Total Posts:9|Showing Posts:1-9
Jump to topic:

The Objectivist II

s-anthony
Posts: 2,582
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/28/2014 8:27:02 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
Wiktionary defines objectivity as, "The state of being objective, just, unbiased and not influenced by emotions or personal prejudices."

The rudimentary question is: Does the religious fundamentalist consider oneself to be defined by objectivity?

Let's look at the definition and answer some questions:

(1) Does the religious fundamentalist consider himself, or herself, as being objective? Yes.

(2) Does the religious fundamentalist consider himself, or herself, as being just? Yes.

(3) Does the religious fundamentalist consider himself, or herself, as being unbiased? Yes.

(4) Does the religious fundamentalist consider himself, or herself, as not being influenced by emotions or personal prejudices? Yes.

Now, the skeptic would answer, "No," to each of these questions; but, the questions were not, "Does the skeptic consider the religious fundamentalist as being...?" but, "Does the religious fundamentalist consider himself, or herself, as being...?".
DPMartin
Posts: 1,096
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/28/2014 9:24:09 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 11/28/2014 8:27:02 AM, s-anthony wrote:
Wiktionary defines objectivity as, "The state of being objective, just, unbiased and not influenced by emotions or personal prejudices."

The rudimentary question is: Does the religious fundamentalist consider oneself to be defined by objectivity?

Let's look at the definition and answer some questions:

(1) Does the religious fundamentalist consider himself, or herself, as being objective? Yes.

(2) Does the religious fundamentalist consider himself, or herself, as being just? Yes.

(3) Does the religious fundamentalist consider himself, or herself, as being unbiased? Yes.

(4) Does the religious fundamentalist consider himself, or herself, as not being influenced by emotions or personal prejudices? Yes.

Now, the skeptic would answer, "No," to each of these questions; but, the questions were not, "Does the skeptic consider the religious fundamentalist as being...?" but, "Does the religious fundamentalist consider himself, or herself, as being...?".

How is that you can answer questions for someone else?

There are atheists who consider themselves just, unbiased and objective. But that doesn"t mean all are, and no one can answer those questions for someone else, but the individual asked. Is there some prerequisite here to smoke a few before posting?

So your posting proves that your view as about as biased and narrow minded as it gets. Which in most circles is viewed as unjust.
Vox_Veritas
Posts: 7,074
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/28/2014 9:32:47 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 11/28/2014 8:27:02 AM, s-anthony wrote:
Wiktionary defines objectivity as, "The state of being objective, just, unbiased and not influenced by emotions or personal prejudices."

The rudimentary question is: Does the religious fundamentalist consider oneself to be defined by objectivity?

Let's look at the definition and answer some questions:

(1) Does the religious fundamentalist consider himself, or herself, as being objective? Yes.

(2) Does the religious fundamentalist consider himself, or herself, as being just? Yes.

(3) Does the religious fundamentalist consider himself, or herself, as being unbiased? Yes.

(4) Does the religious fundamentalist consider himself, or herself, as not being influenced by emotions or personal prejudices? Yes.

Now, the skeptic would answer, "No," to each of these questions; but, the questions were not, "Does the skeptic consider the religious fundamentalist as being...?" but, "Does the religious fundamentalist consider himself, or herself, as being...?".

Objectivism is a philosophy created by writer and philosopher Ayn Rand.
Call me Vox, the Resident Contrarian of debate.org.

The DDO Blog:
https://debatedotorg.wordpress.com...

#drinkthecoffeenotthekoolaid
s-anthony
Posts: 2,582
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/28/2014 12:05:00 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
How is that you can answer questions for someone else?

I'm not answering questions for anybody else. I'm answering from my own personal experience as a religious fundamentalist. I grew up as a religious fundamentalist, attended a religious fundamentalist church, and I belong to a religious fundamentalist family.

There are atheists who consider themselves just, unbiased and objective. But that doesn"t mean all are, and no one can answer those questions for someone else, but the individual asked. Is there some prerequisite here to smoke a few before posting?

Ok.

So your posting proves that your view as about as biased and narrow minded as it gets. Which in most circles is viewed as unjust.

No. The biased and narrow-minded one is the one who thinks he, or she, and the personal philosophy he, or she, adheres to is the only objective one.
s-anthony
Posts: 2,582
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/28/2014 12:17:27 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 11/28/2014 9:32:47 AM, Vox_Veritas wrote:
At 11/28/2014 8:27:02 AM, s-anthony wrote:
Wiktionary defines objectivity as, "The state of being objective, just, unbiased and not influenced by emotions or personal prejudices."

The rudimentary question is: Does the religious fundamentalist consider oneself to be defined by objectivity?

Let's look at the definition and answer some questions:

(1) Does the religious fundamentalist consider himself, or herself, as being objective? Yes.

(2) Does the religious fundamentalist consider himself, or herself, as being just? Yes.

(3) Does the religious fundamentalist consider himself, or herself, as being unbiased? Yes.

(4) Does the religious fundamentalist consider himself, or herself, as not being influenced by emotions or personal prejudices? Yes.

