Deleted User

Well, we don't have much else to go on except other human conceptualizations, so I'm stuck with empirically approaching this from what is most well un...

That's why I said markets specifically. We can see what markets have produced just within the current system in the past 70 years. I've said no such t...

Glad to see we're finally past that, maybe we can make this constructive from here on, what do you say? Okay, not that validity implies truth, but let...

You didn't have a point with this. It isn't relavent to what we're talking about.

No, just since two. It can't be. If my ethical standards are out bound in the direction of other humans, I have violated the exact same reasoning proc...

Then there was no reason to waste our time on it. I'm going to bed now. I'll pick this up tomorrow.

Function, as in what the purpose reason has been evolved to fulfill. What it is doing in function.

Because it's two in the morning, and I've been going around with you for hours about nonsense. Yes, ethical conceptualizations are self-benefitting ac...

Yes, because you weren't relating the two in function.

No, it's a biconditional. Yes, the standard has to be in accord with the benefit of the individual conceptualizing the behavior. Behavior that is self...

If and only if it is a benefit to one's own survival?

Then they wouldn't have been brought up together.

That's not Objectivism's argument: Since reason is man’s basic means of survival, that which is proper to the life of a rational being is the good; th...

Yes, I read your words.

I literally made the shortend version of the argument in the statement. If individual humans are the source of ethics, then ethics are standardized by...

I don't know what you thought you were getting across, but it wasn't an argument against how humans devise survival methods, or any other conceptual i...

It depends on what you mean. If one understands ethics to be a conceptual framework with standards, then it isn't at all difficult to see why such a s...

I'm pointing out that your argument against reason, is to talk about breathing because it also is required to live, as if it were a part of the discus...

It is, reason is how one actually directs their behavior to survive. Breathing is autonomous action.

It does require it. It has nothing to do with what we're talking about. Again, reason is how the human navigates the world. We aren't tlaking about mi...

Yes, they share a property. One is the source of all human science, wealth, technology, medicine, and philosophy, and the other is breathing. Placing ...

What kind of survival? Can babies live by just being left alone to breathe?

Specious is you bringing up basic bodily functions as a means of long-term survival and regarding that in the same caliber of what we're talking about...

I said data being integrated to inform future behavior is specifically what reason was this entire time. And, I'm certainly moving the goal posts now ...

I can't take your argument seriously. You were a thousand times better on the logic stuff. You're "very clear" arguments were pointing out functions l...

I don't know how to argue with assertions of this kind. You are equating autonomic functions with the cognition by which humans standardize all of the...

As in, act in the world to ensure survival. Okay, which word would you like then? Seek, pursue, attempt, or direct. Are those better for you? Sure, it...

Autonomic function is in the same realm of reason?

As of the moment, yes. I stated clearly that there's a difference between what happens when you respond in reflex, which informs later behavior, and w...

Yeah, I quite literally thought you were trying to say that breathing was in the realm of what we were discussing. Okay, that's a bit more clear. This...

I should have been more clear. Breathing is not a means, or method of survival. It is, in fact, a necessary autonomic bodily function required to live...

This is what I've said the whole time, and no it doesn't disagree with Objectivism. Response used to inform future behavior is what I've said. That wo...

No you didn't.

Yes, the same way your organs have to be working. That's not something in dispute in Objectivism. This is how a child analyzes something. Have you rea...

No I didn't. I never claimed science supported that.

And? it is not sufficient to sustain your life. How you accrue resources and meet your needs is through reason.

No, I said that science holds that reason and memory are inextricably linked. Meaning, if stimuli can be stored as memory to inform future behavior, t...

Sufficiency and necessity were conflated with what?

You don't have a point to be vitiated. You just claimed you didn't see why it was ethical, and then I explained it.

Strawman. Reference for what? I haven't made any claims in association with this comment.

I explained it as more.

It's also not a suvival mechanism that sustains your life. It's a basic response to stimuli, which will inform your future behavior, so there's defini...

No, what's ethical is that ethical conceptualization is also a product of reason. To produce ethics that standardize the behaviors of others is unethi...

No, you just won't actually integrate what I'm saying to you, nothing more. I'm not dissenting. I'm saying that if one of the standard measurments for...

Objectivism disagreeing with science isn't a thing. If science indicates that it is 'possible' on some level, then Objectivism incorporates as much.

The concept is not key in any way that I didn't directly imply using other descriptors.

To survive?

What have I already said? It is possible, if that data is used to inform future behavior. We don't know if this is happening.

And I explained the same idea in detail. The word was not necessary.

Yes. Reason is how those tools get used.