Philosophy Now Forum

Arising_uk wrote:

chaz wyman wrote:You said; "Just a touch tired of looking at you pulling up others spellings"

I have made 4922 Posts. THis will be the 4923rd.

Show me when and where I have picked people up on their spelling. If you can find 0.5% then I will concede the point.
Otherwise stop wasting my time.

Ach! You could be right and it may just be my over-sensitivity at someone who's posts are pretty full of spelling and grammar errors correcting anothers. Although my actual question was about how you'd react if or when I correct you in any future conversation we may have.

Changing goalposts does not become you. The first is entangled with the second.

Postmodernism is a tendency in contemporary culture characterized by the rejection of objective truth and global cultural narrative or meta-narrative.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postmodernism

Ron de Weijze wrote:Postmodernism is a tendency in contemporary culture characterized by the rejection of objective truth and global cultural narrative or meta-narrative.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postmodernism

Whilst the concept of 'object truth' is nothing more than the opinion of the dominant ideology, long may Post-modernism reign.

chaz wyman wrote:

Ron de Weijze wrote:Postmodernism is a tendency in contemporary culture characterized by the rejection of objective truth and global cultural narrative or meta-narrative.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postmodernism

Whilst the concept of 'object truth' is nothing more than the opinion of the dominant ideology, long may Post-modernism reign.

Long live the ideology I can believe in after having been able to independently confirm it through knowledge, experience or both, and so have others likewise. The only dominant ideology left over from the past, is political correctness itself, not based on independent confirmation but still on dependent rejection or power-distance.

Ron de Weijze wrote:

chaz wyman wrote:

Ron de Weijze wrote:Postmodernism is a tendency in contemporary culture characterized by the rejection of objective truth and global cultural narrative or meta-narrative.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postmodernism

Whilst the concept of 'object truth' is nothing more than the opinion of the dominant ideology, long may Post-modernism reign.

Long live the ideology I can believe in after having been able to independently confirm it through knowledge, experience or both, and so have others likewise. The only dominant ideology left over from the past, is political correctness itself, not based on independent confirmation but still on dependent rejection or power-distance.

Knowledge is nothing without critique.
The objective truth of religion burned many critics in the past.

chaz wyman wrote:

Ron de Weijze wrote:

chaz wyman wrote: Whilst the concept of 'object truth' is nothing more than the opinion of the dominant ideology, long may Post-modernism reign.

Long live the ideology I can believe in after having been able to independently confirm it through knowledge, experience or both, and so have others likewise. The only dominant ideology left over from the past, is political correctness itself, not based on independent confirmation but still on dependent rejection or power-distance.

Knowledge is nothing without critique.
The objective truth of religion burned many critics in the past.

Yes that is so. Objective truth before-the-fact, confirmed by the fact, and after-the-fact, confirmed by faith, should balance out in social reality.

Ron de Weijze wrote:

chaz wyman wrote:

Ron de Weijze wrote: Long live the ideology I can believe in after having been able to independently confirm it through knowledge, experience or both, and so have others likewise. The only dominant ideology left over from the past, is political correctness itself, not based on independent confirmation but still on dependent rejection or power-distance.

Knowledge is nothing without critique.
The objective truth of religion burned many critics in the past.

Yes that is so. Objective truth before-the-fact, confirmed by the fact, and after-the-fact, confirmed by faith, should balance out in social reality.

I have no idea what you mean. Do you?

chaz wyman wrote:

Ron de Weijze wrote:

chaz wyman wrote:Knowledge is nothing without critique.
The objective truth of religion burned many critics in the past.

Yes that is so. Objective truth before-the-fact, confirmed by the fact, and after-the-fact, confirmed by faith, should balance out in social reality.

I have no idea what you mean. Do you?

Objective truth before-the-fact, confirmed by the fact, is realization of intuition, or trying.
Objective truth after-the-fact, confirmed by faith, is intuition of realization, or valuing.
We can try first and value later or value first and try later. These are social roles, balancing out in social reality.
That is what I meant.

Ron de Weijze wrote:

chaz wyman wrote:

Ron de Weijze wrote: Yes that is so. Objective truth before-the-fact, confirmed by the fact, and after-the-fact, confirmed by faith, should balance out in social reality.

I have no idea what you mean. Do you?

Objective truth before-the-fact, confirmed by the fact, is realization of intuition, or trying.
Objective truth after-the-fact, confirmed by faith, is intuition of realization, or valuing.
We can try first and value later or value first and try later. These are social roles, balancing out in social reality.
That is what I meant.

Maybe an example?

chaz wyman wrote:

Ron de Weijze wrote:

chaz wyman wrote: I have no idea what you mean. Do you?

Objective truth before-the-fact, confirmed by the fact, is realization of intuition, or trying.
Objective truth after-the-fact, confirmed by faith, is intuition of realization, or valuing.
We can try first and value later or value first and try later. These are social roles, balancing out in social reality.
That is what I meant.

Maybe an example?

