Do you know the most troubling thing about Kierkegaard's writing to me? It was the silence in between thoughts of the paradox. As Pascal said something like "man gets into all sorts of turmoil from his inability to sit in his room quietly." It is a hurrendous place to sit: absolutely by yourself, transfiguring though I'm sure of it.
Have you read any of Kierkegaards works? If so, which is his was the objectively best work....for you? Mine was Either:or. I've yet to read "Works Of Love" or "purity of heart" but untill then *doffs hat.*
FANTASTIC VIDEO! Keep in mind that in Rationalism, there is no "I" for the "I like this orange" or "you" for "you do not like this orange".There is only a "we", as in "we" all most be of the same conclusions and thoughts with no room for individual views or understandings. That is the great up Existentialism has over Empiricism: it is the belief that the individual can and should have freedom to decide what reality is, while empirical slavery says that the individual must be enslaved by "reason"
taste must be rationalized if it is to enter into the realm of intelligibility..... if you cant explain your tastes than that means you as a rational person have no involvement in the liking of the orange.....
if you believe your essense as a human lies in rationality (which is a necessary belief for the whole edifice of reality to take place; and thus something we already believe implicitely) than you must believe that taste is meaningless if it cannot be rationalized since anything irrational has no meaningful connection to a rational being......
the reason taste must be explained is to retain our essense .... rationality....
now it is obvious people have tastes that are subjective.... but its not obvious that these people have a distorted and incoherent (which is coextensive with irrational) sense of their essnse.....
To believe in the possibility of taste then is to neglect the importance of your essence (rationality)..... in that sense, strictly (theoretically) speaking taste is immoral as it compromises rationality, which is an essential feature to morality if morality if to have any weight in society....
this is why your tastes have to be objective ..... YOU RISK HURTING OTHERS WITH YOUR TASTES IF YOUR TASTES ARE NOT OBJECTIVELY GROUNDED>>>..
the way we make sure that we dont hurt others by our tastes.... is by placing at the top of our hieracrhy of values, the value to not hurt others with our tastes....
therefore our tastes are conditioned by objectivity.... thus rendering your tastes objective...... if "TASTE" TRULY WAS SUBJECTIVE THAN WE WOULD HAVE NO REASON TO CARE FOR OTHERS....
for instance if you do believe that it is ok for you to like the orange without you wanting everyone to like it.... that means you believe its ok for people to like subjective tastes..... BUT..... what happens when your love for something overides your desire for other people to be protected from your subjective pursuits.... what happens when you love something that harms others....?
if you believe it good that means you believe it is right to believe that is good.... you did not study this issue well... you cant dismiss this issue with a simple consideration of intuition.....
i dont get what your saying at all. are you making analogies or talking about oranges and music? were you trying to be convincing? if so why didnt you give me more information to why u like these things? if not then why did you post this video? i dont get it and therefore im unconvinced.
If you get a crappy orange, your stuck with that crappy orange. But if you eat grapes and you get a crappy grape, you have many other grapes to choose from that aren't crappy.
:P
I understand what your saying but I thought I'd build my own analogy from yours.
These analogies are badly disingenuous. Certainly the reasons you enjoy particular fruits and songs are fantastically complex and nuanced, but extending that to argue that there is no way to (and more importantly no point in trying to) demonstrate the nutritional, biochemical, psychological, sociological and mathematical underpinnings of those behaviors is a complete non-sequiter.
Well done. There's a difference between the objective quality of the orange and the music, versus your opinion of it. Objectively, the orange is more nutritious than gasoline, and in fact if you consume the latter you will die. Objectively, the music in the video was better than the sound of a jackhammer, and if you spend too much time around the latter, you will go deaf; but you might prefer the taste of gasoline and the sound of the jackhammer, and are free to do so without coercion.
I dont think this has anything to do with whether or not you like your "orange" or not...what we are looking for is proof that your "orange" exists...If you can provide that proof, I would love to enjoy my own "orange" as much as you enjoy yours.
He's saying it's not a matter of empiricism. The taste and what he gets from the orange is good enough for him. It's not something to be spoken of in an empirical matter.
Oh I can assure you that my orange exists; in fact, you can see clearly that my orange exists. Now whether or not there is anything 'beyond' my orange can be in question.
