Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TimF who wrote (69304)	12/3/2002 10:47:38 PM
From: The Philosopher	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

I care more about the point then the word used But the word is what we're discussing. There is some objectivity when you consider differences between differences. Some things are more different then other things. Hmmm. To the same observer, yes. But while most Caucasians can tell other Caucasians apart quite easily, and see the differences as being significant, they may have more trouble telling people of other races apart, and see the differences, which people of those races would consider highly significant, as barely noticeable. In any case, though, I do take your point. But here's the key point. The amount of difference between two pixels can be measured, and if two people are measuring the difference accurately they will come up with the same difference. Given the right instruments and the training to use them, ask ten people how many angstrom units (if I'm using the right measure) of color difference is there between pixel A and pixel B, and they will give you the same answer. The amount of difference is measurable and objective. But ask the same ten people "on a scale of 1 to 100, how important is this difference" and you will almost certainly get a range of answers. The importance is an assigned value, not a determinable one, and is therefore subjective. Take history, which Neo used earlier. Ask ten competent historians to rank the Presidents -- heck, there are only 43 or so of them -- in order of their importance, and you will NOT get a single list. You will probably get ten different lists. There will be some similarities -- most or all of them will rank Lincoln more important than Chester Arthur -- but they will NOT be identical. The differences between them can be known objectively. But their importance cannot be. It is subjective. Do you disagree with this?

To: TimF who wrote (69304)	12/3/2002 11:01:01 PM
From: Solon	Respond to of 82486

"There is some objectivity when you consider differences between differences. Some things are more different then other things" In other words...some ideas are more supportable and objective than others. Reality is either real or it isn't. CH seems to be agreeing that it is real and objective. We might be wrong, but we might be right. People, of course have a subjective point of view. We cannot get around that. But these are sensory differences. In the realm of ideas there is a common method of objectifying perception through logic and reason. It is this "objective" ability to comprehend differences which is being referred to when people say it is "objectively" important. It has nothing to do with God or with absolute existence; it has to do with existence being discrete and knowable at a rational level. Differences of perception may be largely ironed out and eliminated in the realm of science (through repeated observations, trials, replications, and so forth), and through the application of a common logic to ideas. Objectivity is not perfect awareness of the real: it is reasonable awareness of the real. The subjectivity of feelings and perception is largely overcome when one addresses reality in the realm of ideas and logic. We can watch two mice trying to choose between cheese and tulips. We know that they see them from a subjective point of view. But we also know that there is an objective (and important) difference. At that level, so do the mice. All differences are objectively important to the person who is both rational and aware of that fact. Because such a person recognizes that if things were all the same then he/she would not have existence. Things are not "objectively" important to everyone from a personal perspective. But they are objectively important from the rational and objective perspective of ideas.