First time watching one of your videos Mr.Penn, and I enjoyed it. You seem like quite the educated individual. I will definitely watch more of your vidoes soon.
He seems to like his hair. I bet it would shatter his reality if a person forcefully shaved it off, like Samson. Does Penn gain his strength from his hair? Is it a wig? Does Barbra Streisand have a penis? Tune in at 11 for all the answers!
A subjective argument for objectivity - brilliant. Too many people make their arguments for objectivity objective, like that would convince a subjectivist.
this vid concerns the terms subjective and objective in the epistemic sense. there are other senses of this term i.e. ontologiclly, ethicly etc. you should ask you friend if his view that the truth of his statement that all statements are subjective in nature is a subjective or objective statement.
i've encountered many people who act like this (say "everything is true" etc). very frustrating. it usually comes down to them twisting your words around. i spoke with someone who said he denies "gradual evolution" because he "doesn't believe in time", but he does believe we all share common ancestors...its idiotic, and it really depresses me that so many people my age (early twenties) spout this kind of baseless nonesense
Hi Penn fans. Penn Says videos have been discontinued, so you won't be seeing any new content on here. You can check out our Profile on our Channel Page for more info. We'll still be checking in, so hope to keep chatting with you all! Thanks!
The real distinction here is that believing that the reality exists regardless of the self is that it does give meaning to existence.
If you believe that the world is simply a product of your mind and would not exist without the self, then there is no reason to search for any truth.
An objective reality allows there to be a purpose for those of us who actually want to search for the truth. Regardless of what that truth is, it must exist whether i do. Otherwise, whats the point?
Objective truth can not be experienced from any point of view because it is everything you experience IS subjective. If you see the color blue, how do you know its blue? Your brain tells you..how does your brain now? your eyes see it? How can the eyes see it? the lense refract the light and it comes up as blue. What if someone elses eyes see green? Who is right? both of you are!!! Its blue to you and green to the other person!
@AmericanPoliceState blue and green and all colors are defined by their wavelengths, which are "objectively" verifiable. yes, i suppose you can interpret colors differently, but that doesn't been there isn't an objective reality
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
PENN, I've listened to a few of your videos. I know you're an atheist. I also know you talk about Jesus and the Bible a lot. I THINK YOU WANT TO BE A CHRISTIAN. Just do it man. IT. IS. THE. BEST. THING. EVER. MAN. you don't have all day
I'm sure nobody will read this, but: here's my latest take on it:
Every concept that exists is a subjective concept. A concept that is objective is also a subjective one.
What differentiates the two is that an objective concept is one that all subjects can theoretically attest to. It is the intersection of subjective truths. Reality is the intersection of subjective perceptions.
There's no need to ASSUME objective reality...Objective truth can be functionally defined without assuming..
@pennsays Little off topic. If you really believed you didn't matter at all, you wouldn't be sharing your ideas with the world man. And I thank whatever need be thanked for that. I'm like you, I don't believe in religion or the dogmas they present. But I am seeing really interesting studies about the impact of states of love and fear we all go through individually. Would you say there is scientific evidence to say we all truly matter in the flow of events? Im happy to send links if you'd like.
Best one I've watched so far. Your growing dilligence to not worrying about getting non-essential facts exactly right should be a beacon to everyone!!!
Blathering on trying to remember on-the-fly the exact non-essential facts does so much to cause loss of interest or just general irritation. It puts the listener in a mental holding pattern that you're just hoping for an exit out of.
Ooh, a different dimension! Can you show me how to jump to one where eating is not necessary for survival? Because that would be boss. Or... please show me how to go to one where I can fly from buildings. I would prefer a dimension where I can choose which "laws" of nature are subjective based on my whims. Eagerly awaiting instructions, thanks!
Why would the mountain being real, prove that humans can be wrong? The mountain isn't wrong, the mountain is true. Penn is true, being objective about the mountains reality does not make anyone wrong.
jeez... he's saying the existence of objective truth allows for absolutes: that of being RIGHT and WRONG. the mountain being real is an example of the primacy of existence over consciousness, in other words: reality (the universe) has been here long before humanity, and will be here long after it.
The mountain only proves that there is relative truth. For example, the mountain exists, therefore truth exists is only true in the time frame in which the mountain and be perceived or existed. If you were to go to a different dimension or position in time, this argument would fall flat on its face, because there would be no mountain, and also no objective truth about the mountain.
The argument only works in a short time frame and from the human perspective.
Hey Penn, What if "reason" dictated for you to kill your own child. Example - Your child is trying to kill you, your wife, or others (God forbid). Wouldn't reason dictate that you use deadly force to stop your own child. Would that make the parent, in your words,"dangerous"?
I really love this clip. Sounds like to me, you are talking about 2 extreme views.... this is very interesting because you and your freind being in the extremes are more alike than you realize. Flip sides of the same coin if you will. If you put yourselves on a finite line of measurement, stretched out you are very far apart. But, if you bend your line into a circle, you are very close... is that subjective or objective?
Penn or Teller you both are gay and it's ok...leave it alone and you tube too..really..just go. Do your tricks and illusions. Paint your nails and have a quiet sidekick...take cake
I believe you're right about subjectivism placing people at the center of the universe: it elevates a mere perspective to the arbiter of everything. The attempt is then made necessary to overcome the horror of a purely subjective reality by embracing all perspectives [where did the subjectivity of experience go all of a sudden?] The so-called "yes" to everything, that squashes everything into meaninglessness with its insipid "yes."
Man would love to meet you over a cup of coffe, and "pick your brain". I bet girls find you very intresting. Can you close?.......None of my buisness. I bet you just piss some people off to where they never want to talk to you again. Im also sure it doesnt bother you, it shouldnt. Man id love to talk to you. Have fun. And if you are reading this. Hi
Penn and Teller do their magic show at the Rio Hotel in Las Vegas. The last time I was there, they were shaking hands with the audience afterwards. If you want to meet them (if only briefly - and have your picture taken) buy a ticket. (Try Googling the Rio All-Suites Hotel, Las Vegas.)
I think that taking a metaphysical approach to this question is foolish. It's like Nietzsche said... although we're incapable of removing our senses from the equation and perceiving the world in a truly "objective" sense, the question still remains: what would we see if we could?
This knowledge would be the most useless of all knowledge, more useless than "the chemical composition of water to a drowning sailor", since it would have no applicability within the confines of human existence.
i think the objective-subjective issue deals with more with the actual meaning of exisence. Without a perceiver, a mountain is simply a jumble of meaningless particles, or strings, or whatever the basic units of our universe are. It takes perception to distinguish the density, direction, color, velocity etc. of this particular jumble from its surroundings and to turn it into what we know as a 'mountain.'
that's not what i said at all. i said that what composes the mountain 'exists' yes but it is meaningless if unperceived. why do we call a mountain a mountain and not, let's say, air? because its chemical makeup is different, it is part of the ground, it is pointing upwards etc. but those chemical distinctions, directional qualities, or anything else are concepts bred of consciousness and perception. yes, the mountain 'exists' but it is meaningless in absence of a perceiver.
i disagree in one sense i can understand that since you were born the world would change in my thought i think im in a sense meaningless yet meaningful talking to a person can bring a new idea forth thus in my mind everything has value
that mountain isnt a mountain in objective reality... its more like strings vibrating or some shit but the point is tangibility of the mountain is only viewable through our perception. just like everything else we believe to be "real".