In fact, I would go one step further (farther??) than this. There is nothing to the orange but your enjoyment of the orange. To stop and look at and examine and try to determine what the orange is, is to effectively stop enjoying that orange that you enjoy. Thus, that orange that you so enjoy is no longer that enjoyed orange when taken alienated from the context of your enjoyment of it; it's not the same orange. And to even say it exists is, I think, to no longer enjoy it.
Yet in speaking of the orange's features is to POTENTIALLY (depending on one's perspective) further enjoy the orange, in all it's splendor! To "wallow" in the beauty of the orange may perhaps influence the flavour in a more delicious way. Of course the opposite is also possible, but you see my point.
The first video I watch of yours in months and your talking about oranges with your LONG hair now : ) I prefer apples myself unfortunately I havent found someone to share it with. "germs". so I plant apple pips to where I can. and sooner then you realize it apple trees are every where with an abundance of apples. I choose Love.
Five stars and two thumbs up from an atheist, here. You hit the nail on the head. It's a subjective thing, not a factual-reality-based thing. I'll tell that to fellow atheists, you tell that to fellow Christians. ;)
The trouble is that some people are trying to make us eat the orange and listen to the song, perhaps not you, but some. And these people are not providing us with good reasons to eat the orange.
if you think an orange tastes good and i think an orange tastes bad, it doesn't change the actual taste of the orange. regarding religion: it does not matter if i do not like the taste of a religion. what matters is if it is true.
Religion is not comparable to taste in any way, unless you're saying you don't really believe in your religion and you worship your god just because you like it, or that your religion really isn't that important to you.
Orange eaters are well established and have been for years. The culture of orange eating is responsible for vitamin C being added to much of our food stuffs and we don't even appreciate it. We take this for granted. On the other hand there is a minority of orange eaters that are insisting all of us eat only oranges. They insist oranges are the only source of vitamin C. So your probably feeling the backlash of the fundy orange eaters.
LOL. Not really. I'm still a right-wing conservative linguist (LOL) and I think that is what philosophy has stemmed from but I think aesthetics is IN DEPTH why we choose to sit on certain stems. Take GG for example. He sits on the Orange stem because of the beautiful taste in his mouth. Even if he would've sat there for "logical" or "empirical" reasons those reasons look better than others for some and that is why they choose them, I think. Blah blah blah I'll change my mind next week.
LOL. Not really. I'm still a right-wing conservative linguist (LOL) and I think that is what philosophy has stemmed from but I think aesthetics is IN DEPTH why we choose to sit on certain stems. Take GG for example. He sits on the Orange stem because of the beautiful taste in his mouth. Even if he would've sat there for "logical" or "empirical" reasons those reasons look better than others for some and that is why they choose them, I think. Blah blah blah I'll change my mind next week.
Do you know the most troubling thing about Kierkegaard's writing to me? It was the silence in between thoughts of the paradox. As Pascal said something like "man gets into all sorts of turmoil from his inability to sit in his room quietly." It is a hurrendous place to sit: absolutely by yourself, transfiguring though I'm sure of it.
fredbloggs02 3 months ago
Have you read any of Kierkegaards works? If so, which is his was the objectively best work....for you? Mine was Either:or. I've yet to read "Works Of Love" or "purity of heart" but untill then *doffs hat.*
fredbloggs02 3 months ago
My dear sir, what does this have to do with Kierkeggaard's view?
TheGadfly1234 1 year ago
FANTASTIC VIDEO! Keep in mind that in Rationalism, there is no "I" for the "I like this orange" or "you" for "you do not like this orange".There is only a "we", as in "we" all most be of the same conclusions and thoughts with no room for individual views or understandings. That is the great up Existentialism has over Empiricism: it is the belief that the individual can and should have freedom to decide what reality is, while empirical slavery says that the individual must be enslaved by "reason"
mysticresistence 1 year ago
The orange is real and there are no major social ramifications from eating it, but God is another story.
IcarusNe0 2 years ago
awesome man ! well done :)
korona3103 2 years ago
Very clever.
7787731240 3 years ago
taste must be rationalized if it is to enter into the realm of intelligibility..... if you cant explain your tastes than that means you as a rational person have no involvement in the liking of the orange.....
codehendrix 3 years ago
if you believe your essense as a human lies in rationality (which is a necessary belief for the whole edifice of reality to take place; and thus something we already believe implicitely) than you must believe that taste is meaningless if it cannot be rationalized since anything irrational has no meaningful connection to a rational being......
the reason taste must be explained is to retain our essense .... rationality....
codehendrix 3 years ago
now it is obvious people have tastes that are subjective.... but its not obvious that these people have a distorted and incoherent (which is coextensive with irrational) sense of their essnse.....
