The Rabbit Hole

Quoting DrManhatten

Disliked

{quote} Ha Ha! I couldn't resist this! {image}

Ignored

Quoting DrManhatten

Disliked

First, your supposition of “truth doesn’t exist" is a fallacy and is one of many arguments that “post modernists” fail to defend, much like how epistemology failed to defend their arguments, so too does the era of post modernism in its’ regime of contrived realities that eventually will see to it’s own demise. Your argument is both contradicting and circular in logic without a passable conclusion in support thereof. Sort of like the analogy of a dog who chases his or hers own tail to no end can not be satisfied. “Truth can not by Definition be subjective” Well, if you subscribe to the belief of “there is no such thing as truth” then how can it have a definition? Or the notion you put forth is your belief, wouldn’t that make it your truth, seeing that is what you believe in, is in essence what makes your own statement subjective? The premise you put forth and are arguing is a paradox, a contradiction. Mountain is still a Mountain, a Horse is still a Horse and the example you are challenging such as when questioning their purposes is when it becomes subjective is conflated and fragmented for it matters not from it’s objective definition. For the two are separate in their stated discourses. If two or more subjects choose to discuss their purposes, then that is an entirely different matter, and not related to the things in question objective truths. Here is an example in how I summarize your argument. One from being objective then going to being subjective and a Horse is a perfect example. “A horse is a horse, of course, of course, And no one can talk to a horse of course, That is, of course, unless the horse is the famous Mr. Ed. Go right to the source and ask the Horse He’ll give you the answer that you’ll endorse He’s already on a steady course Talk to Mr Ed” I am sure you are familiar with this song from the 60’s sitcom “Mr Ed, but read carefully the song and you will find examples being made within the language itself that goes from objective to subjective within a lyric of a song. There is a literal translation and a metaphorical one, and thus language within the post modernism construct operates with the same type of discourse. “Within the subjective there is no such thing as truth” Everyone’s truth is defined by their life experiences” Again a contradiction. You acknowledge that everyone has a truth, yet you claim that there is no such thing as truth. If there is no such thing as truth then how can anyone have truth based on their life experiences? You either are acknowledging there is truth or acknowledging something else, which doesn’t make any sense based on your line of questioning. Again conflict! In Homers Odyssey, it is acknowledged that every individual has a perception of what truth is, and are bonded by their own convictions to what that truth is as being their driving force in their life,(even Nietzsche acknowledges this) as well as being unique to each individual as being their own truth. Just because they can not prove or articulate it in a clear succinct definition that would be perceived the same to some one else doesn’t necessary mean that is is not true, but only that aspect of what that truth is as being told by someone as being truth only then does it become subjective, an expression, or an opinion. To go about in life believing there is no such thing as truth the individual would also have to embrace the idea that their entire life is based on a lie, a fallacy, and if that is indeed what they are doing then another word for that is nihilism, which in of itself is yet another truth they are embracing. Another paradox! "Isn’t context by definition subjective?" No! Context only becomes subjective when a conflict arises or it appears as a contradiction. "If the edifice of Truth is based on context, how can truth be universal” When or where did I ever say that "Truth is Universal?” In fact I acknowledged there is no universal foundation for all knowledge, but that truth does indeed exist. If you read my other comments (carefully) in response to Simond I was specifically clear about this point, so don’t put words into my mouth please! Here I can put in a more simpler way of Truth being Subjective and Objective by the responses given. There is no grey area as to what they mean. "That is a Cat" response: “Yes, it is!" "I am happy, therefore you should be too!” response: “Why?" My impression that I get from you within the discourse of our conversation, is that you are trying to convince yourself to believe there is no such thing as truth, yet you can not reconcile the fact that you yourself hold on to your own certain beliefs inside your own perceptions as being true, therefore you present your arguments as sort of a paradox, and denying that truth exists furthers your impetus to argue this point without resolution even though it fails on it’s own premise as being a reasonable argument. I insist that it is not!

Ignored

Quoting Devauxt

Disliked

{quote} So these people think that the definition of racist is anything they want it to mean, typical clueless Libtard

Ignored

Quoting jen101

Disliked

{quote} The Left's arguments are all emotionally driven; that is why as soon as you throw some facts at them they fall apart quite spectacularly. Some lefties are skilled in evading the question, like politicians, but the numpties in that video clearly dug themselves bigger and bigger holes. Envy is the main driver for the left. And sloth (lazy, workshy), gluttony (lard arses), greed (sharing of other people's money), pride (no fat shaming), anger (calling names), lust (for other people's money).

Ignored

Quoting Devauxt

Disliked

{quote} The cancer of socialism

Ignored

Quoting DrManhatten

Disliked

For car enthusiasts, I found this to be of interest. Never mind the commercials, it is worth a look! https://youtu.be/6nMg_kfB1WM

Ignored

Quoting simond2002

Disliked

{image} What a very strange place this is.

Ignored

Quoting jen101

Disliked

{quote} Oh shiiiiiitttttt! Didn't notice. So is https://www.forexfactory.com/spreadbetter, who Dev was having a bit of a ding dong with.

Ignored

Quoting simond2002

Disliked

{quote} Hadn't noticed. Yep, that'll explain it.

Ignored

Quoting jen101

Disliked

{quote} And another one https://www.forexfactory.com/sorostrustfu from that thread!

Ignored

Quoting Exodus

Disliked

{quote} Is that Cliff Richard's brother?

Ignored

Quoting jen101

Disliked

{quote} I don't quite get it. Why have old when you can have the best that modern technology can offer?

Ignored

Quoting jen101

Disliked

{quote} Oh shiiiiiitttttt! Didn't notice. So is https://www.forexfactory.com/spreadbetter, who Dev was having a bit of a ding dong with.

Ignored

Quoting DrManhatten

Disliked

{quote} It is not about having, but admiring automotive history with such works of art as museum pieces as well as a look back on the progress that has been made regarding automobiles. I am with you, I like modern technology and designs, but some cars are worth having for simply being unique and a rarity from out of the past. To some the act of restoration of a classic car is a labor of love in which the ultimate reward is a social interaction with other car enthusiasts who share the same interests such as going to shows, and car clubs and so forth....

Ignored