Of course there's nothing better, because as humans we crave certainty and solidity; it's simply necessary to function. However, as satisfying as this 'knowledge' may be, it remains that nothing can be proven without prior assumptions.
Fundamentally, everything is wrong, but that doesn't mean that I don't think it useful to develop a functional model based on those inherently subjective observations,especially since such models do at least seem relatively consistent.
I used my fingers to type it. You used your eyes to see the words and your mind to grasp the simple concepts of human language and meaning. It is the same for you and me. We are seeing the same words on the page. Senses are the foundation of knowledge. Their validity is NOT an independent axiom, it is a corollary to the fact of consciousness. Senses never respond to a zero. Only to an existential object that acts on them.
I think therefore I exist ~ descartes. It is truth that there is an objective reality, however some things are subjective to each individual person (such as preferred taste, smell, etc.). We are all alive and exist. We are controlled by a force (aka God) who creates and destroys. That is what we can know for sure out of anything else. Your brilliant Penn, and I hear my own thoughts when you speak.
Ppl normally find it unhealthy or counterproductive "not to know". That everything must have origin, cause, process, and end.
Personally, this obsession is toxic.
If we haven't the brains nor resources to discover, then we play makebelieve, produce myths, crazy anecdotes, & superstitions, then advertise them as the most possible facts. Consequently, they ARE regarded as facts (ie: religion). And there's no turning back.
Is the person you are talking about a certain eyeball of sorts? Then again the beleif in all religions doesnt sound very "residential". The "all beleifs are subjective anyway" sounds like it could be him.
I believe we are all part of the same consciouseness experiencing itself subjectively, HOWEVER, and Objective truth could still exist elsewhere, just not in the reality I am living in. To me that doesn't mean I think I'm always right, it's just what I happen to believe, and whatever singular moments of realization I may have in this existance, it can still feel just as true to me as it does to Penn. Just because I percieve this reality as a possible illusion does not mean I claim to be the cntr.
Do you think that the illusion of your world versus my world can be different? I am asking, do you think you can affect the illusion in a way that I can't or at the very least, in a way that gets a different result than if I had done the same interaction? To me, that is all that matters, the effect. Whether we are part of a grand illusion/matrix with rules that mimic reality or just reality what is the difference?
Our perception of the world is subjective. It developed so that it would be useful to our survival not so that it would give us an objective view of the universe. If we were the size of a tiny neutrino and could pass through the molecules of the mountain, we would not perceive it because its existence would not aid our survival. Because our perception is subjective, scientists use data and not experience to formulate theories.
I disagree. Since there is such a thing as reality, we can therefore know it or at least choose to get to know it. Our perception is a human perception and we can never have any other but our own. Scientists would have a hard time testing anything if they thought that existence didn't really exist or exists only for humans but not giraffes or humans but not beetles. Even being the size of a neutrino, your existence and the mountain's existence exists in objective reality.
If there is some aspect of reality that puts those who notice it at a disadvantage, such as making them go insane, or even something less dramatic, then we have evolved not to notice it.
Our view of reality is likely not the ultimate truth, merely the version of the truth that is best for our survival.
"coorporate fucking shill your another whore in the capitalist gang-bang... Do a commercial, there's a price on your head, everything you say is suspect..." - Bill Hicks
No. Sound is the name we give to the *spectrum of air compression waves that humans are capable of hearing*. That doesn't mean we have to actually *be* there to hear it for it to be sound, Similarly light is the part of the EM spectrum that humans are capable of seeing, regardless of whether a human is there to see. vibrations above audible are ultrasound, below are subsound.
Who knows really and I pose the following observation: who cares? When there are all kinds of perfectly knowable, intelligible objective truths, people who like to float around in the metaphysical are little more than selfish. This is a privilege of the rich and unoccupied. Unless the point is to exercise your brain muscle, your time would be better spent helping poor children eat, or fat children change their lifestyle. I will say that this exercise is good for destroying preconceptions.
The subjective nature of language and human thought does not allow for somethings to be reasoned to the point of full understanding. All words are based intrinsically off the existence of a large body of other words and shared experiences. Since the inherent reality of language is that it relies heavily on subjective truth, it is impossible to understand through language subjective thought objectively. Essentially, it must be excepted as unknowable. When your brain dies does everything else?
Subjectivism is a self-contradictory philosophy. Its one tenant is that there is no absolute truth. The fact that there is a tenant means that there is at least one absolute/objective truth. Put simply, subjectivism claims: "The only truth is that there is no truth." It's untenable.
kind of reminds me of how ostriches (im pretty sure thats the bird im thinking of) stick their heads in the ground to hide, still leaving their bodies perfectly visable. doesn't work for them, i dont think humans'll have much better luck with it either
i'm a grad student in history and today we spent two and a half hours talking about objective truth. when you discuss it that long it always turns into that 'is this table real?' shit. i agree penn, i think it's rather egotistical for people to think that if they cannot see, know, or understand it then it must not be real.
Logically speaking there is no such thing as only subjective truths existing, as that is an absolute statement and implies an objective truth.
While i and you differ on what we choose to believe in as objective truths, me being christian and you being atheist, we do agree in believing in the existence of objective truth.
When i first came across you on the show Penn & Teller, i thought you where just another senselss critic, but to my surprise you're very open and honest.
ur right....the only truth is there is no truth negates itself....bottom line.....Nietzsche thought he discovered this reality/foundation shattering revelation but really he just came to the conclusion that philosophy is pointless....its literally like chasing ur tale
philosophy is an attempt to understand and you can't prove that the understanding is beyond human grasp...so it is not like chasing your tail...and please look up the word "literally"
.you saw my comment and noticed that i sortof declared something on a topic that maybe u think ur knowledgeable about and u needed to find something in my comment to suggest that im fuckin dumb or i dont understand the language..this type of behavior makes sense coming from someone with ur youtubename
i dont wanna argue with you about this topic dude...cuz it would never end....i did notice that i sortof used the word literally wrong...kindof...but whats stranger is that u really had to nit pick my comment to come up with that...its not like i used it in such a ridiculous manner that it just jumps out at u...lol u actually had to nit pick which sort of prooves a few things about you..you are prob a super arrogant guy.
i just checked out ur page and it seems i was right....you just commented on like 4 other videos spewing the same arrogant rhetoric .you come off soooo condescending ..im not saying that you hold retarded oppinions...im saying that you clearly think your smarter than you are dude...i wish we knew eachother personally so we could debate this philosophy thing so i can make u understand why philosophy ultimately hits a wall that it cant break through....it never has and it never can
you weren't "sort of" wrong about the word...you were wrong...I only pointed that out because it has become a fad to use that word incorrectly and use it often...
