 Originally Posted by Dianeva
Does objective mean that it's true independent of what anyone thinks, or that it's true for almost every person? Now that I write it out, it's obviously the latter.
Whaaat? I would say it's obviously the former o.o
I mean, most people think Hitler was a bad person. But it's still subjective. If it's possible to disagree, then it's subjective. If just 1 person disagrees, it's subjective. Hell, even if nobody disagrees, it's still subjective.
We can't have true objectivity. We can say that Hitler caused the death of many people, and that is probably true and objective. But maybe it isn't. Probably, but maybe not. Maybe he was just a scapegoat in some wicked, intricate conspiracy.
Point is, there is an objective truth somewhere: Either he did it, or he did not. However, we can never know. And that's not just for this example.
There are obviously certain characteristics (and usually those characteristics fall under the category of 'normal') that the human brain is programmed to find attractive. It applies to all humans, except for maybe some few people whose brains have developed abnormally for whatever reason.
Yeah, but normal does not equal objective. Whatever anyone likes or dislikes is subjective. I bet we can all agree that torture is not a very pleasing sensation, but it's still subjective. If someone had a brain that had developed abnormally and actually liked being tortured then lo and behold, he would have a different opinion. The fact that he can have a different opinion makes it subjective.
In fact, the first description you made of objectivity is what I think is the definition. An objective truth means something that is true regardless of what anyone thinks. The latter is just a whole shit load of people who agree on a certain subject... Hmm. I like how the last word in that sentence.. Never mind.
|
|
Bookmarks