Now, the skeptic would answer, "No," to each of these questions; but, the questions were not, "Does the skeptic consider the religious fundamentalist as being...?" but, "Does the religious fundamentalist consider himself, or herself, as being...?".

Objectivism is a philosophy created by writer and philosopher Ayn Rand.

Even though I believe your view of the meaning of objectivism is too restrictive, no one used the word objectivism.
DPMartin
Posts: 1,096
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/28/2014 12:46:45 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 11/28/2014 12:05:00 PM, s-anthony wrote:
How is that you can answer questions for someone else?

I'm not answering questions for anybody else. I'm answering from my own personal experience as a religious fundamentalist. I grew up as a religious fundamentalist, attended a religious fundamentalist church, and I belong to a religious fundamentalist family.
So you still can"t answer for what others think of themselves, no matter your own beliefs about them. Because you are stating what they think of themselves. You really don"t know that. Therefore, your posting is erroneous. I was rased Catholic, that might make me familiar with their chosen theologies but it certainly doesn"t make me capable or qualified to state what they think of themselves. Even if those theologies might say so. You state the theology but not what others think of themselves in relationship to the theology. Even if its presumed they agreed to believe it as correct.


So your posting proves that your view as about as biased and narrow minded as it gets. Which in most circles is viewed as unjust.

No. The biased and narrow-minded one is the one who thinks he, or she, and the personal philosophy he, or she, adheres to is the only objective one.

To be objective is to not be invested in the outcome, other than justice be done. But even then, he who cares about justice, is invested too. So pure objectivity is impractical in practice, because if one cares about justice then one cares about justice being done, and it would be unhealthy for anything of true value, if justice isn"t done.

And justice is a matter of view and interpretation of the individual, but it also can be agreed by the many of what is just, and then righteousness is that, that the agreed justice be done. Same in most countries, and most defiantly in the Kingdom of God. In the Kingdom of God all agree that the King is just, or they aren"t there in the first place.
s-anthony
Posts: 2,582
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/28/2014 1:33:59 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
So you still can"t answer for what others think of themselves, no matter your own beliefs about them. Because you are stating what they think of themselves. You really don"t know that. Therefore, your posting is erroneous. I was rased Catholic, that might make me familiar with their chosen theologies but it certainly doesn"t make me capable or qualified to state what they think of themselves. Even if those theologies might say so. You state the theology but not what others think of themselves in relationship to the theology. Even if its presumed they agreed to believe it as correct.

You're right. I can't answer for other people, but I can answer for my interpretation of a particular religion.

It's hypocritical for you to tell me I can't know the thoughts of religious people and then turn around and tell me about something on which they agree.

So your posting proves that your view as about as biased and narrow minded as it gets. Which in most circles is viewed as unjust.

No. The biased and narrow-minded one is the one who thinks he, or she, and the personal philosophy he, or she, adheres to is the only objective one.

To be objective is to not be invested in the outcome, other than justice be done. But even then, he who cares about justice, is invested too. So pure objectivity is impractical in practice, because if one cares about justice then one cares about justice being done, and it would be unhealthy for anything of true value, if justice isn"t done.

And justice is a matter of view and interpretation of the individual, but it also can be agreed by the many of what is just, and then righteousness is that, that the agreed justice be done. Same in most countries, and most defiantly in the Kingdom of God. In the Kingdom of God all agree that the King is just, or they aren"t there in the first place.
DPMartin
Posts: 1,096
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/28/2014 4:53:45 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 11/28/2014 1:33:59 PM, s-anthony wrote:
So you still can"t answer for what others think of themselves, no matter your own beliefs about them. Because you are stating what they think of themselves. You really don"t know that. Therefore, your posting is erroneous. I was rased Catholic, that might make me familiar with their chosen theologies but it certainly doesn"t make me capable or qualified to state what they think of themselves. Even if those theologies might say so. You state the theology but not what others think of themselves in relationship to the theology. Even if its presumed they agreed to believe it as correct.

You're right. I can't answer for other people, but I can answer for my interpretation of a particular religion.

It's hypocritical for you to tell me I can't know the thoughts of religious people and then turn around and tell me about something on which they agree.

If they join, they agree. That"s open information to all that care to know, last time I checked. If you join a club you agree to it"s rules and reg. If you take a job of employment, you agree to the conditions of the employment, that is public to all who care about the conditions of employment. How old are you? You surely seem to have no real life experience. Or you wouldn"t speak as you do.
s-anthony
Posts: 2,582
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/29/2014 12:14:48 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
If they join, they agree. That"s open information to all that care to know, last time I checked. If you join a club you agree to it"s rules and reg. If you take a job of employment, you agree to the conditions of the employment, that is public to all who care about the conditions of employment. How old are you? You surely seem to have no real life experience. Or you wouldn"t speak as you do.

If they are religious fundamentalists, they agree with the precepts of religious fundamentalism; and, religious fundamentalism teaches the tenets of its respective religion are literally, or actually, true. In other words, in Christianity, Christ literally rose from the dead.