Slip, in other words, one needs to cross the ocean of meanings to know what a fact is, to know if a fact ( that I know ) is indeed the fact. -Vam
Or, "The more you know, the more you know you don't know." That about right? I'd say I'd agree with that. dj On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 12:47 AM, Vam <[email protected]> wrote: > > I 've said earlier that your post says a lot, Slip. It was my way of > saying that you are missing a lot ! And, that's a fact. > > First, there is a fact but you are not aware of it. Like a sight no > one has seen, a photograph no one has clicked. Is the fact still a > fact, in your view ? If yes, how do you know it, as of then when you > are absolutely unaware of it. If no ... just say so. Or, you could > say that the fact you are not aware of is not, in fact, a fact. > > Then, with the awareness of a fact, you begin to know what it is, what > it means to you in your perspective and experience, to others in their > perspective and experience, in history, and over time. What you have > labelled as ' subjective interpretation ' is in fact a part or point > along the process of knowing what the fact is ... worldly, > normatively and exceptionally, sensually, emotionally, mentally, > intellectually ... You are still in the process of knowing what the > fact is. Your understanding of what the fact is continues to change > interminably over time, with your understanding of what the fact > indeed is in your knowledge of it ... the form of it, its make up and > construction and properties, the nature of it, the relatedness it has > for you in general and in particular, the relatedness it has to others > and all being in general and in particular, all that it connects with, > all of its supports and all that it supports. > > Despite much that we derive and make use of through approximation and > compromising along the process, the process of such knowing, of what a > fact is, may or may come to an end in one's lifetime. May, if one > allows this process over time. But untill it does, we are truly > speaking not entitled to raise our flag, as being a knower of the > fact, of projecting the ' hard ' and definitive contours of what is > still a supposed fact, still a something of which one may know a lot > but not enough as yet ! One can always approximate without being > incorrect, as we all do, but we all know of medicinal side effects > discovered decades after their administration. > > No, till the completion of the knowing process, whereafter one's > knowledge of the fact no longer changes, not untill then may we speak > of ' the ' fact. Untill then, you could be speaking of part ( or some > features ) of the fact and projecting it as being the whole fact. > Untill then, you do not know enough to be speaking of ' the ' fact ! > > Slip, in other words, one needs to cross the ocean of meanings to know > what a fact is, to know if a fact ( that I know ) is indeed the fact. > > On Sep 21, 4:06 am, Slip Disc <[email protected]> wrote: >> hahaha! The analytical approach eh? lol >> >> I never stated that it was important that they stand apart but simply >> stated, accordingly with my understanding, that they were separate and >> distinct in response to some of the replies earlier in the thread. >> There were those who stated that facts change or do not exist because >> people have differing interpretations of the fact, seems they've >> bailed out. >> Some posts back Don had made statement agreeing with my assertions. >> "I understand that some people refuse to accept certain facts. I also >> understand that some people accept as fact what is, in fact, no such >> thing. I don't see how this makes facts subjective. Facts are facts. >> Either something is true or it isn't. Whether or not somebody >> believes it has nothing to do with it. I'm on Slips side of this >> coin. "<<DJ >> >> I don't really care either way if anyone agrees or disagrees, we can >> agree to disagree. Obviously you are compelled to dispute that facts >> are fixed. I might ask same; why is that so important to you? I >> didn't mean to cause any perturbation on your end, I just thought this >> was another of the many discussions we have here in Minds Eye. >> >> This thread begins with Ayn Rand's video interview Objectivism vs >> Altruism and it has not really veered too far off thread topic save >> for trying to establish the nature of facts. Otherwise the thread has >> reached an impasse and is in a sense a carousel, at which point I get >> off the ride. >> >> Ayn Rand States: "My philosophy, Objectivism, holds that Reality >> exists as an objective absolute—facts are facts, independent of man’s >> feelings, 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 >> feelings, wishes, hopes or fears. And so this is where the thread >> took on a new debate. >> >> After 44 posts you chimed in with fact and synchronicity and Jung's >> scarab example etc. I disagree with your post in relation to fact. >> Your 1+1 example was invalidated and you agreed to technical >> correctness. >> >> Lee claims that fact can be subjective, I disagree. If fact is >> subjective then it is not fact but interpretation. >> >> Chris states "I tend to agree with your hard pressed points (SD) >> regarding objective facts, but I'm sympathetic to those who struggle >> with that." >> >> Finally as I say, we have reached an impasse and can no longer cover >> Ayn Rand's philosophy without a consensus on the nature of facts. >> That 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 >> > facts 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 is >> > 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 I >> > 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. >> > > > And?<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 are >> > > 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 remains; 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 at http://groups.google.com/group/minds-eye?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
