About
Content
Store
Forum

Rebirth of Reason
War
People
Archives
Objectivism

Post to this threadMark all messages in this thread as readMark all messages in this thread as unreadBack one pagePage 0Page 1Page 2Page 3


Post 60

Tuesday, December 16, 2003 - 9:11pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
No no wait. I was saying that to... vertigo.

Post 61

Wednesday, December 17, 2003 - 9:40amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Vertigo is noisy and pointless. Francois, you should "tear him a new philosophy" (hehe) :)
I was wrong about him: discussion about fundamentals is one thing, but he's shown himself in other areas of the board here, to be a Kantian, who is absolutely committed to the idea that knowledge about reality is totally impossible, and that we could all be plugged into a giant simulation gane (despite any evidence to back it up.)
He's not interested in evidence. "Evidence?" We since reality is -- according to this guy -- whatever I happen to believe --- then the evidence can essentially be damned.

No wonder the world is going downhill, with people like Vertigo to help convince us all there's no difference between delusions and reailty.

Post 62

Wednesday, December 17, 2003 - 10:12amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
"No wonder the world is going downhill, with people like Vertigo to help convince us all there's no difference between delusions and reailty."

People think they are very profound when they tell us that What You See Is Not What You Get. But they refuse to understand that What You Believe Is Not What You Get.

Post 63

Wednesday, December 17, 2003 - 11:59amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Please view my responses in the thread about 'Reality is not absolute'. I don't want to repeat myself unnecessarily.

A quick summary, I never advocated that what you believe is what you get. I advocated that what you get is actually what you believe you have got.

Post 64

Wednesday, December 17, 2003 - 12:04pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Also view my post on the Military Technocracy thread please. Do me that much.

Post 65

Wednesday, December 17, 2003 - 12:26pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Actually, now that I think about it, our two statements are actually the same.

Quote: "But they refuse to understand that What You Believe Is Not What You Get."

Actually, in another form this is exactly what I have been saying. This statement says that no matter what you believe you will get the same real thing. That implies that believing something is real doesn't imply it is. This is the fundamental fact of what you are saying.

What is real is really real. Slowly we get a better understanding of what is real, by various evidence. Due the evidence we believe in the legitimacy of that real thing. BY YOUR OWN STATEMENT what we believe is not what we get. Therefore, what you know to be real might not be real.

Amazing isn't it? You and I, Francois, are advocating the very same 'Kantian' idea. The only difference is you say don't worry about the possibility of it being wrong, while I say recognise the possibility, since that leads to better interpretation of evidence.

So why are we arguing?

Such a simple distinction should be enough to get me 'blacklisted' on this site, or called a troll, etc.

Post 66

Wednesday, December 17, 2003 - 12:28pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Sorry, 'should' in that last sentence above should be "shouldn't". Damn typos...

Post 67

Wednesday, December 17, 2003 - 2:37pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Vertigo: I'm not going to waste the time. If you sincerely believe that facts do not exist until observed, or that "wishing really hard" is what makes the world go 'round, then I pity you, I really really do.
If "wishing really hard" worked, you wouldn't be able to post to the board (your hands having spontaneously combusted, and all).
If we are misrepresenting your position, it is either because you ave presented it badly, or because it is, indeed, stupid.

Now do us all a favor, and crawl back to wherever you came from. Don't waste the time posting here, until you at least have some idea what you're posting ABOUT.

Comprende, amigo?

Post 68

Wednesday, December 17, 2003 - 2:47pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Vertigo: if that was actually what you had been saying, then we would have acknowledged that. You were NOT saying that "reality is really real", over in the other thread. You were saying something more like "I can never actually know if reality is real or not, because anything I know can always posslbly be wrong, even if I have no evidence for supporting the conclusion that it is wrong."
In other words, your basic premise was:

1. There is a real world.
2. We can never know anything about reality, because everything we DO 'know" could always concievably be totally wrong. (Nice assertion independent of evidence: WHAT evidence leads you to think that you're knowledge is wrong?)

3. Since we can know nothing about reality, then any and all of the delusions we CHOOSE to call "knowledge" are as good as one another. (Hence, the mere fact that the archaological evidence denies most of the bible, for example, is of no consequence whatsoever.)

Your premise is that reality is unknowable, because whatever we DO know could probably be faked. That's stupid. If you had EVIDENCE to present, it would undermine your entire argument, becasue then you would actually be implying that we CAN KNOW something about reality (and that your evidence was unimpeachable).

The lesson here?

1. Don't come onto a board until you know what the board is about. (IE, ACTUALLY LEARN about Objectivism before posting!!!)

2. Don't expect that a fundamentally alien viewpoint is going to go over well. If we actually thought like you do, then we'd ALREADY BE YOU!!!!

3. pleas of "I just wanted to debate" aren't going to make it all better. You blew it, vertigo. If you'd actually read some objectivist stuff, or given a better presentation, that would have been different, but you just wander in -- admitting that you know nothing about our viewpoint -- and all you can come up with to "learn about it" is some guy on fresian.com?

Gimme a break!

Come on back when you actually KNOW something about what you're trying to debunk, okay?
(When I go to debate fundamentalist christians, I actually know something about the bible first!) sheesh!

Post to this threadBack one pagePage 0Page 1Page 2Page 3


User ID Password or create a free account.