To believe in the possibility of taste then is to neglect the importance of your essence (rationality)..... in that sense, strictly (theoretically) speaking taste is immoral as it compromises rationality, which is an essential feature to morality if morality if to have any weight in society....
codehendrix 3 years ago
this is why your tastes have to be objective ..... YOU RISK HURTING OTHERS WITH YOUR TASTES IF YOUR TASTES ARE NOT OBJECTIVELY GROUNDED>>>..
the way we make sure that we dont hurt others by our tastes.... is by placing at the top of our hieracrhy of values, the value to not hurt others with our tastes....
therefore our tastes are conditioned by objectivity.... thus rendering your tastes objective...... if "TASTE" TRULY WAS SUBJECTIVE THAN WE WOULD HAVE NO REASON TO CARE FOR OTHERS....
codehendrix 3 years ago
for instance if you do believe that it is ok for you to like the orange without you wanting everyone to like it.... that means you believe its ok for people to like subjective tastes..... BUT..... what happens when your love for something overides your desire for other people to be protected from your subjective pursuits.... what happens when you love something that harms others....?
codehendrix 3 years ago
if you believe it good that means you believe it is right to believe that is good.... you did not study this issue well... you cant dismiss this issue with a simple consideration of intuition.....
codehendrix 3 years ago
I really enjoy your views, your optimism, much respect. Waiting for another video.
Toomapoosh 3 years ago
Hmm... An esthetic approach to theology...
Somehow I don't think that's going to carry much weight among Dawkin's followers. ;-)
Not to mention Acharya S and her fanatic disciples.
But, yeah... I suppose it's a start.
Brotoi 3 years ago
i dont get what your saying at all. are you making analogies or talking about oranges and music? were you trying to be convincing? if so why didnt you give me more information to why u like these things? if not then why did you post this video? i dont get it and therefore im unconvinced.
jonathanw810 3 years ago
If you get a crappy orange, your stuck with that crappy orange. But if you eat grapes and you get a crappy grape, you have many other grapes to choose from that aren't crappy.
:P
I understand what your saying but I thought I'd build my own analogy from yours.
So much for absolutes huh?
~options are good~
FreePrometheus 3 years ago
These analogies are badly disingenuous. Certainly the reasons you enjoy particular fruits and songs are fantastically complex and nuanced, but extending that to argue that there is no way to (and more importantly no point in trying to) demonstrate the nutritional, biochemical, psychological, sociological and mathematical underpinnings of those behaviors is a complete non-sequiter.
TheApatheticDespot 3 years ago
Well done. There's a difference between the objective quality of the orange and the music, versus your opinion of it. Objectively, the orange is more nutritious than gasoline, and in fact if you consume the latter you will die. Objectively, the music in the video was better than the sound of a jackhammer, and if you spend too much time around the latter, you will go deaf; but you might prefer the taste of gasoline and the sound of the jackhammer, and are free to do so without coercion.
brainouty 3 years ago
If only seeing your "orange" was as easy as this video portrays...
IHaveEpilepsy 3 years ago
I dont think this has anything to do with whether or not you like your "orange" or not...what we are looking for is proof that your "orange" exists...If you can provide that proof, I would love to enjoy my own "orange" as much as you enjoy yours.
IHaveEpilepsy 3 years ago
He's saying it's not a matter of empiricism. The taste and what he gets from the orange is good enough for him. It's not something to be spoken of in an empirical matter.
thinkeatingmachine 3 years ago
Oh I can assure you that my orange exists; in fact, you can see clearly that my orange exists. Now whether or not there is anything 'beyond' my orange can be in question.
goldengun85 3 years ago
In fact, I would go one step further (farther??) than this. There is nothing to the orange but your enjoyment of the orange. To stop and look at and examine and try to determine what the orange is, is to effectively stop enjoying that orange that you enjoy. Thus, that orange that you so enjoy is no longer that enjoyed orange when taken alienated from the context of your enjoyment of it; it's not the same orange. And to even say it exists is, I think, to no longer enjoy it.
pantiesinauproar 3 years ago
Yet in speaking of the orange's features is to POTENTIALLY (depending on one's perspective) further enjoy the orange, in all it's splendor! To "wallow" in the beauty of the orange may perhaps influence the flavour in a more delicious way. Of course the opposite is also possible, but you see my point.
