Clutch

A great relief to me!

Primal

But clutch isn't it somewhat hasty to conclude that because your sentence concerning wednesday does not make sense that the statement "it's true that the moon exists" likewise does not make sense? It seems to me one can only accept that comparison if one has already accepted your position beforehand.

[ September 25, 2002: Message edited by: Primal ]</p>

Kantian

There never was a constructive argument; if i missed, please direct my attention to it. It's not my fault you perceived the act of identifying your fallacies as insults.

Sadly to inform you, i am no subjectivist- but that of a transcendentalist!

What fanaticism? What immaturity? Mischaracterizations. I'd say that you wilted in the heat of criticism and are now lashing out in turn, fully exposing your sentimental attachments to your failed enterprise.

How so? I only pointed out that you were unfair to the subjectivist by rendering the position as something easily ridiculed, stuffing emaciated straw for self-indulgent purposes, while great men in the past instead took that as a foundation of epistemology and it has been the pinnacle of philosophy for 300 years- until the 20th century. Credit Wittgenstein.

Well, you always have had the ability to ignore me. There's no obligation here, except, perhaps to save face by hurling angry repartees upon your hasty retreat. Any relation to Nixon, perchance?
Xrefer is "less than authoriative?" I'm shocked! Why is that so? The article in question was written by Mr. Ardon Lyon, a teacher of philosophy at Durham and London City universities.

It's amusing to notice that you have not addressed the majority of my points in defense of subjectivism, and chose to focus on the identifications of your fallacies. No wonder- you never had a case.

It takes two to tango, chico.

[edited to add reference of Lydon]
~Transcendentalist~

[ September 25, 2002: Message edited by: Immanuel Kant ]</p>

Kantian

<img src="graemlins/notworthy.gif" border="0" alt="[Not Worthy]" />

~Radical subjectivity~

[ September 25, 2002: Message edited by: Immanuel Kant ]</p>

Primal

- Immanuel Kant, Enlightened Pillar of Transcedentalism

Primal

Keep in mind Kant that I am not reading anything you write, so don't bother responding because it's as good as posting :FAHFAHFAHFAHFAH to me. Ta ta.

Primal

BTW is there any way for me to block this guy or are his posts going to forever be cluttering topics I post on?

Starboy

Hi Keith,

It is as I thought. This is not the usual use of these words. Using them in this way will cause a great deal of confusion. You may wish to reconsider your use and understanding of these words.

Starboy

Keith Russell

Starboy:

Any given word can often have more than one meaning. I don't use 'truth' as a synonym for reality without trying to make it very clear to which concept my use of the word refers.

The main reason I use truth as synonymous with reality is so there's no confusion about where truth comes from. This means I can usually skip having to answer silly questions like 'who decides what is true', or 'where does truth come from'?

But, you are right, I don't use the word (in this context) the way most people use the word. But, I admit this, and understand it, and I don't try to hide behind it.

Keith.

Simon Magus

Q: If a tree falls and nobody is around, does it make a sound?
A: Yes it does.