Philosophy Now Forum

What the •shack• is and what •on fire• refers to — these ideas need development.

It’s not impossible but it is difficult to explain.

Sculptor wrote: ↑Tue May 21, 2024 3:34 pm

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Tue May 21, 2024 3:32 pm

Harbal wrote: ↑Tue May 21, 2024 7:00 am

You are very determined to drive this message home, aren't you?

I think it's a public service to point it out. After all, if somebody is trying to live in a shack that's on fire, wouldn't you want to at least tell them they'd better leave it? Seems fair.

No shack is on fire, except in your imagination.

We can see that Subjectivism is indeed a "shack" a badly-constructed idea, and that it is indeed "on fire," since it falls apart at the first sign of logic. It can't even perform the most rudimentary functions of "morality."

Sculptor wrote: ↑Tue May 21, 2024 3:33 pm You seem to be dancing around a point.

An odd statement. Every post of mine is composed strictly of points.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Tue May 21, 2024 4:00 pm

Sculptor wrote: ↑Tue May 21, 2024 3:34 pm

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Tue May 21, 2024 3:32 pm
I think it's a public service to point it out. After all, if somebody is trying to live in a shack that's on fire, wouldn't you want to at least tell them they'd better leave it? Seems fair.

No shack is on fire, except in your imagination.

We can see that Subjectivism is indeed a "shack"

Are you referring to yourself and Alexis by "we"?

Harbal wrote: ↑Tue May 21, 2024 4:14 pm

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Tue May 21, 2024 4:00 pm

Sculptor wrote: ↑Tue May 21, 2024 3:34 pm

No shack is on fire, except in your imagination.

We can see that Subjectivism is indeed a "shack"

Are you referring to yourself and Alexis by "we"?

I retract the "we". Perhaps you can't see it. But in that case, I've overestimated either your sagacity or your openness to arguments. I hope I have not.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Tue May 21, 2024 4:00 pm
We can see that Subjectivism is indeed a "shack" a badly-constructed idea, and that it is indeed "on fire," since it falls apart at the first sign of logic. It can't even perform the most rudimentary functions of "morality."

"Subjectivism" refers to the philosophical notion that knowledge is generated from the mind without reference to reality. It is the notion that our thoughts are the only unquestionable facts of our experience.

This has nothing to do with forming ethical theories based on both reality, and our opinions about what constitutes good and evil, or good and bad. It is certainly possible to support one's opinions about what is good for people and what is bad for people, although, of course, these opinions are "subjective" (but not necessarily a form of "Subjectivism").

In fact, it is the religious world view that defies logic. This is not always a bad thing (in my subjective opinion). The religious world view deals with contradictions: death = birth; giving alms increases one's "wealth"; the meek shall inherit the earth; when someone visits the "least of my brethren" in prison, one visits Jesus (I could go on and on).

Religion sees the world through symbols and metaphors, some of which, when taken literally, defy logic. That's because the world is complicated, and cannot always be logically explained (at least given our imperfect knowledge). "Now we see through a glass, darkly."

One problem occurs when religious people defy the teachings of their own creed. Some think they DON'T see through a glass, darkly. They think that, like some later day Buddha, they have become enlightened. But although enlightenment can occur, it is never complete. The glass and the darkness remain. Humility is supposed to be a Christian virtue, one sorely lacking in many Christians, who, despite biblical admonitions, think they know the Mind of God.

I add the •we• back in. Just to be difficult!

Alexis Jacobi wrote: ↑Tue May 21, 2024 3:59 pm What the •shack• is and what •on fire• refers to — these ideas need development.

If the shack is on fire, at least there is plenty of murky water close at hand to put it out with.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Tue May 21, 2024 4:20 pm

Harbal wrote: ↑Tue May 21, 2024 4:14 pm

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Tue May 21, 2024 4:00 pm
We can see that Subjectivism is indeed a "shack"

Are you referring to yourself and Alexis by "we"?

I retract the "we". Perhaps you can't see it. But in that case, I've overestimated either your sagacity or your openness to arguments. I hope I have not.

I think it's my gullibility you have overestimated.

Alexiev wrote an interesting post. Bravo!

Not all is lost here ….

Alexiev wrote: ↑Tue May 21, 2024 4:22 pm

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Tue May 21, 2024 4:00 pm
We can see that Subjectivism is indeed a "shack" a badly-constructed idea, and that it is indeed "on fire," since it falls apart at the first sign of logic. It can't even perform the most rudimentary functions of "morality."

"Subjectivism" refers to the philosophical notion that knowledge is generated from the mind without reference to reality.

Harbal and I have not been talking about Epistemological Subjectivism, but about Moral Subjectivism. I've only used the general term, Subjectivism, to avoid having to repeat the adjective constantly.

But if you had been paying attention, you'd already know that.

Harbal wrote: ↑Tue May 21, 2024 4:25 pm

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Tue May 21, 2024 4:20 pm

Harbal wrote: ↑Tue May 21, 2024 4:14 pm
Are you referring to yourself and Alexis by "we"?

I retract the "we". Perhaps you can't see it. But in that case, I've overestimated either your sagacity or your openness to arguments. I hope I have not.

I think it's my gullibility you have overestimated.

Apparently not. I've offered you clear reasons, and even a means of proving it to yourself -- just supply one principle Subjectivism requires of you. Just one. And you cannot. The conclusion should be totally obvious.

Harbal just say: “I give up, you’re right IC”.

You’ll feel better and then there will be a base to build on.

Alexis Jacobi wrote: ↑Tue May 21, 2024 3:46 pm

Sculptor wrote: ↑Tue May 21, 2024 3:33 pm Which ones? Protestant, Catholic, Rastafarian, Orthodox, Mormon?? Which ?

The last census finds that Atheists are now the majority group is Scotland.

This is progress.

Catholic theology — the chief Encyclicals and Catholic social doctrine — and certainly a social focus oriented to the supernaturalism I often focus on (I used the term metaphysics but have now replaced it) based in Greco-Christian philosophy is what I would emphasize.

Protestantism, unfortunately , is contaminated at the most basic level.

So do you beleive that the communion wine is literally the blood of Jesus and the bread the flesh?
DO you believe that it is okay to pay money to the Pope to have your sins washed away?
Have you got the slightest clues about Luther's theses?
No, I thought not.
Run along.

Surely moral subjectivism and epistemological subjectivism share common presuppositions…