Relativity and Absolute Truth

[popeye1945]

Eodnhoj7,
It is a subjective statement on my part a reaction to the question at hand, but to you, it is a statement made by an object/me in your environment for even my own body is an object in my environment, that I experience on a subjective level. You will measure the meaning and worth of my subjective statement that you are experiencing on a subjective level. Again, biology is the measure and meaning of all things on a subjective level, after which you can bestow that meaning upon a meaningless world. All meaning is the property of a conscious subject and never the property of the object. Apparent reality, is biological experience.

This is where I disagree: You cannot seperate non-biological realities from consciousness as consciousness is broken down to only being interactions. In these respects all reality is conscious.

I am speaking of our subjective reality, our apparent reality, subjectivity being the only means we have of knowing the physical world. The old saying that subject and object stand or fall together means, if you take one away the other ceases to be. Without a conscious subject, there is nothing. You may be right however, but it is the misty territory of metaphysics, consciousness maybe what it is in totality or it is consciousness through and through. I have said before that our apparent reality is a biological reaction, meaning our reality is a biological reaction to the energies of the cosmos in the way of a biological readout, not unlike sums fed into an adding machine to find the totality.

[Eodnhoj7]

Eodnhoj7,
It is a subjective statement on my part a reaction to the question at hand, but to you, it is a statement made by an object/me in your environment for even my own body is an object in my environment, that I experience on a subjective level. You will measure the meaning and worth of my subjective statement that you are experiencing on a subjective level. Again, biology is the measure and meaning of all things on a subjective level, after which you can bestow that meaning upon a meaningless world. All meaning is the property of a conscious subject and never the property of the object. Apparent reality, is biological experience.

This is where I disagree: You cannot seperate non-biological realities from consciousness as consciousness is broken down to only being interactions. In these respects all reality is conscious.

I am speaking of our subjective reality, our apparent reality, subjectivity being the only means we have of knowing the physical world. The old saying that subject and object stand or fall together means, if you take one away the other ceases to be. Without a conscious subject, there is nothing.

Is this an objective statement considering the subject is viewing the subject thus negating the subject?

[popeye1945]

This is where I disagree: You cannot seperate non-biological realities from consciousness as consciousness is broken down to only being interactions. In these respects all reality is conscious.

I am speaking of our subjective reality, our apparent reality, subjectivity being the only means we have of knowing the physical world. The old saying that subject and object stand or fall together means, if you take one away the other ceases to be. Without a conscious subject, there is nothing.

Is this an objective statement considering the subject is viewing the subject thus negating the subject?

No, it is the awareness that one cannot separate subject and object in reality, for their relationship is apparent reality.

[Eodnhoj7]

I am speaking of our subjective reality, our apparent reality, subjectivity being the only means we have of knowing the physical world. The old saying that subject and object stand or fall together means, if you take one away the other ceases to be. Without a conscious subject, there is nothing.

Is this an objective statement considering the subject is viewing the subject thus negating the subject?

No, it is the awareness that one cannot separate subject and object in reality, for their relationship is apparent reality.

The paradox of the absence of separation between subject and object is made evident by the distinctions, ie separations, known as "subject" and "object".

[popeye1945]

Is this an objective statement considering the subject is viewing the subject thus negating the subject?

No, it is the awareness that one cannot separate subject and object in reality, for their relationship is apparent reality.

The paradox of the absence of separation between subject and object is made evident by the distinctions, ie separations, known as "subject" and "object".

Would you clarify that statement as I can make no sense of it.

[Agent Smith]

Had trouble parsing the OP but on the whole it rings true! Hats off to ya OP.

[Eodnhoj7]

Had trouble parsing the OP but on the whole it rings true! Hats off to ya OP.

Thank you for the compliment.

[Eodnhoj7]

No, it is the awareness that one cannot separate subject and object in reality, for their relationship is apparent reality.

The paradox of the absence of separation between subject and object is made evident by the distinctions, ie separations, known as "subject" and "object".

Would you clarify that statement as I can make no sense of it.

1. Saying "subject" and saying "object" is to separate subject and object by making "subject" and "object" as distinctions.
2. To say subject and object are unified is contradictory because we make distinctions through the name "subject" and "object".

[popeye1945]

The paradox of the absence of separation between subject and object is made evident by the distinctions, ie separations, known as "subject" and "object".

Would you clarify that statement as I can make no sense of it.

1. Saying "subject" and saying "object" is to separate subject and object by making "subject" and "object" as distinctions.
2. To say subject and object are unified is contradictory because we make distinctions through the name "subject" and "object".

In philosophy, it is a means of understanding that there is a relationship between subject and object and that relationship gives the subject his/her apparent reality. It is understood by those in dialogue that subject and object can never be actually separated. As Schopenhauer stated, subject and object stand or fall together, meaning take one away and the other ceases to be. It is something akin to poetic license a necessity for fruitful dialogue.

[Eodnhoj7]

Would you clarify that statement as I can make no sense of it.

1. Saying "subject" and saying "object" is to separate subject and object by making "subject" and "object" as distinctions.
2. To say subject and object are unified is contradictory because we make distinctions through the name "subject" and "object".

In philosophy, it is a means of understanding that there is a relationship between subject and object and that relationship gives the subject his/her apparent reality. It is understood by those in dialogue that subject and object can never be actually separated. As Schopenhauer stated, subject and object stand or fall together, meaning take one away and the other ceases to be. It is something akin to poetic license a necessity for fruitful dialogue.

And yet the distinctions are made by having two words rather than one. Distinctions show, in one respect, an act of separation.

[popeye1945]

Do you have a problem also with the words country and earth, me and you? We understand we are all part of something larger than ourselves but in order to dialogue about the distinctions, as in you being part of my environment and I being part of ours as an object, it is necessary to acknowledge what is an object and what is distinctively a subject.