On Sep 21, 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.<<VM
I find facts to be simple, we live on planet earth, I find that to be
a simple fact. I don't need any mystical enlightenment process to
accept the earth and moon, the rivers and streams. There is no
perspective or experience, in history or over time that will change
mountains, they are there, factually and all the world know it to be
fact.
Medicinal claims are not facts, they are claims. It is a non fact
example.
Facts are not something that is dependent upon my understanding of
them.
So what ocean do I need to cross before I accept life on planet earth
as 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]
>
> ...
>
> read more »
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
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
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
