Defluffing: Why "I believe, thus it's right for me" is wrong

[TeaDidikai]

Hard Subjective Moralists:

The problem with the position that "Reality is subjective, thus if I believe it, it's true" is that it starts by making an objective statement.

Hence, if reality really is subjective, it's defined by an objective position (the absolute statement that all is subjective), which creates a paradox. On the other hand, if it's subjective for you, but I hold it to be objective, then it's objective.

That's the conflict from the affirmative position. In the negative, we see the statement that "There is no objective reality", in which case we just pointed out a statement about the objective nature reality, that it doesn't exist- thus it does. wink

Soft Subjective Moralists:

If the assertion is that what is true for one isn't true for another, you've defined a statement that for it to have any meaning, has to be true for everyone, even if it isn't true for them (if they believe in objective reality), thus, you have defined something that disproves itself.

Nihilism: The idea that we can't actually know anything for sure is self defeating because we cannot know that Nihilism is valid for sure.

Cute- no?  

[Gho the Girl]

I think that what people believe has meaning for them. I think in order for us to function or understand and tolerate others, we need to be self-opposing entities. I believe certain things, things which should be true for all, but in order to function, and not be a hypocrite, I need to allow these other viewpoints to exist. Further, I don't want to simply toss out all of my opinions, as I think they're the right ones.

Was this an appropriate response?

EDIT: and yes, it was cute. whee  

[TeaDidikai]

Gho the Girl

I think that what people believe has meaning for them.

Which is fine, but that doesn't make it true.

Quote:

I think in order for us to function or understand and tolerate others, we need to be self-opposing entities. I believe certain things, things which should be true for all, but in order to function, and not be a hypocrite, I need to allow these other viewpoints to exist.

I agree up to a point. I don't need to tolerate others on principle. I have discretion for a reason.

Quote:

Further, I don't want to simply toss out all of my opinions, as I think they're the right ones.

You can think they're right- but if you think they're right in spite of being demonstratively wrong, that's a whole different kettle of fish.  

[Gho the Girl]

TeaDidikai

Gho the Girl

I think that what people believe has meaning for them.

Which is fine, but that doesn't make it true.

Of course.

Quote:

Quote:

I think in order for us to function or understand and tolerate others, we need to be self-opposing entities. I believe certain things, things which should be true for all, but in order to function, and not be a hypocrite, I need to allow these other viewpoints to exist.

I agree up to a point. I don't need to tolerate others on principle. I have discretion for a reason.

Yes, I agree vehemently, I just didn't mention it as I took it for granted that it would be understood that exceptions exist to most any rule or assertion.

Quote:

Quote:

Further, I don't want to simply toss out all of my opinions, as I think they're the right ones.

You can think they're right- but if you think they're right in spite of being demonstratively wrong, that's a whole different kettle of fish.

It is, but what I was trying to say was I shouldn't discard them before having them be demonstrated as wrong, or if I haven't yet established that there is even a conflict of ideologies, which is related to my own issue.  

[TeaDidikai]

Gho the Girl

TeaDidikai

Gho the Girl

I think that what people believe has meaning for them.

Which is fine, but that doesn't make it true.

Of course.

Quote:

Quote:

I think in order for us to function or understand and tolerate others, we need to be self-opposing entities. I believe certain things, things which should be true for all, but in order to function, and not be a hypocrite, I need to allow these other viewpoints to exist.

I agree up to a point. I don't need to tolerate others on principle. I have discretion for a reason.

Yes, I agree vehemently, I just didn't mention it as I took it for granted that it would be understood that exceptions exist to most any rule or assertion.

Quote:

Quote:

Further, I don't want to simply toss out all of my opinions, as I think they're the right ones.

You can think they're right- but if you think they're right in spite of being demonstratively wrong, that's a whole different kettle of fish.

It is, but what I was trying to say was I shouldn't discard them before having them be demonstrated as wrong, or if I haven't yet established that there is even a conflict of ideologies, which is related to my own issue.

Very fair.

The concept of Subjective Reality and Objective Reality are mutually exclusive. One can ascribe value in a "personal" sense, but that's still a personal and objective thing.  

[Gho the Girl]

TeaDidikai

Gho the Girl

TeaDidikai

Gho the Girl

I think that what people believe has meaning for them.

Which is fine, but that doesn't make it true.

Of course.

Quote:

Quote:

I think in order for us to function or understand and tolerate others, we need to be self-opposing entities. I believe certain things, things which should be true for all, but in order to function, and not be a hypocrite, I need to allow these other viewpoints to exist.

I agree up to a point. I don't need to tolerate others on principle. I have discretion for a reason.