I dont want to argue the topic either but if you have some sound evidence that there is no chance of mankind learning from the study of philosophy, you should be willing to present it
..becuase we are trying to conceptualize something that is beyond concept...and for u to say well that doesnt proove its impossible is the ego game...the reason philosophy is so frustrating is cause the ego wont ever admit defeat...every form...uhh....u see...i cant get started on this topic ....theres no way i am having a debate about this on fuckin youtube...its to damn heavy and huge
..trying to conceptualize something like consciousness for example ( which is the bottom line by the way) is impossible....it alludes all definition..u speak of sound evidence...in philosophy?..really?...philosophy is to abstract to demand sound evidence...trying to understand the subjective experience is what philosophy is all about yet this very understanding can never be found.
im specifically referring to existentialism ...in this area i believe man can learn no more...its just quite simple really...thought is trying to understand thought.....its so damn frustrating and its a closed loop...attempting to grasp the ultimate reality is futile and pointless. .
your opinions definitely reflect existentialism....I spent a lot of time reading Nietzsche in high school and Sartre in college and I had no problem with their viewpoints at the time ...but since then I have decided that their reasoning is mathematically flawed...for example, they presume that nothingness as a concept is something...I am not saying that existentialism is absolutely wrong but the way i see it, it just doesnt work out...anyway, i know where you are coming from now...thanks
you will have more success getting people to listen to you if you behave as an adult and stop resorting to name calling...the only thing I have done to provoke your anger is disagree with you
arrogant....and you stated that I am not as intelligent as I think I am....without knowing me, you cant have much of an idea of my self-evaluation and i'm pretty sure that my comments don't reflect any tremendous lack of intelligence
Ima roll with Objective... As this video would be on youtube whether I'd came across it or not.
Also, cuz Ive seen what believing in subjective reality turns you into (a Scientologist)!!! "Whats true, is whats true for you"... the biggest scape goat ever as justification for believing incredibly idiotic shit like psychic alien ghosts that infest the exterior of your body and alien overlords who brought said ghosts to earth to be brainwashed in 3d movie theaters and unleash them on cavemen lol
It seems pretty obvious that there is an objective, external reality, but there is also a problem with what people's epistemic situation is. Different people have experienced different data, had different experiences, so not everyone has the same justification for various beliefs that others have.
I personally believe there is objective truth, but at the same time, there is also subjective truth, things you know or think you know on a personal level. However, i am open to any of what i believe as truth to the possibility that it can be wrong, and as i process new information, I decide whether i personally see it as reality. I agree for instance that that mountain will be here when I am long gone, however, I don't see how that negates personal truth.
Penn: You seem to be saying that you choose an objective philosophy because it allows you to feel good about being wrong. That's not a philosophical argument. :-)
Humility, however... Humility is what I think you're really trying to talk about. Some people just can't let go of what they see as theirs, especially being 'right.'
Anyway. I wanted to comment because... Where exactly *is* the camera resting?
HA Gotcha! There you are taking an philosophical agnostic position in the context of an objective truth! (You just can*t ever get close to it) - so... I think I*ll bake myself an icecream for that one. :P
On a Newtonian scale, of course you're right, but delve a little deeper and things get... well, subjective. Quantum Mechanics are the the ultimate game changer.
Except, no. Quantum mechanics is still observable occurences - they just don't seem to make sense to us. It's not "subjective" in the sense used as the opposite of objective.
Also, I definately agree with you. I believe there is an objective truth out there because I don't see how logically it could be otherwise, and the mistake you mentioned in this video is something I've heard people make all the time and it drives me crazy as well.
There is no rational way someone could believe in science, skepticism, and reason and then at the same time believe in religions (not just 1 religion but ones who even contraddict each other). The only way I can imagine people doing it is the same way that people can have contraddicting beliefs and not even realize it. I dont understand how he says he believes it all. I dont know the guy but I can't imagine someone truly understanding all of those things and at the same time believing them all.
because some people who dont live in reality( or maybe they are in reality and we are not) like to pick and choose the good stuff as they see it from religion politics and philosophy and disregard the negative.
die hard liberal sheeple being my prime example.
but this is just my reality and opinion as i see it, and could be real and truth, or it could be bullshit.
intresting trying to fathom that which the mind cannot fully understand.
Reality is anything that conforms with fact. However, that is not saying it is absolute truth. History has proved that old truths, facts have been replaced with new truths, new data etc. The earth at one time was thought to be flat until new data, truth and facts replaced the old. That's about the best explanation I can come up with.
You were saying there was no true reality and as evidence used that we disproved previous ideas. It sounds like the exact same argument as BUT 'SCIENCE' WAS WRONG BEFORE THUS IT'S WRONG.
It sounded like you were saying "well look how many times we were wrong before, so obviously reality is subjective." Sorry if I read that wrong. I think it's because of the negative connotation with "conform" that I thought that. It sounds like the language of a cultural relativist. My apologies.
The next time your friend says he believes in everything, ask him "what about my belief that there is an objective reality and that not all subjective opinions are valid?" Then SHOOT THE FUCK and walk away.
The fact that reality exists is undenyable (I am therefore I think). The foolish hubris of humanity is to want truth to be MINE and YOURS aka HUMANITIES, rather than natures or its own. Reality is truth. Everything else is a truthful notion or a created one. Other than that, he makes a great point with the argument of being wrong. Just great.
(Until I taste it with YOUR taste buds, the taste of mustard remains "subjective". It's measurable qualities remain "objective".) Whether you exist or not, mustard exists. Check out computer scientist Peter Voss's ideas on "compatibilism" and open-system objectivism. His views are the smartest I've encountered, by far. He is at optimal DOTorg.
There is an objective reality, and perhaps it is fairly well knowable. What the use of subjectivism is, is to understand VALUE judgements. Objectively, we both recognize that mustard exists. But I like it, you don't. Subjectivity and objectivity give us ways of taking about mustard. It's healthy based on your genetic code, if you have a predisposition to strokes, because it contains turmeric = objective (that's how the molecules work). It tastes sour = subjective. (Until I... LIMIT)
I wonder why people question physical reality as a truth, when it is the most "real" thing we know. What's wrong with saying we are real? If a man asks you if the coffee cup is there, break it over his head and ask him if he is really bleeding.
It doesn't matter whether we KNOW anything 100%, it is whether we know something enough to be useful. 99% is good enough for me. There is a 99% chance Santa Clause does not exist as a real human in the north pole with the elves and reindeer and all that jazz. That is good enough for me. I am theoretically agnostic on the existence of santa clause, but PRACTICALLY nostic (gnostic? What is the word?)on his existence, and that is what i think matters. What is practical, rather than theoretical.
Everything comes to us by way of experience, which is subjective. However, that doesn't mean it's limited to just that. Mathematics, for instance, are objective truths, regardless of our perception of the world. Yes, it is true to say that a schiZophrenic might not be able to judge the math of a triangle, but if he or she could, they would witness an objective proposition. It would simply be proposterous to ask when a A^2+B^2=C^2 had been 'invented' -- because it has always existed ;]
I noticed you used the word 'know' in reference to acknowledging one's mistake and the word 'believe' when talking about the existence of the mountain whether you're here or not. I know you said being a proponent of an objective reality doesn't necessarily mean you have to 'know' this reality... but isn't the definition of objective 'of or something that is able to be known'? If there is an objective reality, then it should all be know-able. You should 'know' that mountain will always exist.
