Skepdick wrote: ↑Wed Mar 10, 2021 3:36 pm
VVilliam wrote: ↑Tue Mar 09, 2021 7:34 pm
Morally is not objectively sourced, but subjectively sourced.
Begging the question.
Objectively speaking, there is no such thing as subjectivity.
The object cannot speak through the subject
Subjectively speaking, there is no such thing as objectivity.
The subject speaks through the object.
They are just perspectives. If you do away with the distinction/schema you can't recover it in any "subjective" or "objective" way.
We have a bunch of words which we deem are devoid of subjective nuance/connotation/emotion/value. We call those words "objective". We insist that those words correspond to an ontology. When we use those pre-approved and socially sanctioned words to describe the world we call that "objectivity".
When we deviate from that vocabulary it becomes prose, opinion, metaphor, poetry...
The words of language are but sounds broadcast through the objective [human body] into the objective [world around the human body] by the subjective [the mind consciousness]. The subjective is that which
experiences the objective. Layering language over the objective can and does distort the real nature of the objective We - the subjective - are experiencing... Some worship the brain [objective] as that which allows for us to experience the objective. That it is. But it is also that which allows us to distort the real nature of the objective, by superimposing simulations over said nature of the objective it is part of.
One of those simulations became 'brain worship'. Another of those simulations became 'image of god worship' -
Both of which the brain simulated.
Or;
It is
not the brain doing the simulating, but
that which is using the brain and in doing so, creating the said simulations.