SociologyDr 3 years ago
(Responding to "pantiesinauproar")
SociologyDr 3 years ago
The first video I watch of yours in months and your talking about oranges with your LONG hair now : ) I prefer apples myself unfortunately I havent found someone to share it with. "germs". so I plant apple pips to where I can. and sooner then you realize it apple trees are every where with an abundance of apples. I choose Love.
teabowbraine 3 years ago
Five stars and two thumbs up from an atheist, here. You hit the nail on the head. It's a subjective thing, not a factual-reality-based thing. I'll tell that to fellow atheists, you tell that to fellow Christians. ;)
helgihg 3 years ago
The trouble is that some people are trying to make us eat the orange and listen to the song, perhaps not you, but some. And these people are not providing us with good reasons to eat the orange.
BelovedRock 3 years ago
Get some death metal on ya! Try 'Execration Text' by Nile.
BoozyBeggar 3 years ago
What the Hell? Double post? I pressed 'Post Comment' ONCE!
BoozyBeggar 3 years ago
Get some death metal on ya! Try 'Execration Text' by Nile.
BoozyBeggar 3 years ago
if you think an orange tastes good and i think an orange tastes bad, it doesn't change the actual taste of the orange. regarding religion: it does not matter if i do not like the taste of a religion. what matters is if it is true.
tophy84 3 years ago
What matters is a matter of opinion. I don't think he'd say that is what matters the most, (In that way, atleast).
thinkeatingmachine 3 years ago
Religion is not comparable to taste in any way, unless you're saying you don't really believe in your religion and you worship your god just because you like it, or that your religion really isn't that important to you.
rowsdowersavesus 3 years ago
sounding more like a "nothing" everyday ;D Much respect, much!!!
hunniebee173 3 years ago
Orange eaters are well established and have been for years. The culture of orange eating is responsible for vitamin C being added to much of our food stuffs and we don't even appreciate it. We take this for granted. On the other hand there is a minority of orange eaters that are insisting all of us eat only oranges. They insist oranges are the only source of vitamin C. So your probably feeling the backlash of the fundy orange eaters.
owheydusoapsk 3 years ago 5
This comment reminded me why I like you. ;)
rUTokKIN2ME 3 years ago
Thanks Rut.
owheydusoapsk 3 years ago
Let's see... three people in the house... so that's six thumbs up.
Very well put. :D
Krysannia521 3 years ago
Hurray for willing ignorance! May a new dark age fall upon you :P
Kyberspawn 3 years ago
I've changed from "it boils down to language" to "it boils down to aesthetics"
thinkeatingmachine 3 years ago
So you've abandoned "the linguistic turn" and gone to "the hawtness turn" eh? :-)
randyhelzerman 3 years ago
LOL. Not really. I'm still a right-wing conservative linguist (LOL) and I think that is what philosophy has stemmed from but I think aesthetics is IN DEPTH why we choose to sit on certain stems. Take GG for example. He sits on the Orange stem because of the beautiful taste in his mouth. Even if he would've sat there for "logical" or "empirical" reasons those reasons look better than others for some and that is why they choose them, I think. Blah blah blah I'll change my mind next week.
theamazingparody 3 years ago
Don't copy me! WTF! Nice channel though! Haha.
thinkeatingmachine 3 years ago
LOL. Not really. I'm still a right-wing conservative linguist (LOL) and I think that is what philosophy has stemmed from but I think aesthetics is IN DEPTH why we choose to sit on certain stems. Take GG for example. He sits on the Orange stem because of the beautiful taste in his mouth. Even if he would've sat there for "logical" or "empirical" reasons those reasons look better than others for some and that is why they choose them, I think. Blah blah blah I'll change my mind next week.
thinkeatingmachine 3 years ago
So you've cloned yourself!!!!! :-) W.R.T. this, its like what Quine said---there's the words and there's the music :)
randyhelzerman 3 years ago
the value or truthfulness of an orange or a song is not in question. it is what it is.
the value and truthfulness of religion is very much in question.
furthermore, lol, in kansas they are indeed "shoving christianity down peoples' throats"
blasphemite 3 years ago
Excellent vid! Most beliefs boil down to a matter of preference, of which logic and rationale are mere byproducts.
Are you sure that isn't a tangerine you're enjoying? ;)
CelphaFiael 3 years ago 2
Hahaha! Very well done.
Pavoreax 3 years ago