Amazon.com Widgets
  • As are most things stemming from post-modernist thought and connected to it...

    You don't get to truth by accepting everything as a subjective truth. You get to truth by trying to separate out bias and subjective experience to ask 'what is really going on'.

    In essence, if all things are subjective to interpretation, then so is the idea that all things are NOT subjective to interpretation. If you say that everything is subjective OTHER than the idea that everything is subjective, then you are engaging in special pleading. If you accept that it can be subjectively true that all things are NOT subjective to interpretation, then you open the door to say that it is possible for things to be subject to subjective interpretation or have an objective reality.

    As well, the idea that everything is subjective is, in and of itself, an absolute that doesn't seem to measure up with reality, given the success of predictions under objectivist thought, and lack of an ability to substantiate ANYTHING, including proving their core premise of everything being subjective.

    If everything is subjective, you would not be able to prove it. The very idea is not falsifiable, and therefore not provable. Like solipsism, how would you know whether it was or not? It makes for interesting thought games, and can be good for exploring topics to explore bias, but as a theory (not really a theory, as it can't have evidence for it by the nature of the proposition) it falls short, to say the very least.

  • When Each One Define All Reality Only Inconsistency Exists!

    Norman Geisler says self-refuting theories do not satisfy their own criteria for legitimacy. This post-modern stance, says Thomas Nagel, is more a reflection of laziness than intellectual rigor. It is these two flaws that undermine the point of view that the individual makes the ultimate determination of what is true and real. In this paradigm any two individuals interpret the same experience so differently that they refute each other.

  • When Each One Define All Reality Only Inconsistency Exists!

    Norman Geisler says self-refuting theories do not satisfy their own criteria for legitimacy. This post-modern stance, says Thomas Nagel, is more a reflection of laziness than intellectual rigor. It is these two flaws that undermine the point of view that the individual makes the ultimate determination of what is true and real. In this paradigm any two individuals interpret the same experience so differently that they refute each other.

  • No, and yes!

    The core tenet of Subjectivism is that a person's own experiences and thoughts are the only unquestionable proof of existent. "I think, therefor I am" The things we see? Tricks of perception! The words we use? We gave them meaning. Our own thoughts? Those are real and prove our existence. However, the opposite side of that coin is how do you quantify thoughts? How can we be certain that we are not simply someone else's dream? All in all, I feel that the fact we can have debates like this with multiple view points proves that the theory is sound.


Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.