Is the subjective the inability to replicate?

I hesitate to speculate - or ,also, articulate-but in the meantime I'll ruminate along with the others here at A2K.


wish I could delegate Ed for a better response.

Thanks. I'm glad you took interest.
My own insight is that what people generally understand as the subjective is no different from objectivity, but of course I could be totally wrong.

No, 'subjective' is merely the logical complement of 'objective'. Philosophically (ontologically) the status of that dichotomy ranges from 'problematic' to 'useless' *as far as views of 'existence' are concerned. This is because 'evidence' can lie in the eye of the beholder - a participator in a contextual social exchange, rendering 'objectivity' equivalent to 'consensus', and 'subjectivity' as lacking in consensus. Those who do not concur with this deconstruction of the dichotomy tend to be labelled 'naive realists' since they ignore the personal and social factors (especially language) in the structuring of what is called 'reality'.
It is true that 'objective' can be equated to 'replicability' in most of science, but there is an unstated subtext of 'consensus' (paradigm) about interpretation of observations.

*If this is what you are implying by 'no difference', you are on the right track.

I'll accept that answer as the definitive answer - thank you.

No.
Even objectivity becomes subjective, when identified.
Everything is subjective.

Can you explain that a bit? I know that anything is replicated, making anything uniformity, but does this interfere with the meaning of anti?

Everything is born to your reality, perception and ability to process content.
Thus - Everything 'of you' is subjected to these factors.
Even objectivity is your subject.
'Anti' means against/opposing - And is causal by exact degree.

The divide between content and me is the puzzle. I can create content, and content creates me. The rotation of creator is perhaps infinite, but if it is what's the power causing the rotation?

It Is.

Is context evidence of no freedom?

It is quantifiably limited - Thus restricts/imprisons the observer to the qualities therein.
'Freedom' is subjective (as is everything) So only you can join those particular dots.
One mans' Treasure is another mans' Trash.

Like one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter, and the point about relativity.

Relativity being the infinity of inversion, what is the meaning of it? Assume that inversion reflects the absence of beginning, and so X and Y are forced to always be identical, I can't actually imagine an alternate reality.
If reality were chronological (X, then Y), there'd be no possibility of knowledge!


Knowledge is dependent on no order.

Yes.
Relativity is infinite because infinity is relative.
Yes

rather - Knowledge is independent of order because order is knowledgeable of independence.

In other words, anything can be post. The top ten movie list can exist after any State of the Union address, and the query to a literary agent can exist after any wedding.

Do you see the problem there? The ability of no order is actually because of an innate sense of bias (the ability to demonstrate no order is itself because of a real structure, being subverted).

That's why I think truth is standard.
No order has never been able to have always been free of order, but the reverse isn't true.

Thomas, I have difficulty understanding your prior post - I was with you during the 'In other words' intro, but lost you immediately thereafter.

Reality is chronology. Day and night. Monday to Sunday. First then second semester.
Reality is also subjectivity (personal opinions, art). The subjective informs reality, and yet the chronology exists despite never being subjective (the chronology for Vladimir Putin is the same as for Kate Middleton).

So therein lies proof of a dual truth: objective and subjective.
My point is that despite being anti to one another, both subjective and objective experience needs, an obvious error.

The condition of subjective shouldn't exist in reverse.

Your 'reality' may be chronological, but mine isn't - Now - nvm.
Have a lovely everything.