Objectivism 101

I do not have a definition of truth, but I do not subscribe to religion either.

0 Replies

DavidIg wrote:

What do you mean by unjustified?
Also, both JJ and I reject every religion, however, unlike you, we're aware of the strong Jewish influence in many western countries, usually manifesting most blatantly via it's foreign policy decisions, but also by it's domestic one's, ie, turning England into Englastan.

I want to read more of David's commentary on "idiots." This guy is a tack.
I'll be right back, after I finish washing the pile of dishes that are resting on the counter.

0 Replies

You're seriously rejecting all of the science of the twentieth century? As a a physics major, I'm appalled. Claiming that quantum mechanics is made up is probably the most overwhelmingly ignorant thing you've said so far. Your computer would not work without quantum mechanics. Any high school physics student could tell you the reasons for the necessity of quantum mechanics. Empirical observations showed that light particles acted like waves and that the energies that atoms could only have certain energies. The physicist De Broglie suggested that atoms are also like waves and that their distinct energies are somewhat analogous to harmonics (a bugle can only produce certain notes.) If you actually know any math at all, the Uncertainty Principle can be proven from the Fourier decomposition of these waves. Last time I heard, quantum mechanics has been empirically verified to 10 or 15 decimal places...

0 Replies

Thalion : Your computer would not work without quantum mechanics.

The computer only works because of the principles of reality, based on the state of being either true or false. Reality is the starting point of everything. How the computer works is it follows a process to accomplish a task, by using Boolean logic. Everything can be broken down to either on=true=1 or off=false=0. The Binary code is a series of off and on, representing an A =0100 0001. A computer program can be thought of as a logical thought process, the duality of motion with reality.

Mechanics is only the process of carrying out the logic.

0 Replies

Those 0's and 1's are information contained in transistors and semi-conductors that would not work unless quantum mechanics were true.

0 Replies

Reality is that state of being true. As a human being, we operate at three levels, which are the physical, mental, and emotional. At the physical level, reality is the final arbiter, where the buck stops. As a human being, one's interface with reality, can only be individually established, with our five senses. No matter who much I want someone to understand, I can not do their thinking for them. Therefore, collectivism is a fraud at its core.

Reality will always revert to the physical level, where if it works for one, it will work for anyone.

One who questions reality or truth, to promote collectivism (subjective reality), do so at their own demise.

0 Replies

Thalion : information contained in transistors and semi-conductors

The human computer came long before transistors or semi-conductors.

0 Replies

You aren't talking about the topic at all. I never said anything about collectivism. You're just as bad as the religious fanatics who are unable to have a conversation and resort to such non-sequitor claims such as "God condemns those who refuse to acknowledge him."

0 Replies

Thalion, You jump in to the middle of the thread and now you are some how the authority of the discussion?

Collectivism is the subjective control over someone else reality, for the purpose of manipulating their reality. One can only get reality from their own discernment, objectively established.

0 Replies

Thalion wrote:

You're seriously rejecting all of the science of the twentieth century? .

Never said anything like that, in fact, I'm the first to acknowledge the extraordinary progress of the 20th century, however, I reject crap like string theory, black holes and big bangs etc.

Now, considering you're a man of science, you should be able to answer my questions regarding the size/age of the universe, ie, "if the universe is infinite, how do you go about measuring it, OTOH, if the universe is finite, where is your measure?".

0 Replies

existential potential wrote:

I do not have a definition of truth, but I do not subscribe to religion either.

You're seeking to undermine realities absolute status, just as the religious do.......and if you don't know what is or isn't true, how could you do anything but constantly ask questions Rolling Eyes

0 Replies

Mexica wrote:

I want to read more of David's commentary on "idiots." This guy is a tack.
I'll be right back, after I finish washing the pile of dishes that are resting on the counter.

If you're interested in idiocy, check the nearest mirror for insights, LOL.

0 Replies

The banality of this thread continues to amaze me. Words like "truth" and "reality" have been heavily debated many times on a2k at levels far beyond the apparent intellectual capacity of two of their "acolytes" here.

I cite this merely as one such example.

http://www.able2know.org/forums/viewtopic.php?t=1119

Thalion, I applaud your efforts to "suffer fools gladly".

0 Replies

DavidIg wrote:

Mexica wrote:

I want to read more of David's commentary on "idiots." This guy is a tack.
I'll be right back, after I finish washing the pile of dishes that are resting on the counter.

If you're interested in idiocy, check the nearest mirror for insights, LOL.

OMGNOWAY

0 Replies

fresco wrote:

The banality of this thread continues to amaze me. Words like "truth" and "reality" have been heavily debated many times on a2k at levels far beyond the apparent intellectual capacity of two of their "acolytes" here.
".

you chumps have no definition for truth, only "doubt"

0 Replies

Thanks fresco. For some reason the site won't let me send PM's. I think this will probably be my last post in this thread.

"I define God to be a perfect being that exists in reality, therefore God exists."

"I define objective knowledge to be absolute knowledge that exists in reality, therefore objective knowledge exists."

I'll leave it up to you two to figure out what the point is. I think the parallelism/analogy is pretty obvious, though.

0 Replies

Thalion wrote:

Thanks fresco. For some reason the site won't let me send PM's. I think this will probably be my last post in this thread.
.

Quote:

DavidIg said....Now, considering you're a man of science, you should be able to answer my questions regarding the size/age of the universe, ie, "if the universe is infinite, how do you go about measuring it, OTOH, if the universe is finite, where is your measure?".

I think we'll allow your exit to be that of evasion Rolling Eyes

0 Replies

Thalion,

It may be of interest that your parallelism point together with the concept of "measurement" are combined early on in the thread I mention above when I made the statement....

Quote:

"objective truth" seems to be a quasi-religious ideal like a Platonic form. It ignores the motivations/conditioning of the observer who by the simple act of "naming" performs the prerequisite of all subsequent "measurement".

Simplistic (anthropocentric) wittering about "measurement of the universe" is simply the result of ignorance about the involvement of language at the first level of measurement (the nominal). Non-binary logics (e.g. fuzzy sets) together with Wittgenstein's concept of "language games" help to explain what happens in practical terms with respect to our imperfect "control of the flux", which objectivists like theists desire to be populated by permanent features.

.

0 Replies

fresco wrote:

Simplistic (anthropocentric) wittering about "measurement of the universe" is simply the result of ignorance about the involvement of language at the first level of measurement (the nominal). Non-binary logics (e.g. fuzzy sets) together with Wittgenstein's concept of "language games" help to explain what happens in practical terms with respect to our imperfect "control of the flux", which objectivists like theists desire to be populated by permanent features.

.

Jen.....is this yet another case of "if you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bullshit", LOL......in fact, it probably takes the cake in this thread.

0 Replies

fresco wrote:

Wittgenstein's concept of "language games"

Quote:

His concern with moral perfection led Wittgenstein at one point to insist on confessing to several people various sins, including that of allowing others to underestimate the extent of his 'Jewishness'.

0 Replies

Objectivism 101

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know