Skepticism and The Normal
- Thread starter WWHP
- Start date
One more time Blisterbrain, and I'm sure you won't be disappointed, this isn't a discussion. Unfortunately "discussion" is a concept slightly beyond the grasp your retarded slug like intellect.
As you were saying... truth, reason, critical thinking? What's your understanding of these novel concepts? Do tell!
Nah! Troll's the word, and
Edited by Lisa Simpson:
Real name removed.
Btw. Fishbrain, it's been public knowledge on Badscience for weeks. I happen to think it was very kind of me to save the nice folk in this forum the trouble of accidentally stumbling across the information.
Last edited by a moderator:
One more time Blunderboy - and sing in tune this time:
the name. Trolling's the game!
Edited by Lisa Simpson:
Private information removed.
Stop posting Bubblefish's real name. If you continue to do so, you will face suspension or banning.
Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic Posted By: Lisa Simpson
Last edited by a moderator:
Probably the best question I have ever been asked, and the first time someone asked it like this! Man am I glad I came to a critical thinking discussion forum, boy was that badscience.com a real dud!
And the answer is very simple and very very interesting to explore. Although subjective statements tell us nothing about the objectivity in the statement, they inform us of objective 'events'' about the person making them. They are almost a virtual read-out of the internal workings of the subjective experience and environment.
Through dialectic, continual tit for tat and exchange of truth values, this is how we can come to *see* what each other means. Sometimes, it's not so nice to *see* what someone means, especially when they have personality disorders, it can actually be alarming.
This is highly relevant in behavorial game theory.
hmm, I do think I do point that out. I only call them false because they ARE false relative to the true. They function as false, so I call them false.
Understanding *false* as something more expansive than simply not true is the *key* to getting this, by the way.
I could not believe how many false ideas I had about false when I got this, it was sort of humbling, and funny.
I would say it's not a false statement, it's a true statement, unless you were lying. Could you use a better example?
How about I give one?
"Miles Davis and Gil Evans recorded the most beautiful albums of the 20th Century"
That's a personally true statement, and an objectivly FALSE idea.
I deconstruct things down to ideas, not statements.
You will find that once you get this, you will be able to describe things perfectly that you never could previously, and sometimes many people wont understand you because they dont get it, but you would not phrase your statements the way your suggesting either.
yes. or statements you believe to be completly true statements honestly.
that may be the case, and if so, I apologize, I'm really doing the best I can, but I dont think that is purely the case. These are very difficult distinctions to communicate via text alone. It has to do with analytical intelligence and intuitive intelligence, and since intuition is so subjective, it creates some problems.
I am looking for the simplest way to explain these distinctions in commonly used language, so if you can help, I appreciate!
where do you find that I do this? I dont believe that I do this, but may be mistaken, can you assist here?
Thank you, much respect
Bubblefish
PV, I just reported this post of yours. This will be the second complaint about the same activity from a new member who obviously signed up to troll my thread.
I wonder how that will be recieved? let's wait and see. Other than that, you were at least being funny before.
This, however, is just disrespectful.
Last edited:
Nah! Troll's the word, and ****** the name. But ya knew that already!!
Btw. Fishbrain, it's been public knowledge on Badscience for weeks. I happen to think it was very kind of me to save the nice folk in this forum the trouble of accidentally stumbling across the information.
now the third complaint has just been sent in.
One complaint and request for removal for each post. 3 posts, 3 complaints, 3 violations.
well put! Objective reality gives us perfect agreement.
we only disagree when we confuse our subjecive reality as objective and the objective reality as subjective. it is really no more complex than that
Are you guys telling me you didnt get my OBVIOUS JOKE?
internet search engine from the late 19th century? can you imagine?
You think I would have discussions like this for four years and not know or come across boolean til now?
C'mon prof......distinguish.....
0=meaning
1=text
2=interpretation
or
0=text
1=objective honest statement
2=joke
ahhh, so you're now suggesting that my work (dialectic) and my discussions are signs of some sort of mental distress?
Well I will have you know, i do see a therapist from time to time! Charming lady. Met her a few months ago to get some assistance in patching together some communication between me and the missus, and decided to see her once or twice privatly.
I told her exactly what I do, she got a good hoot over it. the only thing she told me is that i should quit smoking.