Science is a collection of facts based on impartial research and not personal believe. Opinion is not fact and fact is not relative. If reality is subjective and everyone is correct then no one is correct. Some things are true and some things are not. As much as I believe that 2 + 2 = 5 it is not and it never will be as long as we agree about the values of the symbols. It is not up to the mathematician to decide what is true. It is up to him or her to understand truth and know how to use it.
First time watching one of your videos Mr.Penn, and I enjoyed it. You seem like quite the educated individual. I will definitely watch more of your vidoes soon.
AIGbennis 1 month ago
you say you don't do drugs penn, so that begs the question... when did you stop using acid?
MisterWite1 7 months ago
solipsism is just plain dumb.
marcmeup1 7 months ago
He seems to like his hair. I bet it would shatter his reality if a person forcefully shaved it off, like Samson. Does Penn gain his strength from his hair? Is it a wig? Does Barbra Streisand have a penis? Tune in at 11 for all the answers!
crud4 9 months ago
actually that mountain does not exist.
cassidy99ful 10 months ago
X- see this baseball bat?
O- yes
SMASH!!!
X- did you feel that?
O- yes, my head hurts
X- that's objective reality MF
JonnyLikesPie 10 months ago
@JonnyLikesPie I didn't feel anything.
cassidy99ful 10 months ago
epistemological relativism may be true to you, but it isn't true to me.
lubermanl 1 year ago
A subjective argument for objectivity - brilliant. Too many people make their arguments for objectivity objective, like that would convince a subjectivist.
zarkoff45 1 year ago
Read the first half of Descartes "Meditations" and get back to me.
Laou41 1 year ago
Reality is what you make it and I hate to tell ya but there's a whole hell of a lot of us who don't want a "free market" libertarian reality.
crud4 1 year ago
@crud4 That simply means that you disagree with his opinion on that. I don't think that changes reality.
RawwestHide 1 year ago
@RawwestHide Reality is only compatible with free market capitalism. Ayn Rand says so. The dead queen of reality!
crud4 1 year ago
@crud4 i fucked ayn rands corpse.
cassidy99ful 10 months ago
@cassidy99ful That's very enlightening. Thank you for sharing.
crud4 10 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Reliable Russian dating site here gettop5.info
Emalyjesica 1 year ago
Dude without you, I would probably still be catholic. Thank you for showing me the error of my ways.
TheGreatRL 1 year ago
HAHAHA The tree thing was hilarious, I love Penn!
RoboticsNShenanigans 1 year ago
Some friend.
crocswsocks 1 year ago
this vid concerns the terms subjective and objective in the epistemic sense. there are other senses of this term i.e. ontologiclly, ethicly etc. you should ask you friend if his view that the truth of his statement that all statements are subjective in nature is a subjective or objective statement.
ex0gen 1 year ago
i've encountered many people who act like this (say "everything is true" etc). very frustrating. it usually comes down to them twisting your words around. i spoke with someone who said he denies "gradual evolution" because he "doesn't believe in time", but he does believe we all share common ancestors...its idiotic, and it really depresses me that so many people my age (early twenties) spout this kind of baseless nonesense
mogghee 1 year ago
Love Penn Says, but that Penn Point sucks. No seriously, what the fuck?
FranksDead 1 year ago
Hi Penn fans. Penn Says videos have been discontinued, so you won't be seeing any new content on here. You can check out our Profile on our Channel Page for more info. We'll still be checking in, so hope to keep chatting with you all! Thanks!
pennsays 1 year ago
have this same argument all the time. very frustrating, especially when the other person ("subjectivist") acts like im the one not 'getting' it
mogghee 1 year ago
The real distinction here is that believing that the reality exists regardless of the self is that it does give meaning to existence.
If you believe that the world is simply a product of your mind and would not exist without the self, then there is no reason to search for any truth.
An objective reality allows there to be a purpose for those of us who actually want to search for the truth. Regardless of what that truth is, it must exist whether i do. Otherwise, whats the point?
TASDeign 2 years ago
Objective truth can not be experienced from any point of view because it is everything you experience IS subjective. If you see the color blue, how do you know its blue? Your brain tells you..how does your brain now? your eyes see it? How can the eyes see it? the lense refract the light and it comes up as blue. What if someone elses eyes see green? Who is right? both of you are!!! Its blue to you and green to the other person!
AmericanPoliceState 2 years ago
@AmericanPoliceState very well said :)
Poonard 2 years ago
@AmericanPoliceState blue and green and all colors are defined by their wavelengths, which are "objectively" verifiable. yes, i suppose you can interpret colors differently, but that doesn't been there isn't an objective reality
mogghee 1 year ago
Wash your hands or Ganthor the god of science will smite you!
aciddino 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
PENN, I've listened to a few of your videos. I know you're an atheist. I also know you talk about Jesus and the Bible a lot. I THINK YOU WANT TO BE A CHRISTIAN. Just do it man. IT. IS. THE. BEST. THING. EVER. MAN. you don't have all day
bolney87 2 years ago
You act as though he has never been one before. How condescending.
nurbSoldier 2 years ago
you talkin' to that retahd? He better have good jokes or dance good or somethin'
corenothing 2 years ago
I'm sure nobody will read this, but: here's my latest take on it:
Every concept that exists is a subjective concept. A concept that is objective is also a subjective one.
What differentiates the two is that an objective concept is one that all subjects can theoretically attest to. It is the intersection of subjective truths. Reality is the intersection of subjective perceptions.
There's no need to ASSUME objective reality...Objective truth can be functionally defined without assuming..
mrbluesky323 2 years ago 2
Objective reality = "A rock is a rock."
igytsiycm 2 years ago 2
But it isn't a rock. It's ROCK LOBSTER!
andrewclunn 2 years ago
@andrewclunn Nice one.
pennsays 2 years ago
@pennsays Little off topic. If you really believed you didn't matter at all, you wouldn't be sharing your ideas with the world man. And I thank whatever need be thanked for that. I'm like you, I don't believe in religion or the dogmas they present. But I am seeing really interesting studies about the impact of states of love and fear we all go through individually. Would you say there is scientific evidence to say we all truly matter in the flow of events? Im happy to send links if you'd like.
Poonard 2 years ago
@pennsays btw, "good enough for Jesus." Perfect! HAHA!
Poonard 2 years ago
@Poonard I'm not Penn, actually, I just help out with the comments. :-)
pennsays 1 year ago
i see, so, mr. helper with comments, keep up the good work ;)
Poonard 1 year ago
@Poonard Oh, thank you. I'm a ms, tho. :-)
pennsays 1 year ago
i thought that might be the case after i hit the button...oh well, :) take care!
Poonard 1 year ago
Best one I've watched so far. Your growing dilligence to not worrying about getting non-essential facts exactly right should be a beacon to everyone!!!
