Why can't you just admit you were wrong m-theory? You have too much ego, that is why! just say "intrapersona, i was wrong. 6 foot high doesn't exist objectively, it is a subjective interpretation of a socially accepted standard of measurement OF sensory information that says NOTHING about objectivity".

But no, you can't do that can you? Know why? Caus your a bigot!

Right it is only subjective.
Because you can't go beyond the subjective.

This means it is not an objective fact what you have said.

If it was an objective fact, then you would have gone beyond the subjective, which you cannot do.

You mean it is not true unless I voluntarily admit I am wrong?

Caus your a bigot! — intrapersona

lol, you are trolling me right now?

lol, you are trolling me right now? — m-theory

Pretty much, but sort of true... you did concede. First u said there was objective truth (6 foot) now u say that there is only subjective truth... there is only interpretation, no objective truth anywhere.

The sooner you admit that the sooner you can die and stop posting stupid comments on here... jk :P

No I am saying that what you said is not objectively true.
At least not without being self refuting.

No I am saying that what you said is not objectively true.
At least not without being self refuting. — m-theory

What that 6 foot is only an interpretation? how is that self refuting?

We can't go beyond subjectivity
is refuted
if it is supposed to be an objective fact

We can't go beyond subjectivity
is refuted
if it is supposed to be an objective fact — m-theory

it is a subjective fact, as i stated already which you continue to ignore... now how about we talk about your bigotry in not conceding you were false in saying 6 foot is objective fact?

Yes but it is not an objective fact.
So why should I care?

It does not refute anything about objective facts.

Yes but it is not an objective fact.
So why should I care?

It does not refute anything about objective facts. — m-theory

So you should only care about objective facts? They don't exist, as far as we know any way. now how about we talk about your bigotry in not conceding you were false in saying 6 foot is an objective fact?

That runs afoul with the same issue.

It is not an objective fact that objective fact's don't exist.
If it was, it would be self refuting.

No it's a subjective fact, and you won't ever find any objective facts because that is impossible via what reason can tell us. And plus, you say you only care about objective facts?? now how about we talk about your bigotry in not conceding you were false in saying 6 foot is an objective fact?

It is not an objective fact that it is impossible to find any objective facts.
See the pattern yet?

By definition you have not refuted anything about objective facts.
At least not without being self refuting.

It is not an objective fact that it is impossible to find any objective facts.
See the pattern yet?

By definition you have not refuted anything about objective facts.
At least not without being self refuting. — m-theory

You keep telling me I am saying it is an objective fact that it is impossible to find any objective facts. What is wrong with you? We have already established that it is subjective fact AND have repeated that it is about 3-4 times... seriously?!?!

now how about we talk about your bigotry in not conceding you were false in saying 6 foot is an objective fact? You know 6 foot is an interpretation of sensory information and there is no objective fact about that.

You keep telling me I am saying it is an objective fact that it is impossible to find any objective facts. What is wrong with you? We have already established that it is subjective fact AND have repeated that it is about 3-4 times... seriously?!?! — intrapersona

Subjective facts don't prove anything about objective facts.

So what, it is a subjective fact, who cares?

You were saying 6 foot is objective fact. can't be proven.

objective facts don't exist. there is only subjectivity, that is all you know that is all you will ever know!

anything you claim is objective fact is a subjective interpretation.

now how about we talk about your bigotry in not conceding you were false in saying 6 foot is an objective fact?

objective facts don't exist. — intrapersona

This is not an objective fact.

there is only subjectivity — intrapersona

This is not an objective fact

that is all you know that is all you will ever know! — intrapersona

This is not an objective fact

Nothing you have here has any consequences for objective facts.

Basically by saying there is only the subjective you set yourself up so that you can't disprove that anything is objective.

It is impossible, as you point out.

The subjective can't disprove the objective.

This is not an objective fact

Nothing you have here has any consequences for objective facts. — m-theory

thats because there ARE no objective facts, there is no such thing as that. EVERYTHING is subjective. So you can't say "that is not objective fact" because such a thing doesn't exist.

now how about we talk about your bigotry in not conceding you were false in saying 6 foot is an objective fact?

thats because there ARE no objective facts — intrapersona

This is only subjective.

EVERYTHING is subjective. — intrapersona

This is only subjective.

You still haven't proven anything about the objective.

From you position, that everything is subjective, you can't prove there is no objective facts.
You can only prove what is subjective to you.
Which amounts to your opinion.

So what, in your opine everything is subjective.
Meanwhile in the real world there are objective facts which you have done nothing to disprove.

You still haven't proven anything about the objective. — m-theory

nor have you, i refute it exists (at least in the way we think it does or that it can be obtained truthfully), you postulate it does exist but can;t provide evidence for it...

looks like I win

From your position you can't know if we can or can not obtain truthfully objective facts.

You assume truth is objective. — intrapersona

Odd thing to say to me if you've read many of my posts.

If I perceive something truthfully — intrapersona

But you don't perceive value. That's because value is simply something you do.

How can something that is unequally distributed and has the potential to be a source of even more suffering in the short or long run be a reason for embracing life or providing new life to other individuals (i.e. reason for procreation), or being in any way a reason for having a positive outlook in regards to the lot of the human experience? — schopenhauer1

It seems to me that you are asking for a "universal" reason. But we wrestle with these issues passionately as individuals (even if this sometimes includes public discussions.) Some "optimists" and "pessimists" project their own experience and worldview outward, assuming that the value of life is more or less objective and therefore treating as in issue for "super-science." By this "super-science" I just mean a certain vision of philosophy that assumes that thinking person at their desk can "crack" or "solve" the most profound issues of life (including its value) for everyone, not just themselves, no matter this individual's relatively limited and particular experience.

Why are you always focusing on proof?