Yes, I agree vehemently, I just didn't mention it as I took it for granted that it would be understood that exceptions exist to most any rule or assertion.

Quote:

Quote:

Further, I don't want to simply toss out all of my opinions, as I think they're the right ones.

You can think they're right- but if you think they're right in spite of being demonstratively wrong, that's a whole different kettle of fish.

It is, but what I was trying to say was I shouldn't discard them before having them be demonstrated as wrong, or if I haven't yet established that there is even a conflict of ideologies, which is related to my own issue.

Very fair.

The concept of Subjective Reality and Objective Reality are mutually exclusive. One can ascribe value in a "personal" sense, but that's still a personal and objective thing.

Value is objective?  

[TeaDidikai]

Gho the Girl

Value is objective?

Values exist objectively. The soda machine isn't going to suddenly be $.12 instead of a $1.00 just because I think a soda is only worth a dime a my two cents. whee  

[Cyrus the Elder]

Gho the Girl

Value is objective?

To an extent in the very least. I might value $10,000 and two one way plane-tickets to Europe more than a glass of water. Somehow I don't think a man stranded in the middle of a desert would agree wink  

[Gho the Girl]

TeaDidikai

Gho the Girl

Value is objective?

Values exist objectively. The soda machine isn't going to suddenly be $.12 instead of a $1.00 just because I think a soda is only worth a dime a my two cents. whee

surprised that's true. Although I often do disagree with how people value things.

"1.25 for a can of Coca-Cola??!?!?"  

[Cyrus the Elder]

TeaDidikai

Gho the Girl

Value is objective?

Values exist objectively. The soda machine isn't going to suddenly be $.12 instead of a $1.00 just because I think a soda is only worth a dime a my two cents. whee

I dunno, wouldn't someone at the outset have to decide it was valued at the price they're offering to sell it for based upon the various costs of labor and materials and then subjectively value their own time and effort and come to a conclusion of how much it should be sold for and weigh that against what the popular conception of its worth would be so as to ensure it would still sell at the point at which they can maximize profit? ninja

Edit: I can see what you're saying in a way, I think it comes down to two different types of value. Objective: "This is what it costs" and Subjective: "This is what I'll give". I wouldn't say it's entirely objective though as something can be more valuable to one person than to another, I know I own a few things I'd give all my money to have, which others wouldn't pay $1 for.  

[TeaDidikai]

Gho the Girl

"1.25 for a can of Coca-Cola??!?!?"

Couldn't say. Most of them are energy drinks... and I don't really use the machines. sweatdrop

Cyrus>> Actually, in Econ 101 there are formulas for all that stuff. Math is pretty objective.

But that's beside the point. There is an objective value for the product, and then there is a personal value for the product. The personal value is still objectively belonging to that person.  

[Cyrus the Elder]

TeaDidikai

Cyrus>> Actually, in Econ 101 there are formulas for all that stuff. Math is pretty objective.

But that's beside the point. There is an objective value for the product, and then there is a personal value for the product. The personal value is still objectively belonging to that person.

*cough* *is doing undergrad in Econ* ninja

Well, my point is, things only have the value we assign to them because we assign it to them. As one of my tutors would have said "If tomorrow everyone started trading in chickens instead of money, would your $10 still truly hold the same worth?"

I guess I'm looking at things from the supplier side more than the consumer side, but in the end, the demand curve for a product is still fairly subjective (except in certain cases) and therefore what it is valued at is dependent on subjective value assigned to an item by the consumer.  

[TeaDidikai]

Cyrus the Elder

*cough* *is doing undergrad in Econ* ninja

Well, my point is, things only have the value we assign to them because we assign it to them. As one of my tutors would have said "If tomorrow everyone started trading in chickens instead of money, would your $10 still truly hold the same worth?"

Yep. Because there is a difference between value and worth when speaking from a psychological perspective.

Quote:

I guess I'm looking at things from the supplier side more than the consumer side, but in the end, the demand curve for a product is still fairly subjective (except in certain cases) and therefore what it is valued at is dependent on subjective value assigned to an item by the consumer.

I'm suggesting that the demand curve varies, but it isn't so much subjective as much as it's contextual- and that context is objective.  

[Recursive Paradox]

This reminds me of my old signature.

"In reality, reality is a lie."

Ah, I love paradoxical statements.  

[Falhalterra]

Recursive Paradox

This reminds me of my old signature.

"In reality, reality is a lie."

Ah, I love paradoxical statements.

Paradoxes, paradigms.

Penguins. dramallama lol But yeah, me too. Fun topic.