Blathering on trying to remember on-the-fly the exact non-essential facts does so much to cause loss of interest or just general irritation. It puts the listener in a mental holding pattern that you're just hoping for an exit out of.
JasperXoR 2 years ago
Ooh, a different dimension! Can you show me how to jump to one where eating is not necessary for survival? Because that would be boss. Or... please show me how to go to one where I can fly from buildings. I would prefer a dimension where I can choose which "laws" of nature are subjective based on my whims. Eagerly awaiting instructions, thanks!
whatever678 2 years ago 2
Why would the mountain being real, prove that humans can be wrong? The mountain isn't wrong, the mountain is true. Penn is true, being objective about the mountains reality does not make anyone wrong.
Squiffel 2 years ago
jeez... he's saying the existence of objective truth allows for absolutes: that of being RIGHT and WRONG. the mountain being real is an example of the primacy of existence over consciousness, in other words: reality (the universe) has been here long before humanity, and will be here long after it.
whatever678 2 years ago
The mountain only proves that there is relative truth. For example, the mountain exists, therefore truth exists is only true in the time frame in which the mountain and be perceived or existed. If you were to go to a different dimension or position in time, this argument would fall flat on its face, because there would be no mountain, and also no objective truth about the mountain.
The argument only works in a short time frame and from the human perspective.
Squiffel 2 years ago
Hey Penn, What if "reason" dictated for you to kill your own child. Example - Your child is trying to kill you, your wife, or others (God forbid). Wouldn't reason dictate that you use deadly force to stop your own child. Would that make the parent, in your words,"dangerous"?
Deist1965 2 years ago
the case he was speaking of had no reason
cenyan13 2 years ago
I really love this clip. Sounds like to me, you are talking about 2 extreme views.... this is very interesting because you and your freind being in the extremes are more alike than you realize. Flip sides of the same coin if you will. If you put yourselves on a finite line of measurement, stretched out you are very far apart. But, if you bend your line into a circle, you are very close... is that subjective or objective?
physty 2 years ago
Penn or Teller you both are gay and it's ok...leave it alone and you tube too..really..just go. Do your tricks and illusions. Paint your nails and have a quiet sidekick...take cake
acm19751 2 years ago
I believe you're right about subjectivism placing people at the center of the universe: it elevates a mere perspective to the arbiter of everything. The attempt is then made necessary to overcome the horror of a purely subjective reality by embracing all perspectives [where did the subjectivity of experience go all of a sudden?] The so-called "yes" to everything, that squashes everything into meaninglessness with its insipid "yes."
Heidegger's thoughts on Nothing are helpful.
jmonroe64 2 years ago
Aha Moments.......Doesnt get any better does it..
Alot of pain and suffering to get to them though.
Good job.
sk8420bones 2 years ago
Man would love to meet you over a cup of coffe, and "pick your brain". I bet girls find you very intresting. Can you close?.......None of my buisness. I bet you just piss some people off to where they never want to talk to you again. Im also sure it doesnt bother you, it shouldnt. Man id love to talk to you. Have fun. And if you are reading this. Hi
-=Marcus=-
P.S. I wish i had HBO.
sk8420bones 2 years ago
Penn and Teller do their magic show at the Rio Hotel in Las Vegas. The last time I was there, they were shaking hands with the audience afterwards. If you want to meet them (if only briefly - and have your picture taken) buy a ticket. (Try Googling the Rio All-Suites Hotel, Las Vegas.)
eventh9 2 years ago
I think that taking a metaphysical approach to this question is foolish. It's like Nietzsche said... although we're incapable of removing our senses from the equation and perceiving the world in a truly "objective" sense, the question still remains: what would we see if we could?
This knowledge would be the most useless of all knowledge, more useless than "the chemical composition of water to a drowning sailor", since it would have no applicability within the confines of human existence.
Zappafan14 2 years ago
That was soo beautiful T.T
i wish more people understood it
Maestroxxx1 2 years ago
i think the objective-subjective issue deals with more with the actual meaning of exisence. Without a perceiver, a mountain is simply a jumble of meaningless particles, or strings, or whatever the basic units of our universe are. It takes perception to distinguish the density, direction, color, velocity etc. of this particular jumble from its surroundings and to turn it into what we know as a 'mountain.'
dimmucoltrane890 2 years ago
without a perceiver, the mountain is still there, still exists - but there is nothing to name it as 'mountain.' Its still there.
anything perceiving it does not change it into anything, simply defines it for itself.
I don't suddenly pop into existance when someone looks at me. When I am alone and unobserved, I am still the same as when someone looks at me.
TheGraywalker 2 years ago
that's not what i said at all. i said that what composes the mountain 'exists' yes but it is meaningless if unperceived. why do we call a mountain a mountain and not, let's say, air? because its chemical makeup is different, it is part of the ground, it is pointing upwards etc. but those chemical distinctions, directional qualities, or anything else are concepts bred of consciousness and perception. yes, the mountain 'exists' but it is meaningless in absence of a perceiver.
dimmucoltrane890 2 years ago
i disagree in one sense i can understand that since you were born the world would change in my thought i think im in a sense meaningless yet meaningful talking to a person can bring a new idea forth thus in my mind everything has value
wolfsadfree 2 years ago
that mountain isnt a mountain in objective reality... its more like strings vibrating or some shit but the point is tangibility of the mountain is only viewable through our perception. just like everything else we believe to be "real".
capsBeatz 2 years ago
Of course there's nothing better, because as humans we crave certainty and solidity; it's simply necessary to function. However, as satisfying as this 'knowledge' may be, it remains that nothing can be proven without prior assumptions.
Fundamentally, everything is wrong, but that doesn't mean that I don't think it useful to develop a functional model based on those inherently subjective observations,especially since such models do at least seem relatively consistent.
bryguy95 2 years ago
Penetrating and insightful.
hreisig 2 years ago
That sounds terribly sexy.
unhappy4life9 2 years ago
The ending was wonderful, great thought.
LukeSaysss 2 years ago
Existence exists. The end.
After that whole rant, that's all you had to say, brotha!
leanordjenkis 2 years ago
"Existence exists."
You used speech to make that claim. One needs sight or hearing to interpret.
Gondorginan 2 years ago
I used my fingers to type it. You used your eyes to see the words and your mind to grasp the simple concepts of human language and meaning. It is the same for you and me. We are seeing the same words on the page. Senses are the foundation of knowledge. Their validity is NOT an independent axiom, it is a corollary to the fact of consciousness. Senses never respond to a zero. Only to an existential object that acts on them.
leanordjenkis 2 years ago
Penn is right also there has to be a balance in our culture between objective and subjective truth AND it doesn't have to be an either or situation.
lalalaliz1 2 years ago
Subjectivity is really an interesting topic. Anyone interested in the relationship between subject and object should read Kierkegaard.
lalalaliz1 2 years ago
Absolutely true.
leanordjenkis 2 years ago
This is awesome penn! What a great thought at the end. You're right, there's nothing better!
mike8903 2 years ago
This reminds me of Ayn Rands quote. I can't remember it exactly but it's something like "The indiscriminate lover of everyone, truly hates mankind"
mike8903 2 years ago
I think therefore I exist ~ descartes. It is truth that there is an objective reality, however some things are subjective to each individual person (such as preferred taste, smell, etc.). We are all alive and exist. We are controlled by a force (aka God) who creates and destroys. That is what we can know for sure out of anything else. Your brilliant Penn, and I hear my own thoughts when you speak.
howhigh121 2 years ago
Penn is brilliant. One of my favorite videos this is.
