Search

Query

Log in to VuTales

Reset my password

Username

Password

Sign up

Username (5-13 characters)

Password (6+ characters, and something hard to guess)

Password again

Email (Must be valid)

What is 18 + 7? (Sorry, we have to ask)

Objectivity

Written by Dustin on April 16, 2010
Food for thought. Objectivity and subjectivity aren't a dichotomy but a continuum. Nothing can be innately objective or subjective. Aside from mass, structure, moment of spin, chemical composition, electrical charge, position relative to other objects. Even then one could argue that both time and locality are subjective. Morality for example. Values are entirely subjective in almost everyone's books but morality itself is more of a meta-value. It's the way in which we employ those values. Objective? Sounds like it.

I don't know. Just think about it.

Social media

FaceBook Reddit Stumbleupon Google Digg delicious Twitter

Blog details

Rate this blog

4
You must be logged in to vote

Actions

Report

Dustin

Dustin
Author
April 16, 2010
Submitted on
283
Views
18
Comments

Dustin's stats

27
Blogs
3848
Blog reads
874
ID pageviews
0
Friends
April 23, 2012
Last seen
December 23, 2009
Joined

Dustin's blogs

Pages

« | 1 | 2 |

Comments

 
Sun Apr 18, 2010 04:49 PM [Edited once ] +
Reve
"If you keep poking a normally well-mannered dog with a stick, it will bite. And when it does, the fault lies not with the dog, but with you."

Argh, I need to scrutinize words more closely from now on. Thanks for input Tartar. Things like that is the reason why I like pure math... 1+2=3, y'know. ._.

You're right, upon further reflection, logic may not the best word to use there. But it was Kurt freaking Godel, he must have thought of that before he penned it down. Maybe he was thinking, "Hey, we're using logic to validate logic, so isn't there a problem there?" Anyway, didn't dare change the words.

(Btw, just my two cents, but, Arly, no matter how I read it, I didn't think Tarheel attacked you as a person. Criticized your argument, yes, but not you as a person.)

 
 
Mon Apr 19, 2010 02:07 AM +
tarheel91
///M

Reve said: Argh, I need to scrutinize words more closely from now on. Thanks for input Tartar. Things like that is the reason why I like pure math... 1+2=3, y'know. ._.

You're right, upon further reflection, logic may not the best word to use there. But it was Kurt freaking Godel, he must have thought of that before he penned it down. Maybe he was thinking, "Hey, we're using logic to validate logic, so isn't there a problem there?" Anyway, didn't dare change the words.

(Btw, just my two cents, but, Arly, no matter how I read it, I didn't think Tarheel attacked you as a person. Criticized your argument, yes, but not you as a person.)


I think this issue is with language. Language is inherently imperfect. It fails to convey exactly what we mean, and this is even more apparent when talking about concepts as abstract as these. When he says logic I think he's referring to the way we think and come to conclusions. There's not really a word for that, so I think he went with "a person's logic." I think it's very different from general logic.

 
 
Mon Apr 19, 2010 10:05 AM +
Reve
"If you keep poking a normally well-mannered dog with a stick, it will bite. And when it does, the fault lies not with the dog, but with you."

Put your finger right on it. :D

I wish I could be content sticking to 1+2=3, but... Bleh. ._.

 

Pages

« | 1 | 2 |

Login or sign up

You must be a member to reply or post. You can sign up or log in if you already have an account.

VuTales 3.3.23 Beta © 2009 – 2012

Blogs and comments are owned by their posters | Trademarks and copyrights are owned by their respective owners

Contact | Privacy Policy