I trust that your Carosel ride will be a happy turn of events.
-----Original Message----- From: Slip Disc <[email protected]> To: "Minds Eye" <[email protected]> Sent: Sun, Sep 20, 2009 7:06 pm Subject: [Mind's Eye] Re: Objectivism vs Altruism ahaha! The analytical approach eh? lol I never stated that it was important that they stand apart but simply tated, accordingly with my understanding, that they were separate and istinct in response to some of the replies earlier in the thread. here were those who stated that facts change or do not exist because eople have differing interpretations of the fact, seems they've ailed out. ome posts back Don had made statement agreeing with my assertions. I understand that some people refuse to accept certain facts. I also nderstand that some people accept as fact what is, in fact, no such hing. I don't see how this makes facts subjective. Facts are facts. ither something is true or it isn't. Whether or not somebody elieves it has nothing to do with it. I'm on Slips side of this oin. "<<DJ I don't really care either way if anyone agrees or disagrees, we can gree to disagree. Obviously you are compelled to dispute that facts re fixed. I might ask same; why is that so important to you? I idn't mean to cause any perturbation on your end, I just thought this as another of the many discussions we have here in Minds Eye. This thread begins with Ayn Rand's video interview Objectivism vs ltruism and it has not really veered t oo far off thread topic save or trying to establish the nature of facts. Otherwise the thread has eached an impasse and is in a sense a carousel, at which point I get ff the ride. Ayn Rand States: "My philosophy, Objectivism, holds that Reality xists as an objective absolute—facts are facts, independent of man’s eelings, wishes, hopes or fears." http://aynrandlexicon.com/ayn-rand-ideas/introducing-objectivism.html link provided by Molly) I agree with Ayn Rand that facts are facts, independent of man's eelings, wishes, hopes or fears. And so this is where the thread ook on a new debate. After 44 posts you chimed in with fact and synchronicity and Jung's carab example etc. I disagree with your post in relation to fact. our 1+1 example was invalidated and you agreed to technical orrectness. Lee claims that fact can be subjective, I disagree. If fact is ubjective then it is not fact but interpretation. Chris states "I tend to agree with your hard pressed points (SD) egarding objective facts, but I'm sympathetic to those who struggle ith that." Finally as I say, we have reached an impasse and can no longer cover yn Rand's philosophy without a consensus on the nature of facts. hat is all I can say. On Sep 20, 5:02 pm, [email protected] wrote: Please enlighten me as to the reason why you think it is so important that acts stand apart from their interpretation? -----Original Message----- From: Slip Disc <[email protected]> To: "Minds Eye" <[email protected]> Sent: Sun, Sep 20, 2009 4:49 pm Subject: [Mind's Eye] Re: Objectivism vs Altruism Your getting closer but first let me say I'm not passionate about my point of view, just assertive. Your recurrent use of the phrase "so what" I take to mean that it is of no consequence. I don't see the relevance of vacuum in this but now that you mention it, is vacuum a fact? I'm sure "some" people in the Netherlands walk around feeling like they are living above sea level but the fact is they are living below sea level. That is a fact, immutable, fixed. What is there to dispute? You say, "That unrecognized facts still have an existence apart from whether or not a human being recognizes their factualness 'I agree' ......(just remove "but so what?") There it is. You agree. Recognized "and" Unrecognized facts exist. Other than that I don't know what you are trying to dispute. I rest my case. On Sep 20, 1:33?pm, [email protected] wrote: > Let me come at it in another way. So let's say I agree with you that a fact s a fact. So what? Unless you select one fact out of the billions of possible selectable facts it simply exists in a vacuum. No? > It is a fact that you feel passionately about your point of view. That is fine. But unless someone responds either pro or con or simply acknowledges the fact of your fact then for all practical purposes it exists in a vacuum. Or am missing something. That unrecognized facts still have an existence apart from whether or not a human being recognizes their factualness I agree but so what? > -----Original Message----- > From: Slip Disc <[email protected]> > To: "Minds Eye" <[email protected]> > Sent: Sun, Sep 20, 2009 1:24 pm > Subject: [Mind's Eye] Re: Objectivism vs Altruism > On Sep 20, 10:32?am, [email protected] wrote: > > Of course Van Goghs painting is Van Goghs painting. That is a fact. nd?<gw > (Yes, of course it is, interpretation and meaning do not change it.) > > It is a fact that you and I are most likely going to die one day. Those re > facts. <gw > (Yes, physically as per belief. ?You say "most likely" but that adds > ambiguity to the fact. ?Most likely is not a fact attribute, it's like > kind of pregnant. > > But without imputing meaning to those facts - the facts themselves are simply > facts. <gw > (Yes, exactly, facts, that's what I've said repeatedly. ?To impute > meaning to a simple fact does not alter the fact because meaning can > be assigned on an individual basis. ?As with VG's painting, for one > the "meaning" might be Contribution to the Art World, but to another > the meaning might be an Example of a gross abomination, anathema) > (You assigned meaning to the "Object" on your office table as being > beautiful, blue, ashtray, however to a minimalist the object would be > rendered meaningless and viewed as clutter. ?Fact rema ins; you have a > "Object" on your office table.) > > In a way who cares? ?<gw > (It's not a matter of caring, you should know caring is an emotion, > are we attaching emotion to facts now? Beautiful blue ashtray?) > > Unless a person attributes meaning to any facts - the facts themselves are by > definition meaningless and simly exist. <gw > (It is not essential for a fact to have meaning, it can still be a > fact. ?It is meaningless to me that there are 63 moons around planet > Jupiter but it is still a fact) > > If you are impressed with the mere fact of existing objects so be it.<gw > (Impressed? ?I simply acknowledge that facts do exist, some may have > meaning and be pertinent to other issues and some may just be a fact > without meaning. ?Point still remains intact, individual perceptions > of fact do not alter the fact which you have yet failed to demonstrate > otherwise.) --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group athttp://groups.google.com/group/minds-eye?hl=en -~---- ------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~--- -~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ ou received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Minds Eye"" group. o post to this group, send email to [email protected] o unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] or more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/minds-eye?hl=en ~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~--- --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/minds-eye?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