Sam26100 2 years ago
Ppl normally find it unhealthy or counterproductive "not to know". That everything must have origin, cause, process, and end.
Personally, this obsession is toxic.
If we haven't the brains nor resources to discover, then we play makebelieve, produce myths, crazy anecdotes, & superstitions, then advertise them as the most possible facts. Consequently, they ARE regarded as facts (ie: religion). And there's no turning back.
Efferts 2 years ago
Is the person you are talking about a certain eyeball of sorts? Then again the beleif in all religions doesnt sound very "residential". The "all beleifs are subjective anyway" sounds like it could be him.
trsdos 2 years ago
Reality=noun that has real qualities. Real=objective. Subjective Reality = not possible.
scottsittlow 2 years ago
Well in a way he is right, no matter what you believe all paths lead to the same place... the grave :)
ScaryGuy255 2 years ago
I believe we are all part of the same consciouseness experiencing itself subjectively, HOWEVER, and Objective truth could still exist elsewhere, just not in the reality I am living in. To me that doesn't mean I think I'm always right, it's just what I happen to believe, and whatever singular moments of realization I may have in this existance, it can still feel just as true to me as it does to Penn. Just because I percieve this reality as a possible illusion does not mean I claim to be the cntr.
P0mt3 2 years ago
Do you think that the illusion of your world versus my world can be different? I am asking, do you think you can affect the illusion in a way that I can't or at the very least, in a way that gets a different result than if I had done the same interaction? To me, that is all that matters, the effect. Whether we are part of a grand illusion/matrix with rules that mimic reality or just reality what is the difference?
NyelaniousTour 2 years ago
Our perception of the world is subjective. It developed so that it would be useful to our survival not so that it would give us an objective view of the universe. If we were the size of a tiny neutrino and could pass through the molecules of the mountain, we would not perceive it because its existence would not aid our survival. Because our perception is subjective, scientists use data and not experience to formulate theories.
mBognerd 2 years ago
I disagree. Since there is such a thing as reality, we can therefore know it or at least choose to get to know it. Our perception is a human perception and we can never have any other but our own. Scientists would have a hard time testing anything if they thought that existence didn't really exist or exists only for humans but not giraffes or humans but not beetles. Even being the size of a neutrino, your existence and the mountain's existence exists in objective reality.
leanordjenkis 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Why'd you post this on the Tick?
ShadowArtistTXL 2 years ago
You need to listen to Rush, Penn ;)
Xenophage2112 2 years ago
If there is some aspect of reality that puts those who notice it at a disadvantage, such as making them go insane, or even something less dramatic, then we have evolved not to notice it.
Our view of reality is likely not the ultimate truth, merely the version of the truth that is best for our survival.
Eudaletism 2 years ago
Whose science?
elar4563 2 years ago
Sounds like what Ayn Rand has written about Objectivism, well said Penn
mike23984 2 years ago
Reality exists. I'm not sure of its nature.
Humble and reasonable and important point of view. Thanks.
Icharys 2 years ago
"coorporate fucking shill your another whore in the capitalist gang-bang... Do a commercial, there's a price on your head, everything you say is suspect..." - Bill Hicks
datafork 2 years ago
No. Sound is the name we give to the *spectrum of air compression waves that humans are capable of hearing*. That doesn't mean we have to actually *be* there to hear it for it to be sound, Similarly light is the part of the EM spectrum that humans are capable of seeing, regardless of whether a human is there to see. vibrations above audible are ultrasound, below are subsound.
LameVulcan7702 2 years ago
Who knows really and I pose the following observation: who cares? When there are all kinds of perfectly knowable, intelligible objective truths, people who like to float around in the metaphysical are little more than selfish. This is a privilege of the rich and unoccupied. Unless the point is to exercise your brain muscle, your time would be better spent helping poor children eat, or fat children change their lifestyle. I will say that this exercise is good for destroying preconceptions.
donpengin 2 years ago
The subjective nature of language and human thought does not allow for somethings to be reasoned to the point of full understanding. All words are based intrinsically off the existence of a large body of other words and shared experiences. Since the inherent reality of language is that it relies heavily on subjective truth, it is impossible to understand through language subjective thought objectively. Essentially, it must be excepted as unknowable. When your brain dies does everything else?
donpengin 2 years ago
subjectivism doesn't necessarily imply that you believe what you want as much as it means you doubt the existence of everything
I can't tell you for sure if there is or is not an objective truth, but even if there was, how would it ever be proven?
oober349 2 years ago
If there is an objective truth, it is unknowable.
oober349 2 years ago
why? i hear this all the time and I am never given a satisfactory explanation.
maxk322 2 years ago
It's not my responsibility to satisfactorily explain it. Those who would affirm the existence of an objective truth have to prove it.
oober349 2 years ago
I think a distinction needs to be made: We can know THAT a thing exists as an objective reality; but we cannot comprehend its existence.
Oober, you are stating this as an objective fact: "Objective truth is unknowable." That, to you, is an objective truth. Isn't that a contradiction?
davidwins0 2 years ago
Physical truth is unknowable. We can only be sure of the existence of nonmaterial abstract thoughts
oober349 2 years ago
Subjectivism is a self-contradictory philosophy. Its one tenant is that there is no absolute truth. The fact that there is a tenant means that there is at least one absolute/objective truth. Put simply, subjectivism claims: "The only truth is that there is no truth." It's untenable.
davidwins0 2 years ago
kind of reminds me of how ostriches (im pretty sure thats the bird im thinking of) stick their heads in the ground to hide, still leaving their bodies perfectly visable. doesn't work for them, i dont think humans'll have much better luck with it either
k1ngkoo0pa 2 years ago
i'm a grad student in history and today we spent two and a half hours talking about objective truth. when you discuss it that long it always turns into that 'is this table real?' shit. i agree penn, i think it's rather egotistical for people to think that if they cannot see, know, or understand it then it must not be real.
mrbinga 2 years ago
i bet you think that 'Gift' was about you
TheBiggBoobBunch 2 years ago
Not 100% sure, but rumor has it that Carly Simon's "You're So Vain" is about actor Warren Beatty
pennsays 2 years ago
'"You're So Vain" is about actor Warren Beatty '
I bet that's what Warren Beatty thinks ;-)
42fba 2 years ago
So who is this friend that Penn is talking about? A popular muscian who believes all opinions are true in some sense...hmm.
This is worse than Carly Simon's "You're So Vain." Does anybody know who she was singing about?
Maybe Penn was talking about Carly Simon!
D1G3T5 2 years ago
objective truths, yes. skepticism, yes. me being equal to non-living matter, no! not even non-human organisms, though they have immense value.
sherlockfury 2 years ago
I agree with you, Penn.