Most salient example is between Significant Others.
He thinks they want a certain house so he builds it. Realizes his intuition in trying.
The house is finished.
She sees what he created and thinks it is beautiful. Intuits what she realizes in valuing.
She is on his mind, valuing his own work while trying and he is on her mind, trying to cope with it while valuing.
And if need be, they tell each other.
All other sorts of partnership are comparable to this.
http://crpa.co/CRPA-Philosophy-Special.htm#20

Ron de Weijze wrote:

chaz wyman wrote:

Ron de Weijze wrote: Objective truth before-the-fact, confirmed by the fact, is realization of intuition, or trying.
Objective truth after-the-fact, confirmed by faith, is intuition of realization, or valuing.
We can try first and value later or value first and try later. These are social roles, balancing out in social reality.
That is what I meant.

Maybe an example?

Most salient example is between Significant Others.
He thinks they want a certain house so he builds it. Realizes his intuition in trying.
The house is finished.
She sees what he created and thinks it is beautiful. Intuits what she realizes in valuing.
She is on his mind, valuing his own work while trying and he is on her mind, trying to cope with it while valuing.
And if need be, they tell each other.
All other sorts of partnership are comparable to this.
http://crpa.co/CRPA-Philosophy-Special.htm#20

Your example does not include anything 'objective'.
Are you sure you want to use this example to explain the above?

chaz wyman wrote:

Ron de Weijze wrote:

chaz wyman wrote: Maybe an example?

Most salient example is between Significant Others.
He thinks they want a certain house so he builds it. Realizes his intuition in trying.
The house is finished.
She sees what he created and thinks it is beautiful. Intuits what she realizes in valuing.
She is on his mind, valuing his own work while trying and he is on her mind, trying to cope with it while valuing.
And if need be, they tell each other.
All other sorts of partnership are comparable to this.
http://crpa.co/CRPA-Philosophy-Special.htm#20

Your example does not include anything 'objective'.
Are you sure you want to use this example to explain the above?

Objective is the independent confirmation:
intuiting what is realized
realizing what is intuited
trying what is valued
valuing what is tried.

Ron de Weijze wrote:

chaz wyman wrote:

Ron de Weijze wrote: Most salient example is between Significant Others.
He thinks they want a certain house so he builds it. Realizes his intuition in trying.
The house is finished.
She sees what he created and thinks it is beautiful. Intuits what she realizes in valuing.
She is on his mind, valuing his own work while trying and he is on her mind, trying to cope with it while valuing.
And if need be, they tell each other.
All other sorts of partnership are comparable to this.
http://crpa.co/CRPA-Philosophy-Special.htm#20

Your example does not include anything 'objective'.
Are you sure you want to use this example to explain the above?

Objective is the independent confirmation:
intuiting what is realized
realizing what is intuited
trying what is valued
valuing what is tried.

You are only throwing gasoline on the fire.

No evaluation is independent. All evaluation is interested and with a bias.
Without bias there can be no evaluation.
It is the very essence of your subjective perspective that make it possible to make confirm or deny.
Bias is the intuitive set of tools that enable interpretation; they are the filter of meaning.

chaz wyman wrote:

Ron de Weijze wrote:

chaz wyman wrote: Your example does not include anything 'objective'.
Are you sure you want to use this example to explain the above?

Objective is the independent confirmation:
intuiting what is realized
realizing what is intuited
trying what is valued
valuing what is tried.

You are only throwing gasoline on the fire.

No evaluation is independent. All evaluation is interested and with a bias.
Without bias there can be no evaluation.
It is the very essence of your subjective perspective that make it possible to make confirm or deny.
Bias is the intuitive set of tools that enable interpretation; they are the filter of meaning.

Individuals can be independent so they can look for independent confirmation either given to them by others or given to others by them. I know independence is hard to find, because until recently, society could only be explained in terms of power-distance or dependent rejection by elite- and group pressures. Contrary to your statement, I believe that if evaluation is NOT independent, THEN it is biased. My subjective intuition is to guide me through objective reality and it cannot do so when subjectively, I am not objective. The alternative would be to submit to the group in groupsism or dominate the group in cronyism.

Ron de Weijze wrote:

chaz wyman wrote:

chaz wyman wrote: Your example does not include anything 'objective'.
Are you sure you want to use this example to explain the above?

No evaluation is independent. All evaluation is interested and with a bias.
Without bias there can be no evaluation.
It is the very essence of your subjective perspective that make it possible to make confirm or deny.
Bias is the intuitive set of tools that enable interpretation; they are the filter of meaning.

Individuals can be independent so they can look for independent confirmation either given to them by others or given to others by them. I know independence is hard to find, because until recently, society could only be explained in terms of power-distance or dependent rejection by elite- and group pressures. Contrary to your statement, I believe that if evaluation is NOT independent, THEN it is biased. My subjective intuition is to guide me through objective reality and it cannot do so when subjectively, I am not objective. The alternative would be to submit to the group in groupsism or dominate the group in cronyism.

How can a person be independent - of what?
Everyone has a POV.