m-theory

What part of truth value or mind is objective?

If your judgements don't correspond to something objective, they are not facts. None of the statement "All truths (which are subjective) are subjectiv...

There are no objective truths, by your definition, so the "truth" part of the statement "All truths are subjective" does not correspond to anything ob...

Right, so your statements are not objective facts. And they only correspond to the subjective case. For example "All truths are subjective" only corre...

The statement "All truths are subjective" is not an objective statement if it has a truth value.

I point it out because the truth of this has nothing to do with what is objectively the case.

This is only subjectively true.

I agree. The facts are the facts, regardless of subjective truths.

Exactly. Your judgement does not matter. That was my point. What is the objective fact is the case regardless of what you believe is true.

Right, the facts don't hinge on your judgement. And it is only your judgement that it is an objective fact. You can't move from your judgement that it...

The point is that it is only subjectively true that it is an objective fact. Not objectively true.

Right it is not objectively true that it is an objective fact. We agree.

It is not an objective fact that is true.

It is not an objective fact, it is just a subjective fact that it is your opinion. I did not derail the thread, you mentioned something you believed a...

You say this as if it could be objectively true. It is just your opinion, you realize that right?

It can't be objectively true what you say. So basically your are saying it is your subjective opinion. Why should any one care about your subjective o...

How can you that is true?

Maybe you have a source where Einstein himself said that he meditates, prays, practices celibacy, and tries to live like Jesus did. I am pretty sure t...

That is not what Einstein said. He even clarified this.

I was told that post-truth is just media hype.

Agustino is right, being insulting does give the mods an excuse to be doing something while they are online.

I am not sure how it applies to formal arguments in symbolic form. How would you be able to distinguish it from valid forms?

Happy new year!

I think mosesquine's point was that it was not a formal fallacy.

That looks like something a spy would post.

Totally left out eastern traditions?

How could you know if this were true?

What is the difference between begging the question and having a valid circular argument? How is that argument an example of one but not the other.

A logic puzzle/challenge on circular arguments. -The Non Sequitur

Back in my day they referred to it as the information superhighway.

Is tonight star trek meme night at TPF?

Fair enough. I had not thought about that.

Ayn Rand...though I am not sure she even counts.

What about those that can't afford a therapist? We should still avoid medication because some people might think we are weak willed?

That's the rub, no amount of evidence is ever enough.

How does coming to terms with medical depression help if you are not going to treat it?

I was skeptical about treatment for a long time myself, until my condition got worse. I pretty much had to resort to treatment because my mental illne...

I think maybe we are not talking about the same thing. I was talking about medical depression which can be treated as a chemical imbalance.

Sorry, you seemed to imply that people with depression should not seek treatment. I know from experience that is not good advice.

Yeah where is that guy?

Hey, I am just pointing out how the term gets used. Not how it out to be used.

In my opinion the different branches of philosophy covers all of human endeavor There is no subject which not a subject of philosophy, it is the mothe...

Ha!

pretty cool stuff man, thanks for the shares

I think it was a valid point. Also I pointed out that many people that suffer from depression do embrace it, and that is part of the problem. It is no...

lol thanks

Yes, eventually all the anti-realists will die, and there will still be a reality around.

I was claiming that there is no way to demonstrate that nominalism is true or false. I don't think it is possible.

this is extremely ironic to me

How would you propose this could be demonstrated?