Logically speaking there is no such thing as only subjective truths existing, as that is an absolute statement and implies an objective truth.
While i and you differ on what we choose to believe in as objective truths, me being christian and you being atheist, we do agree in believing in the existence of objective truth.
When i first came across you on the show Penn & Teller, i thought you where just another senselss critic, but to my surprise you're very open and honest.
Barachem 2 years ago
ur right....the only truth is there is no truth negates itself....bottom line.....Nietzsche thought he discovered this reality/foundation shattering revelation but really he just came to the conclusion that philosophy is pointless....its literally like chasing ur tale
toolkills 2 years ago
toolkills,
philosophy is an attempt to understand and you can't prove that the understanding is beyond human grasp...so it is not like chasing your tail...and please look up the word "literally"
pleasethinklogically 2 years ago
.you saw my comment and noticed that i sortof declared something on a topic that maybe u think ur knowledgeable about and u needed to find something in my comment to suggest that im fuckin dumb or i dont understand the language..this type of behavior makes sense coming from someone with ur youtubename
toolkills 2 years ago
i dont wanna argue with you about this topic dude...cuz it would never end....i did notice that i sortof used the word literally wrong...kindof...but whats stranger is that u really had to nit pick my comment to come up with that...its not like i used it in such a ridiculous manner that it just jumps out at u...lol u actually had to nit pick which sort of prooves a few things about you..you are prob a super arrogant guy.
toolkills 2 years ago
i just checked out ur page and it seems i was right....you just commented on like 4 other videos spewing the same arrogant rhetoric .you come off soooo condescending ..im not saying that you hold retarded oppinions...im saying that you clearly think your smarter than you are dude...i wish we knew eachother personally so we could debate this philosophy thing so i can make u understand why philosophy ultimately hits a wall that it cant break through....it never has and it never can
toolkills 2 years ago
you weren't "sort of" wrong about the word...you were wrong...I only pointed that out because it has become a fad to use that word incorrectly and use it often...
I dont want to argue the topic either but if you have some sound evidence that there is no chance of mankind learning from the study of philosophy, you should be willing to present it
pleasethinklogically 2 years ago
..becuase we are trying to conceptualize something that is beyond concept...and for u to say well that doesnt proove its impossible is the ego game...the reason philosophy is so frustrating is cause the ego wont ever admit defeat...every form...uhh....u see...i cant get started on this topic ....theres no way i am having a debate about this on fuckin youtube...its to damn heavy and huge
toolkills 2 years ago
..trying to conceptualize something like consciousness for example ( which is the bottom line by the way) is impossible....it alludes all definition..u speak of sound evidence...in philosophy?..really?...philosophy is to abstract to demand sound evidence...trying to understand the subjective experience is what philosophy is all about yet this very understanding can never be found.
toolkills 2 years ago
im specifically referring to existentialism ...in this area i believe man can learn no more...its just quite simple really...thought is trying to understand thought.....its so damn frustrating and its a closed loop...attempting to grasp the ultimate reality is futile and pointless. .
toolkills 2 years ago
your opinions definitely reflect existentialism....I spent a lot of time reading Nietzsche in high school and Sartre in college and I had no problem with their viewpoints at the time ...but since then I have decided that their reasoning is mathematically flawed...for example, they presume that nothingness as a concept is something...I am not saying that existentialism is absolutely wrong but the way i see it, it just doesnt work out...anyway, i know where you are coming from now...thanks
pleasethinklogically 2 years ago
cool
toolkills 2 years ago
also toolkills,
you will have more success getting people to listen to you if you behave as an adult and stop resorting to name calling...the only thing I have done to provoke your anger is disagree with you
pleasethinklogically 2 years ago
i called you a name?
toolkills 2 years ago
arrogant....and you stated that I am not as intelligent as I think I am....without knowing me, you cant have much of an idea of my self-evaluation and i'm pretty sure that my comments don't reflect any tremendous lack of intelligence
pleasethinklogically 2 years ago
i agee...i was just ticked off cuz u came off condescending and i hate that
toolkills 2 years ago
Hysterical! the whole tree/mountain/sand bit. You made food fall out of my mouth, I was laughing so hard, lol.
civitasdei 2 years ago
Ima roll with Objective... As this video would be on youtube whether I'd came across it or not.
Also, cuz Ive seen what believing in subjective reality turns you into (a Scientologist)!!! "Whats true, is whats true for you"... the biggest scape goat ever as justification for believing incredibly idiotic shit like psychic alien ghosts that infest the exterior of your body and alien overlords who brought said ghosts to earth to be brainwashed in 3d movie theaters and unleash them on cavemen lol
ntelekt1 2 years ago
His friend is Jarule
kegs666 2 years ago
It seems pretty obvious that there is an objective, external reality, but there is also a problem with what people's epistemic situation is. Different people have experienced different data, had different experiences, so not everyone has the same justification for various beliefs that others have.
FrostyPhilosopher 2 years ago
XD "i was gonna point dramatically to a tree, but i live in a desert..."
alixinthemiddle 2 years ago 2
Penn, I don't know why you bother engaging in serious discussions with believers like that.
SinfulMessiah 2 years ago
it must be really hard to make friends if you restrict your discussions to people who have no weird beliefs.
GBanville 2 years ago
not really. I do just fine.
SinfulMessiah 2 years ago
So who's the guy?
PanekPL 3 years ago
I personally believe there is objective truth, but at the same time, there is also subjective truth, things you know or think you know on a personal level. However, i am open to any of what i believe as truth to the possibility that it can be wrong, and as i process new information, I decide whether i personally see it as reality. I agree for instance that that mountain will be here when I am long gone, however, I don't see how that negates personal truth.
Kawamura2 3 years ago
a material universe is the only tenable position. George H. Smith is good on why solipsism and formal skepticism are objectively wrong.
Cheimison 3 years ago
Yes I was about to say...I don't have a clue what you just tried to say.
Obscuredbywinds 3 years ago
Hey Mattussr, you didn't make any sense.
Your grammar is so fucked up that I cannot understand a word you're saying.
Please speak coherently and intelligently =).
sk8erboi555453 3 years ago
Penn: You seem to be saying that you choose an objective philosophy because it allows you to feel good about being wrong. That's not a philosophical argument. :-)
Humility, however... Humility is what I think you're really trying to talk about. Some people just can't let go of what they see as theirs, especially being 'right.'
Anyway. I wanted to comment because... Where exactly *is* the camera resting?
homerthebrave 3 years ago
Excellent!
5/5
AlanCom1 3 years ago 4
HA Gotcha! There you are taking an philosophical agnostic position in the context of an objective truth! (You just can*t ever get close to it) - so... I think I*ll bake myself an icecream for that one. :P
Cappl 3 years ago
On a Newtonian scale, of course you're right, but delve a little deeper and things get... well, subjective. Quantum Mechanics are the the ultimate game changer.
nonesuchone 3 years ago
Except, no. Quantum mechanics is still observable occurences - they just don't seem to make sense to us. It's not "subjective" in the sense used as the opposite of objective.
blackjamm 3 years ago
Just because you get the out come you want doesn't make you right either.
drwalepen15 3 years ago
Also, I definately agree with you. I believe there is an objective truth out there because I don't see how logically it could be otherwise, and the mistake you mentioned in this video is something I've heard people make all the time and it drives me crazy as well.
