Objectively speaking ...

Loading...

Sign in or sign up now!
Alert icon
Upgrade to the latest Flash Player for improved playback performance. Upgrade now or more info.
696 views
Loading...
Alert icon
Sign in or sign up now!
Alert icon

Uploaded by on Oct 17, 2009

Why I reject the objective/subjective dichotomy.

Category:

People & Blogs

Tags:

License:

Standard YouTube License

  • likes, 160 dislikes

Link to this comment:

Share to:
see all

All Comments (157)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • Perception may, and clearly DOES differ from person to person, but that doesn't change the fact that we are all reflecting and participating in a single reality. Each perception, each angle, is unique, each facet reflects reality differently, but that doesn't change the underlying unity. We may perceive facts differently, but they're still facts. We can communicate thanks to that.

  • My contention is not whether the child lives or dies... I'm just wondering about what an isolated person might perceive. I've always assumed they see what I do... BUT do they really??

    Funny enough, I just read an interesting book on the subject of perception..and syncronistically, it dovetailed with that peculiar incident in the comments section. I'm not crazy, Roze, ....my life is just very... magical.

  • Whoa. How did you work that one out? This whole video is about me rejecting absolutism and objectivism. I'm perfectly happy to accept that in the world of the tribesperson, magic bird shat a shiny log out of the clear blue sky. But shiny log fell down and caved in kid's head. They may even be utterly unable to see the camera. But they'll agree that kiddo is dead. To claim otherwise is insane.

  • No, I'm as serious as a heart attack.

    The child, the mother and you are aware that trucks exist.

    You are assuming that we all 'see' the same things. How can you be absolutely sure?

    I guess I'll just have to provide some ideas from Psychology...(the science of magic) ;) ..about how human perception seems to work..how we 'model' reality, rather than perceiving "what is"...where "what is" is a misnomer.. nobody knows for sure if there is even a "what is".

  • I'll keep that in mind; if I ever see a child run over by a truck and its brains splattered all over the asphalt, I'll tell its mother that all she needs to do is imagine that the truck is a strange looking bird. And the child is just a barbie doll. And life is wonderful. Sorry to sound facetious but we're entering pretty ridiculous territory here, don't you think?

  • Reality is. Even all our differing perceptions are real to us. But there still is just the one reality. The fact that it cannot be objectively described at the deepest level does not change this.

  • Yes..something might fall on the child's head, but when others came to investigate, what they'd see is a strange looking bird, not a package.

  • Yeah..but whose 'reality' is real?...if we are all perceptive beings, and our brains 'model' reality..then what exactly is real?

  • Reality cannot be "objective". If it was, it could be described from an external perspective. You cannot externalise a perspective from reality.

  • Do you mean that you don't buy any philosophical argument of what is or probably is the true objective, or do you have the view that there is no actual true objective? I subscribe to the former.

Loading...

Alert icon
0 / 00Unsaved Playlist Return to active list
    1. Your queue is empty. Add videos to your queue using this button:
      or sign in to load a different list.
    Loading...Loading...Saving...
    • Clear all videos from this list
    • Learn more