Comment on People who reject challenging ideas as stupid without engagement are like intellectual nepobabies
SenK@lemmy.ca 3 weeks agoIf objective reality doesn’t exist, then your definition of ‘subjective’ is just a consensus-based hallucination you inherited from your own comfort. How do you know your ‘multiverse’ isn’t just a realist’s cage you haven’t recognized yet? Your own argument destroys the premise upon which it rests. Also, what if my subjective experience includes what I would characterize as objective reality? You would be imposing your own definition on to me, again destroying your own premise.
Grail@multiverse.soulism.net 3 weeks ago
Do you want to argue so that we can both learn from each other or do you want to argue so you can change My mind?
SenK@lemmy.ca 3 weeks ago
Neither. I just enjoy picking apart philosophical arguments.
Grail@multiverse.soulism.net 3 weeks ago
Alright, well I’m happy to engage with that. I know it’s not a realist’s cage because I’m actively maintaining My subjective world and making choices about what to believe on a daily and weekly and yearly basis. I’m being an active agent in a way that realists don’t. They let society tell them what is objectively true. I don’t care about that, I’m asking Myself what is useful to believe.
SenK@lemmy.ca 3 weeks ago
How do you define what a realist cage is without being informed by objective reality?