Obscuredbywinds 3 years ago
There is no rational way someone could believe in science, skepticism, and reason and then at the same time believe in religions (not just 1 religion but ones who even contraddict each other). The only way I can imagine people doing it is the same way that people can have contraddicting beliefs and not even realize it. I dont understand how he says he believes it all. I dont know the guy but I can't imagine someone truly understanding all of those things and at the same time believing them all.
Obscuredbywinds 3 years ago
because some people who dont live in reality( or maybe they are in reality and we are not) like to pick and choose the good stuff as they see it from religion politics and philosophy and disregard the negative.
die hard liberal sheeple being my prime example.
but this is just my reality and opinion as i see it, and could be real and truth, or it could be bullshit.
intresting trying to fathom that which the mind cannot fully understand.
mattussr 3 years ago
You konw the Truth? I wish i could speak with you.
howhore 3 years ago
Reality is anything that conforms with fact. However, that is not saying it is absolute truth. History has proved that old truths, facts have been replaced with new truths, new data etc. The earth at one time was thought to be flat until new data, truth and facts replaced the old. That's about the best explanation I can come up with.
nogogma 3 years ago
proving that one was wrong before is not proving that somebody is wrong now
Spalg 3 years ago
Huh?
nogogma 3 years ago
Simply because we were wrong before doesn't make us wrong now.
Spalg 3 years ago
Does that mean that since the earth was proved not to be flat means it's still flat? That was my example.
Either you're not making any sense or you're just having a hard time explaining your argument.
nogogma 3 years ago
You were saying there was no true reality and as evidence used that we disproved previous ideas. It sounds like the exact same argument as BUT 'SCIENCE' WAS WRONG BEFORE THUS IT'S WRONG.
Spalg 3 years ago
No I never said there was never any true reality.
Reality is anything that conforms with fact. Truth, fact and reality should conform to one another. If it doesn't that is it really true?
Read the rest of what I said below. I think it's not that complicated.
nogogma 3 years ago
It sounded like you were saying "well look how many times we were wrong before, so obviously reality is subjective." Sorry if I read that wrong. I think it's because of the negative connotation with "conform" that I thought that. It sounds like the language of a cultural relativist. My apologies.
Spalg 3 years ago
I thought I was wrong once,but I was mistaken.
ThePhalseProfit 3 years ago
Perception is reality.
girrl88 3 years ago
The next time your friend says he believes in everything, ask him "what about my belief that there is an objective reality and that not all subjective opinions are valid?" Then SHOOT THE FUCK and walk away.
jacobbielarski 3 years ago 2
once one realizes that he is of no relative importance to the world, he can begin to truly be happy.
grimshawr 3 years ago
The fact that reality exists is undenyable (I am therefore I think). The foolish hubris of humanity is to want truth to be MINE and YOURS aka HUMANITIES, rather than natures or its own. Reality is truth. Everything else is a truthful notion or a created one. Other than that, he makes a great point with the argument of being wrong. Just great.
phvalue323 3 years ago
(Until I taste it with YOUR taste buds, the taste of mustard remains "subjective". It's measurable qualities remain "objective".) Whether you exist or not, mustard exists. Check out computer scientist Peter Voss's ideas on "compatibilism" and open-system objectivism. His views are the smartest I've encountered, by far. He is at optimal DOTorg.
heywoodjablohme 3 years ago
There is an objective reality, and perhaps it is fairly well knowable. What the use of subjectivism is, is to understand VALUE judgements. Objectively, we both recognize that mustard exists. But I like it, you don't. Subjectivity and objectivity give us ways of taking about mustard. It's healthy based on your genetic code, if you have a predisposition to strokes, because it contains turmeric = objective (that's how the molecules work). It tastes sour = subjective. (Until I... LIMIT)
heywoodjablohme 3 years ago
I wonder why people question physical reality as a truth, when it is the most "real" thing we know. What's wrong with saying we are real? If a man asks you if the coffee cup is there, break it over his head and ask him if he is really bleeding.
goobymoogy 3 years ago 2
I don't believe we can be sure of anything 100 %. That's why we can't KNOW anything
TheTrollgubbe 3 years ago
How do you live your life like that? Must be a dreary existence. I recommend the philosophy of Objectivism. :-)
JMartins1981 3 years ago
It doesn't matter whether we KNOW anything 100%, it is whether we know something enough to be useful. 99% is good enough for me. There is a 99% chance Santa Clause does not exist as a real human in the north pole with the elves and reindeer and all that jazz. That is good enough for me. I am theoretically agnostic on the existence of santa clause, but PRACTICALLY nostic (gnostic? What is the word?)on his existence, and that is what i think matters. What is practical, rather than theoretical.
atlant80 3 years ago
Everything comes to us by way of experience, which is subjective. However, that doesn't mean it's limited to just that. Mathematics, for instance, are objective truths, regardless of our perception of the world. Yes, it is true to say that a schiZophrenic might not be able to judge the math of a triangle, but if he or she could, they would witness an objective proposition. It would simply be proposterous to ask when a A^2+B^2=C^2 had been 'invented' -- because it has always existed ;]
Savagecuntfart 3 years ago
I just think both subjectives and objectives are paradoxes
GoldTeamRulez1015 3 years ago
I noticed you used the word 'know' in reference to acknowledging one's mistake and the word 'believe' when talking about the existence of the mountain whether you're here or not. I know you said being a proponent of an objective reality doesn't necessarily mean you have to 'know' this reality... but isn't the definition of objective 'of or something that is able to be known'? If there is an objective reality, then it should all be know-able. You should 'know' that mountain will always exist.
Metallic7Dust 3 years ago
Science is a collection of facts based on impartial research and not personal believe. Opinion is not fact and fact is not relative. If reality is subjective and everyone is correct then no one is correct. Some things are true and some things are not. As much as I believe that 2 + 2 = 5 it is not and it never will be as long as we agree about the values of the symbols. It is not up to the mathematician to decide what is true. It is up to him or her to understand truth and know how to use it.
davidspoo 3 years ago 3
Exactly, ksol000.
To say there are no absolutes, or that there are only "some" absolutes, are statements of absolutes.
Conclusion: there are and can only be absolutes. The entire concept of subjective reality/non-absolute truth is a word game.
MorganRand 3 years ago
People who believe that everything is subjective, believe that as an absolute, objective truth.
ksol000 3 years ago
Is the friend Flava Flav?
8644371 3 years ago
Fuck yea
hector3222 3 years ago
It's an old paradox, Penn, uttered by every dime store philosopher, but a valid one nonetheless. Riddle me this:
Is truth absolute?
hyroglyphx 3 years ago
Reality.. or better said... Human Reality is a sistem.. and within that sistem, science is objective...
Booorislav 3 years ago