Challenging the Objectivity of Science

[Eodnhoj7]

So, NO.

According to your subjective opinion. But there are other subjective states you cannot speak for.

That is true of all organisms, including you.

I see....so you can speak for others subjective states, without evidence for such states outside of your own subjective state, and yet you claim such truths knowing you do not know their subjective states?

[popeye1945]

According to your subjective opinion. But there are other subjective states you cannot speak for.

That is true of all organisms, including you.

I see....so you can speak for others subjective states, without evidence for such states outside of your own subjective state, and yet you claim such truths knowing you do not know their subjective states?

Ok, now you're getting silly on me. Do you wish to continue in a serious dialogue?

[Eodnhoj7]

That is true of all organisms, including you.

I see....so you can speak for others subjective states, without evidence for such states outside of your own subjective state, and yet you claim such truths knowing you do not know their subjective states?

Ok, now you're getting silly on me. Do you wish to continue in a serious dialogue?

No friend...far from it...I am following your logic and it contains internal inconsistencies within it.

Reverting to "biology=meaning" every time I point out that what you are stating is purely subjective opinion, by degree of your logic that all experience is purely subjective (thus yourself as part of the set "all experience") is merely a repetition of basic distinctions that are inherently void internally by nature of the conditions they require.

[popeye1945]

I see....so you can speak for others subjective states, without evidence for such states outside of your own subjective state, and yet you claim such truths knowing you do not know their subjective states?

Ok, now you're getting silly on me. Do you wish to continue in a serious dialogue?

No friend...far from it...I am following your logic and it contains internal inconsistencies within it.

Reverting to "biology=meaning" every time I point out that what you are stating is purely subjective opinion, by degree of your logic that all experience is purely subjective (thus yourself as part of the set "all experience") is merely a repetition of basic distinctions that are inherently void internally by nature of the conditions they require.

Ok, you may have something here, but you need to make it more accessible to the understanding, if it is indeed understandable. Try making your granny understand it and get back to us.

[Eodnhoj7]

Ok, now you're getting silly on me. Do you wish to continue in a serious dialogue?

No friend...far from it...I am following your logic and it contains internal inconsistencies within it.

Reverting to "biology=meaning" every time I point out that what you are stating is purely subjective opinion, by degree of your logic that all experience is purely subjective (thus yourself as part of the set "all experience") is merely a repetition of basic distinctions that are inherently void internally by nature of the conditions they require.

Ok, you may have something here, but you need to make it more accessible to the understanding, if it is indeed understandable. Try making your granny understand it and get back to us.

You choice. Where do you want me to start?

[popeye1945]

No friend...far from it...I am following your logic and it contains internal inconsistencies within it.

Reverting to "biology=meaning" every time I point out that what you are stating is purely subjective opinion, by degree of your logic that all experience is purely subjective (thus yourself as part of the set "all experience") is merely a repetition of basic distinctions that are inherently void internally by nature of the conditions they require.

Ok, you may have something here, but you need to make it more accessible to the understanding, if it is indeed understandable. Try making your granny understand it and get back to us.

You choice. Where do you want me to start?

By changing your terminology and approach to the subject, can you make the conscious subject the centre of the reality around us?

[Eodnhoj7]

Ok, you may have something here, but you need to make it more accessible to the understanding, if it is indeed understandable. Try making your granny understand it and get back to us.

You choice. Where do you want me to start?

By changing your terminology and approach to the subject, can you make the conscious subject the centre of the reality around us?

Are we aware through distinctions with these distinctions being synonymous to forms or limits?

[popeye1945]

You choice. Where do you want me to start?

By changing your terminology and approach to the subject, can you make the conscious subject the centre of the reality around us?

Are we aware through distinctions with these distinctions being synonymous to forms or limits?

We are getting nowhere. Good luck to you!

[Eodnhoj7]

By changing your terminology and approach to the subject, can you make the conscious subject the centre of the reality around us?

Are we aware through distinctions with these distinctions being synonymous to forms or limits?

We are getting nowhere. Good luck to you!

Best of luck.