It is not voluntary that I measure 6 ft, whether I measure or someone else does. — m-theory

Doesn't matter whether it is volentary or not, this is not about freewill. All you have is your observation of 6 foot and other peoples observations of 6 foot. You infer truth from the fact that other people are telling you you are 6 foot, if everyone told you you were 2 foot tall and you looked 6 foot, you would be in quite a mess.

THEREFORE, we don't really know how tall you are... we can only guess by what we see. Which is all we are actually describing anyway. When I say you are 6 foot tall, what is implicit in that is that "to my sensory experience and possibly others" you appear 6 foot tall, or at least that is what is being show to me from external reality. THERE IS NO OBJECTIVE TRUTH THAT IS READILY PERCEIVABLE, IT IS ONLY AN INFERENCE. Come on man, you know better than this bickering nonsense, you know this!

It is not voluntary that I measure 6 ft, whether I measure or someone else does.

I am 6 ft tall in the sense that this is what I will measure.
Others, nor myself, cannot simply decide that this is not what I will measure.

It is not subject to interpretation as far as the measuring mechanism is concerned.

I am 6 ft tall in the sense that this is what I will measure.
Others, nor myself, cannot simply decide that this is not what I will measure.

It is not subject to interpretation as far as the measuring mechanism is concerned. — m-theory

Yes it is, EVERYTHING is subject to interpretation. You measure your height WITH YOUR MIND and not with an objective computer than confirms absolute objective truth which would be impossible because you are stuck in subjectivity.

You say "I am 6 ft tall in the sense that this is what I will measure." and don't even realize that by saying "I measure" confirms you to a position of complete subjectivity. To say "I measure" means to say I am subjective and I will subjectively measure this height.

Shouldn't we be discussing that Pussy IS Really a Source for Meaningful Life and Optimism? Sorry... I meant "relationships"?

No I measure with a tape, which does not have a mind.

What that tape will measure does not depend on it's mind, it has none, so it does not interpret what I measure.

No I measure with a tape, which does not have a mind. — m-theory

Omg, are you stupid man? The tape is IN your mind? ffs! EVERYTHING is just interpretation.

Shouldn't we be discussing that Pussy IS Really a Source for Meaningful Life and Optimism? Sorry... I meant "relationships"?

Do you agree that tapes do not have minds and thus do not interpret what is being measured?

If so wouldn't you agree that is the very reason for using a tape, so that when I say 6 ft, and you say 6 ft, we can refer to something that is not just an interpretation but a thing which is consistently a given finite length?

You measure your height WITH YOUR MIND — intrapersona

How, exactly, does "your mind" measure anything all by itself?

Shouldn't we be discussing that Pussy IS Really a Source for Meaningful Life and Optimism? Sorry... I meant "relationships"? — intrapersona

What you are experiencing in this pointless discussion is what passes for pussy (errr, meaningful relationships) among philosophers. Actual pussy is not interested in this kind of intellectual pusillanimous pussyfooting.

lol

Do you agree that tapes do not have minds and thus do not interpret what is being measured?

If so wouldn't you agree that is the very reason for using a tape, so that when I say 6 ft, and you say 6 ft, we can refer to something that is not just an interpretation but a thing which is consistently a given finite length? — m-theory

Very simply, tape=sensory information -> You = Your brain -> Tape goes in to your brain and then you infer that there exists an outside world with "objectively measurable quantities".

Then you end up posting on forums that objective states actually exist because "I CAN SEE THEM WITH MY EYES" Therefore they are objective lol

Yes but you did not answer my question.
Do tapes interpret?

How, exactly, does "your mind" measure anything all by itself? — Bitter Crank

You just asked me to explain how sensory information is integrated within the nervous system? Or to paraphrase "how can you calculate 2+2 with your mind at all".

Sensory experience is integrated and formed to make a model of reality, then stupid people like m-theory end up thinking an actual world out there exists instead of them seeing sensory information about something which we know nothing of apart from small portions of data exclusively coming through our sensory apparatuses. It is absolutely foolish to think you have some footing over what objectivity is.

I don't need to, the answer is already in my responses. Stop asking stupid question like does a tape have consciousness and try to see how ridiculous you are sounding. You are trying to prove objective states actually exist, lol... good luck mate!

You are not being very reasonable.
Either tapes can interpret or they can not.
Which would you say is the case?

No

Don't you agree that is why we use tapes, because they do not interpret?

Follow up question.
If your life depended on it.
Would you rather I simply interpret what is 6 ft, or use a tape measure?

yes, but you misphrased that. We don't use tapes BECAUSE they don't interpreted... an interpreting tape measure would be useful albeit sci fi... we use tapes as a tool.

If your life depended on it.
Would you rather I simply guess what is 6 ft, or use a tape measure? — m-theory

the fact that you guess something does not have anything to say about the proof of objectivity. Where is 6 foot exactly? Is it 0.0000000000001cm above 5.9999999999?

Things don't exist how you think they do, the sooner you embrace it the better.

The point I am making is that, for practical purposes, some things are less subject to interpretation than others.

The sooner you embrace this fact the better off you will be.

The point I am making is that, for practical purposes, some things are less subject to interpretation than others.

The sooner you embrace this fact the better off you will be. — m-theory

That is true, a shadow of a shark in the water is more open to interpretation than if it is clearly attached to your leg BUT, does the shark have objective existence just because it is chewing on your leg?? This is practically less subject to interpretation... but that is only practically and that is NOT what we are talking about so don't confuse the two..

We are talking about absolutely, you are trying to say there exists objectivity and yet you can't prove it yet. You just have some failing statements like saying "does a tape measure interpret".

The fact is you can't go beyond your subjectivity, and all you have are inferences about objectivity. That is A FACT m-theory, don't you get that?

I can't prove it to you.
I am fine with that, as long as you agree that some things a true involuntarily and that it is practical to use measurements.

The fact is you can't go beyond your subjectivity, and all you have are inferences about objectivity. That is A FACT m-theory, don't you get that? — intrapersona

It is not an objective fact.
After all you can't go beyond subjectivity remember.

It is not an objective fact.
After all you can't go beyond subjectivity remember. — m-theory

So it it isn't a fact that you can't go beyond your subjectivity because you can't go beyond subjectivity? seems circular to me.

Like you said in this thread already, these are truths about subjectivity... as are all truths. In fact can't say anything about objective truth.

Nevertheless this is a subjective truth for all people. So stop trying to make out like there is objective truth like 6foot tall.

I can't prove it to you.
I am fine with that, as long as you agree that some things a true involuntarily and that it is practical to use measurements. — m-theory

I don't agree with you that it is involuntary and practical... I MADE THAT ASSERTION TO BEGIN WITH! You were the one who came along and tried to say that 6 foot tall actually exists in the world... but now you have been proven wrong and are too much of a piss ant to concede and say you were wrong.

So it it isn't a fact that you can't go beyond your subjectivity because you can't go beyond subjectivity? seems circular to me. — intrapersona

Me too.
I wonder why people argue that.

Like you said in this thread already, these are truths about subjectivity... as are all truths. In fact can't say anything about objective truth. — intrapersona

Then you can't say it is an objective fact that we can't go beyond subjectivity.
That would be self refuting.

Then you can't say it is an objective fact that we can't go beyond subjectivity.
That would be self refuting. — m-theory

Like I stated in that sentence already "these are truths about subjectivity... as are all truths. In fact can't say anything about objective truth."

So of course what I am saying is subjective truth...