I don't know how to make an untranslatable language. — frank
...which takes us back to the OP...What is salient here is that while chess is a game for two players, it is possible to play it by oneself. What would be absurd would be to conclude that therefore chess must essentially be a game for one player, which is occasionally played by two people - intersubjectively. — Banno
Well, what are the differences between objectivity and intersubjectivity? — TheMadFool
I see. Doesn't that open you up a little to Banno's complaints that
you cannot therefore use the privacy of pain as evidence for subjectivism - at least, not without a vicious circularity.
— Banno — Isaac
You've defined 'subjectivity' in terms that assume the existence of subjective properties (conscious awareness, rational thought, sensory perception, and the ability to feel pain), so we can't then prove something like pain is subjective. It's just in the list there, the list of things you associate with subjectivity. It would be tantamount to saying "pain is subjective because it's in the list of things which are subjective". — Isaac
You sure you want to throw in your lot with a bloke with an eccentric notion of equality, Mww? — Banno
What is salient here is that while chess is a game for two players, it is possible to play it by oneself. What would be absurd would be to conclude that therefore chess must essentially be a game for one player, which is occasionally played by two people - intersubjectively. — Banno
...which takes us back to the OP...
Well, what are the differences between objectivity and intersubjectivity? — TheMadFool — Banno
No matter how we break up these multi-propped terms, we end up only with individual props which are themseves shared. I don't see where you end with with subjective meanings. — Isaac
You sure you want to throw in your lot with a bloke with an eccentric notion of equality, Mww? — Banno
If you were feral, I don't think your natural capacity to speak would be activated. — frank
Point is, your private language would be built off work done by others — frank
I dunno....a feral cat does the same basic stuff as a regular cat. A feral human, if there could be such a thing, might just be what we’d call uncivilized. Still have the same innate capacities, I would guess. Again....the reality of it would be inconceivable, even if the logic is not. — Mww
Point is, your private language would be built off work done by others — frank
Agreed, hence my (edited) unloaded consciousness stipulation. — Mww
No - I would not use that word; nor the notion of reality that seems implicit. Far too broad.So would you argue that the set of things we declare to be real is largely produced intersubjectively — frank
Obviously the world “subjective” has a socially constructed meaning. — khaled
Subjectivity is not socially constructed.
— khaled
Why are you so sure? Why so certain?
The myth has you in its thrall; how could things be otherwise? — Banno
Since chess is a social construct, playing chess by yourself is also a social construct...What is salient here is that while chess is a game for two players, it is possible to play it by oneself. What would be absurd would be to conclude that therefore chess must essentially be a game for one player, which is occasionally played by two people - intersubjectively. — Banno
Since chess is a social construct, playing chess by yourself is also a social construct... — Banno
I don't recall agreeing to such a claim anyway. — Banno
Subjectivity is not socially constructed.
— khaled
Why are you so sure? Why so certain?
The myth has you in its thrall; how could things be otherwise? — Banno
I'm too tired at the moment to follow the confusion in this discussion. — Banno
I don't see how "Subjectivity is intersubjective" is the same as "without the word, the emotion would somehow no longer be experienced", — Banno
That's fine. I had a feeling you wouldn't be able to answer. — frank
You were pressing me to explain why pains are subjective but noses are not. I offered an explanation in terms of personhood. A better explanation, more relevant to the OP, might be that the subjective is whatever aggregates to make the “intersubjective”. My view is that it’s individual people. — Luke
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.