By the way, nice low blow! Sort of along the same lines as "who do you believe, me or your lying eyes?"
kinda a disgusting point of view you have there!
Lotsa Frontal Lobe,
Bubblefish
Last edited:
surely and indeed, the future is always a mystery that is both true and false at once and indistinguishable.
exactly, this is not a question of knowledge, it is a question of understanding. Knowledge is what is meaningless if there is no understanding.
We need three values for understanding knowledge, at least, if we want to think critically.
Bubblefish, I'll address your idiotic repsponse and leave it at that:
I am no more emotional over your idiocy than I am emotional over seeing dead worms on the pavement. You have very clearly shown that you do not wish to discuss anything, to learn anything, and are fairly hellbent on dancing whatever dance you can come up with to stick to your own delusions of grandeur that you have some fanciful revolutionary idea. There is no third value. You're a troll.
I am no more emotional over your idiocy than I am emotional over seeing dead worms on the pavement. You have very clearly shown that you do not wish to discuss anything, to learn anything, and are fairly hellbent on dancing whatever dance you can come up with to stick to your own delusions of grandeur that you have some fanciful revolutionary idea. There is no third value. You're a troll.
So lets' see mr troll, you're trying to get me banned for revealing what is public knowledge anyway. And I have revealed what a liar you are by your non-disclosure of your own interest. How can I be trolling a thread that you have specifically set up for the purpose of trolling? Have you claimed all trolling rights for yourself, just like you claim all rights to truth, reason and critical thinking? You abuse any member who points out the falseness of your position and you have the temerity to accuse me of trolling! You're an idiot.
Have you also explained to the moderator how you revealed the identity of a Badscience forum member merely out of spite? How you abused any and everybody at Badscience? How you posted exactly the same meaningless garbage at Badscience and trolled for all you were worth? Well, have you? I doubt it! I think this makes you, in addition to trolling your own purpose built thread, in addition to being an ill mannered boor, in addition to being a pathological liar, in addition to being a sad pointless squit of a human being, an unmitigated spineless hypocrite. You like to dish it out, like the bully you are, but you can't take it can you. What a pathetic whingeing troll you are.
Grow up moron. Act your age instead of your single digit IQ and get a life!
Well I can't say for certain, because first off that is an example, and secondly even if it were true, it is impossible to verify the subjective experience of another, we can only go on what they tell us.
We only know that it is a subjective event and nothing more critically. A dream is a subjective event. I dont have to know what your dream is to know that it was an actual subjective event that occurred.
damn! where are those laughing rolling smilies when you need them?
I can perfectly account for all behavior on this thread inside of this framework far more objectivly I suggest than you Captain Atheist.
I'll ignore your opinion and address the critical aspect of your question, if you dont mind. I still want to respect you since I read and responded to your wonderful previous post.
Here is what I am saying.
1.) All ideas can either be true, false, or mystery, and can be represented by the number set 0, 1, 2 as perfect symbols which carry those distinctions and relationships in the ordering and counting sense mathematically.
2.) All ideas replicate, duplicate, spread, multipily, divide, and add in a manner similar to cell division/DNA/RNA via human being as messenger.
3.) All ideas conflict or have the potential of conflict
4.) All ideas influence human behavior, and all human behavior influence the perceptible value of idea
5.) Human Beings are not ideas.
6.) All problems of human dilemma relating to conflicting ideologies can be said to be resolved when all sides win in the conflict of idea. In common language, all problems are solved effectivly and for certain when all sides win.
Last edited:
Arkan_Wolfshade
Philosopher
- Joined
- Jan 18, 2006
- Messages
- 7,154
No. You stated that 2+2=5 was a subjective statement. Now substantiate your claim.
how so? Why not address my honest critical arguments? Hmm?
who cares what your opinion is? I mean does opinion really mean anything in critical and objective thinking?
0=point of view
1=objectivity
2=opinion
I challenge you to return to this discussion using honesty and critical thinking, and to challenge me to do so as well.
Yes, i did say it is a subjective statement, but your question was not to back my claim, your question was "what was the subjective event?" as in what was the experience of the observer who made the statement, and I'm sure you can agree, no one can ever know the exact experience of another, that's rather impossible!
If your asking for an answer in princaple, the subjective event was intuition, or more precisely intuition misplaced as critical thinking, or as I like to call it, thinking with the feelings.