byoder@smcnet.UUCP (Brian Yoder) (01/19/90)
There's a lot of chaff in this thread and not much wheat. Let's winnow a bit... Some folks think that... 1. Subjectivity may be false but it doesn't matter... > >>>>When we say, "the theory of relativity changed reality," that may well > >>>>be false, given an objective reality, etc. But it doesn't matter! 2. Past history is fluid. It changes as we understand more... > >>So? Surely reality, as we see it, includes history. Our history > >>changed. 3. Historians "create" the past unrelated to any actual truths... > As far as changing the past goes, I'm a historian by trade. I invent > the past every day. I haven't the foggiest idea what really went on > back then, but I collect evidence and try to put together a picture that > makes sense -- to me and others in my trade. New evidence rewrites that > picture every time. > And you know what? That picture IS the past, as far as we're concerned. 4. Objectivists have a sick need to know things... > Why does Ayn Rand sell so many books? Well, she talks a good game, and > she lets you know she's right beyond any controversy. Lots of people > find that soothing -- to have found the Truth. 5. People should not bother with reality, just abstract ideas... > I am not considering reality itself, just a picture that I > (and better draftsmen) have drawn. 6. Nobody cares about the truth unless it is related to something else (considering the usual eastern mystic bent of many such theoriticians, it is surprising that this is not an admission that truth relates to everything by them)... > What do you mean, "objectively true?" Nobody even CONSIDERS the issue > of the truth of a matter unless it has some importance to something > else. 7. Logical approaches to evaluation of reality are arbitrary... > ["We"] approach "reality" in a fairly circular way: it's what fits our model > of it, once we've integrated as many perceptions of it as we can. 8. No truths can be known... > Truth is an unattainable standard. 9. Objective truth isn't what "we" are searching for... > And since we don't actually chase after that standard, but rather strive > to explain what we've seen and build tools to do what we'd like to do, > that big objective truth out there is not the central issue that some > would like to think it is. 10. Subjectivists think that they care about the truth... > >>And as for your pious words about "caring about the truth," what makes > >>you think I don't? > >ROGER LUSTIG> When we say, "the theory of relativity changed reality," > >ROGER LUSTIG> that may well be false, given an objective reality, etc. > >ROGER LUSTIG> But it doesn't matter! (It seems they care nothing for consistency either ;-) 11. Every-day reality isn't objective reality. > [T]he reality we use, day to day, is not the ultimate, objective one. 12. All that matters is how we think about things, not how they really are... > >ROGER LUSTIG> As far as anything we care about goes, the WAY OF THINKING > >ROGER LUSTIG> about reality changed -- and that's all that matters to us! 13. "We" cannot think about things, only thoughts... > Indeed. But when we think, we're operating on thought, not on the > "things" we're thinking about. > Oh, on the contrary! I am constantly updating my view of reality -- > that is, the *informal* reality we all use. 14. Informal use of reality is OK, formal use of it is bad... > I have no objection to using "truth" and "reality" in fairly informal > ways... 15. Objectivists insist that ignoring reality leads to disaster... > This is in contrast to those who insist that all sorts of axioms about > objective reality are necessary, and that those who do not subscribe to > them completely are on the road to Nazism, mysticism, 43% more cavities, > or whatever. At least there's one correct conclusion. When a philosophy allows history to be re-written without consequence, when reality changes from second to second as we think it into existence, and when consistency is irrelevant, that philosophy can find itself advocating any impossible cause, justifying any crime, glorifying any atrocity, and wasting any resource. Of course anything you do is OK, since tomorrow this will just be fluid history. Is that any kind of basis for morality? For achievement? For survival? I think not. Brian Yoder -- -<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>- | Brian Yoder | answers *byoder(); | | uunet!ucla-cs!smcnet!byoder | He takes no arguments and returns the answers | -<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-