There is no such thing as 'truth'!

[Ponce]

That would be like If I were to asked you "Do you believe in God?"... if you say NO they all that you are saying is that there is a God but that you don't believe in him......... the true answer would be "I have no opinion".

[Lanya]

What I posted not too long ago pretty much applies as my assumption here: Truth isn't something that can be thought, stated, verbalized, visualized, etc. (and I think some other people have posted the same thing).

[Maguru]

Originally Posted by Angela

Well, that's your reality, anyway.

It's not only mine though. There is a difference between fact and fantasy.

[Angela]

Originally Posted by Maguru

It's not only mine though. There is a difference between fact and fantasy.

It's interesting that you yourself have chastised others for declaiming their opinions or theories as fact, and yet here you are declaring that "Reality isn't subjective".. and implying that your point of view is fact, and dissenting points of view are fantasy -- that people who don't think as you do in this matter are simply wrong.

So here you are, in the middle of your subjective point of view, the world occurring for you the way it does, hanging around with me, whose perspective is coming from an entirely different direction. Surrounded by "others" whose points of view are some like yours, some like mine, some completely and utterly different from either. And yet you insist that reality is not subjective.

I am reminded of that guy who kept insisting that the direction that the ballerina appeared to spin in was completely objective, that the observer had absolutely nothing to do with it, and that people who think they could affect the direction she appears to spin are delusional if not downright dangerous!

[Spartan]

Is reality not objective by definition? My understanding of the word 'reality' is that which is really there, independent of whether anyone thinks or knows it is there.

Berkeley’s subjective idealism claims bodies only exist when perceived; his slogan was 'to be is to be perceived'. However, even he conceded that it is wrong to believe that an object's existence depends on our perception of it, because otherwise it would be impossible to make sense of error. Thus he reconciled this fact by introducing an 'eternal spirit' that constantly perceives everything, ensuring everything remains in existence, even when we aren't looking. Thus he replaced the external world with the mind of an 'eternal spirit'. However, why not just assume things exist independently of perception? Then there is no need to conjure up an 'eternal spirit' in who's mind everything resides.

[Maguru]

Originally Posted by Angela

It's interesting that you yourself have chastised others for declaiming their opinions or theories as fact, and yet here you are declaring that "Reality isn't subjective".. and implying that your point of view is fact, and dissenting points of view are fantasy -- that people who don't think as you do in this matter are simply wrong.

So here you are, in the middle of your subjective point of view, the world occurring for you the way it does, hanging around with me, whose perspective is coming from an entirely different direction. Surrounded by "others" whose points of view are some like yours, some like mine, some completely and utterly different from either. And yet you insist that reality is not subjective.

I am reminded of that guy who kept insisting that the direction that the ballerina appeared to spin in was completely objective, that the observer had absolutely nothing to do with it, and that people who think they could affect the direction she appears to spin are delusional if not downright dangerous!

It seems (but it may be my perception and untrue) that you are making this into a personal issue. It is my opinion that your response is a perfect example of subjectivity clouding the issue.

Angela, I wonder if I had preceded my statements below with : 'It is my belief' or 'it is my opinion' or 'it is my perception' and deriving from e.g. 'my life experiences,' would this be more acceptable to you? Would you then be able to consider my meaning objectively?

Reality isn't subjective. It's just humans' perceptions, opinions and judgements that are subjective.

[Angela]

Originally Posted by Maguru

It seems (but it may be my perception and untrue) that you are making this into a personal issue. It is my opinion that your response is a perfect example of subjectivity clouding the issue.

Angela, I wonder if I had preceded my statements below with : 'It is my belief' or 'it is my opinion' or 'it is my perception' and deriving from e.g. 'my life experiences,' would this be more acceptable to you? Would you then be able to consider my meaning objectively?

You're right -- I consider it a personal thing that you, as one person, have a subjective point of view, and I, another person, have another subjective point of view. Our responses to each other are subjective, or as you say, personal. You say that reality isn't subjective, and I point out that perhaps your experience of a non-subjective reality is, itself, subjective. How is that clouding the issue?

To answer your questions, no, your using qualifiers wouldn't make what you say more acceptable to me. What you say is perfectly acceptable and I accept it without qualification, because I recognize it is your subjective point of view. I am amused that you seem to be overlooking that you have stridently objected to the exact behavior that you are exhibiting here (declaring your point of view as fact), but that doesn't mean it's not acceptable. Quite the opposite, in fact.

Would I be able to consider your meaning objectively? No, there is not such thing (insert qualifier here, if you need one. ). I have only a subjective point of view, whichever one I am using at any particular time, through which to consider your meaning. Just like you.

[Maguru]

Would I be able to consider your meaning objectively? No, there is not such thing (insert qualifier here, if you need one. ). I have only a subjective point of view, whichever one I am using at any particular time, through which to consider your meaning. Just like you.

I get your point if you mean that you have a one-sided view point and when anything disagrees with your subjective view point you accept that it is their subjective view point and let it go.

No, not just like me. See 3a.

ob·jec·tive (b-jktv)
adj.
1. Of or having to do with a material object.
2. Having actual existence or reality.
3.
a. Uninfluenced by emotions or personal prejudices: an objective critic. See Synonyms at fair1.
b. Based on observable phenomena; presented factually: an objective appraisal.

[Angela]

I get your point if you mean that you have a one-sided view point and when anything disagrees with your subjective view point you accept that it is their subjective view point and let it go.

No, that's not what I mean. I mean: when you declare that "reality isn't subjective" (or any other opinion), you're stating how you see things through your own subjective lens, which is the same thing I do when I state my opinions. In that way, we are the same. Do you have some way of proving that there is an objective or ultimate truth to your opinion? If you did, it would be worthy of publication, because people have been searching for provable, ultimate truth for quite some time now and I would love to see it! You could probably make some real (!) money that way.

Speaking of one-sided viewpoints, didn't you just declare that "reality isn't subjective" is a fact, and imply that it's a fantasy to believe otherwise? However, I absolutely agree with you that "when anything disagrees with (my) subjective view point (I) accept that it is their subjective view point and let it go." I'm totally with you on that one.