Sorry, but there are many different types of philosophies. Some are ancient, some are contemporary or recent. Some are western, some are eastern.

Some philosophies covered only social and cultural issues, others deal with political philosophies. Some even relate to religious ideology, mysticism, etc.

And then there are focus on logic, and on science.

Often one philosophy would disagree with others, and there are even conflicts and oppressions, because philosophers are “human”, so they can be biased and very opinionated, and be hostile to whom they disagree with. People who follow one philosophy or the other, have tendencies to be defensive, when there are no agreement.

And most of the philosophies, past and present, have absolutely nothing to do with sciences.

But the questions for you are:

Which one of the hundreds of different philosophies are you talking about?

How would you determine which schools of thought are right or wrong?​

 

[firedragon]

Sorry, but there are many different types of philosophies. Some are ancient, some are contemporary or recent. Some are western, some are eastern.

Some philosophies covered only social and cultural issues, others deal with political philosophies. Some even relate to religious ideology, mysticism, etc.

And then there are focus on logic, and on science.

Often one philosophy would disagree with others, and there are even conflicts and oppressions, because philosophers are “human”, so they can be biased and very opinionated, and be hostile to whom they disagree with. People who follow one philosophy or the other, have tendencies to be defensive, when there are no agreement.

And most of the philosophies, past and present, have absolutely nothing to do with sciences.

But the questions for you are:

Which one of the hundreds of different philosophies are talking about?

How would you determine which schools of thought are right or wrong?​

Tell me gnostic. Imagine you are a Phd. And you have read all kinds of philosophy books from Aristotle to Descartes. Just imagine you are all of that. Now tell me according to which so called school of thought is "Subjective truths" an oxymoron?

Thanks.

 

[gnostic]

Tell me gnostic. Imagine you are a Phd. And you have read all kinds of philosophy books from Aristotle to Descartes. Just imagine you are all of that. Now tell me according to which so called school of thought is "Subjective truths" an oxymoron?

The all kinds of philosophies are not the same.

It is impossible to agree with them all, as different schools offered

And many of the ancient ones and the ones in the 19th century are outdated.

You haven’t answer my questions.

You wrote a reply to @Polymath257:

Yes, they do. And whether what they say is true or not often depends on the definitions used. For me, subjective human truths are all opinions *because* they are subjective.

Since you have not given *your* definitions and since we seem to differ in our definitions, I cannot say what *you* think.

Bizarre things you say do not matter. They are just bizarre.

Please do read a little bit on philosophy prior to making such bizarre statements. Especially after claiming you are a God in the studies of it.

There are hundreds of philosophies, not one philosophy.

Which “philosophy” was you talking about that Polymath257 should read?

Surely you don’t expect Polymath257 to know or to read them all, so which one?

 

[gnostic]

They are all subjective. But not necessarily just opinions. Maybe you should read the OP and address that.

The examples you have given, I have already answered. Those examples are all opinions, based on personal preferences and personal tastes.

 

[Polymath257]

Tell me gnostic. Imagine you are a Phd. And you have read all kinds of philosophy books from Aristotle to Descartes. Just imagine you are all of that. Now tell me according to which so called school of thought is "Subjective truths" an oxymoron?

Thanks.

Are you saying that philosophy ended with Descartes?

I personally like the philosophy of Hume more. of the ancient philosophers, I prefer Lucretius. I despise Hegel and Witgenstein.

 

[firedragon]

The all kinds of philosophies are not the same.

Specific question. Which philosopher says "subjective truth" is an oxymoron?

 

[firedragon]

Are you saying that philosophy ended with Descartes?

Is that a question or some kind of bizarre statement?

 

[firedragon]

The examples you have given, I have already answered. Those examples are all opinions, based on personal preferences and personal tastes.

Read the OP.

Thanks.

 

[firedragon]

I personally like the philosophy of Hume more. of the ancient philosophers, I prefer Lucretius. I despise Hegel and Witgenstein.

Which philosopher says "Subjective Truth" is an oxymoron?

 

[Polymath257]

Specific question. Which philosopher says "subjective truth" is an oxymoron?

Here is a Catholic philosopher that explicitly says as much:

No Such Thing As Subjective Truth

Do you want me to find others? By the way, I will likely disagree with the above philosopher in many ways. I just agree with him in this.

I can find many others that point out that 'subjective truth' is simply a type of opinion.

 

[firedragon]

Here is a Catholic philosopher that explicitly says as much:

No Such Thing As Subjective Truth

Do you want me to find others? By the way, I will likely disagree with the above philosopher in many ways. I just agree with him in this.

I can find many others that point out that 'subjective truth' is simply a type of opinion.

Saying there is no subjective truth is not the same as saying "subjective truth is an oxymoron".

If this is the type of philosophy you find after googling for it, I don't know what to say. Have a good day.

 

[Polymath257]

Saying there is no subjective truth is not the same as saying "subjective truth is an oxymoron".

If this is the type of philosophy you find after googling for it, I don't know what to say. Have a good day.

This shows you did not read anything from that link.

The first sentence literally says that the phrase 'subjective truth' is an oxymoron.

There are many philosophers who understand 'subjective truth' as simply being a form of opinion (and thereby not a truth). Do you really deny this? if so, you must be less well read in philosophy than you claim to be.

 

[firedragon]

This shows you did not read anything from that link.

The first sentence literally says that the phrase 'subjective truth' is an oxymoron.

There are many philosophers who understand 'subjective truth' as simply being a form of opinion (and thereby not a truth). Do you really deny this? if so, you must be less well read in philosophy than you claim to be.

No I did not read it. I read it now. It's a very simplistic piece. Way too simplistic. He does not address much of the discussion on it.

Anyway, it's nice to know that you are pushing for objective truth only. And mate. I never claimed that no philosopher ever denied there was subjective truth. You have never responded to the OP because you are just looking to argue over something over and over again.

If this is the kind of philosophical piece that you wish to push after googling, it's way too simplistic for someone who claims to be such a superior being. You should as him if he is pushing for Objective morality and what he thinks about God and if you agree with him on that too. Mate, like you, I don't go telling people I am a Phd, and that I am a guru in philosophy or anything of the nature. That's your appeal to self authority.

You said you like Hume. Wonder what Hume said about subjective truths.

Address the OP.

 

[Polymath257]

No I did not read it. I read it now. It's a very simplistic piece. Way too simplistic. He does not address much of the discussion on it.

It dealt with what needed to be dealt with. An easy argument is sufficient.

Anyway, it's nice to know that you are pushing for objective truth only. And mate. I never claimed that no philosopher ever denied there was subjective truth. You have never responded to the OP because you are just looking to argue over something over and over again.

I did respond to the OP: post #11.

If this is the kind of philosophical piece that you wish to push after googling, it's way too simplistic for someone who claims to be such a superior being. You should as him if he is pushing for Objective morality and what he thinks about God and if you agree with him on that too. Mate, like you, I don't go telling people I am a Phd, and that I am a guru in philosophy or anything of the nature. That's your appeal to self authority.

It is simplistic because the question isn't that complicated and a simple argument serves to answer it.

No, I probably don't agree with him about whether there is an objective morality or whether God exists. You asked for a philosopher that says that subjective truth is an oxymoron. I provided a link to one.

You said you like Hume. Wonder what Hume said about subjective truths.

Hume said very little about truth.

Address the OP.

I already did. Post #11.