Wizard22 wrote: ↑Wed Oct 11, 2023 11:45 am
Age wrote: ↑Sat Sep 30, 2023 5:32 amBut 'objectivity', which fits in with the GUTOE, is not outside of consciousness.
Unless, of course, you could present a sound and valid argument showing that 'objectivity' is outside of consciousness.
Wizard22 wrote: ↑Sat Sep 09, 2023 10:13 am
That's the kicker...
technically, we don't. Instead we use our higher & highest mental faculties to "get at" it, to access it, to enter it. We use "Science", Rationality, Reason, Philosophy, Mathematics, Physics, and the like—
to try (and fail) to gain access.
But what is 'it' first?
Wizard22 wrote: ↑Sat Sep 09, 2023 10:13 am
However, the immediate problem of Objectivity, is that it enters into Mysticism, Fantasy, Childhood Imagination, very quickly.
'Objectivity' only enters into these things if you put 'objectivity' there.
No, because Objectivity is not dependent upon/relative to Subjects.
you are missing the point.
Wizard22 wrote: ↑Wed Oct 11, 2023 11:45 am
It's the other way around. Subjects are dependent upon/relative to Objectivity as a whole.
If 'you', 'the subject', BELIEVE and SAY so.
Wizard22 wrote: ↑Wed Oct 11, 2023 11:45 am
Age wrote: ↑Sat Sep 30, 2023 5:32 amBut all human beings begin life before childhood.
Where?
Depending on 'one's' own subjective point of view and definition of and for the phrase and term 'human being', it could be said, usually in the fallopian tube, in the uterus, or in the womb.
When?
At any stage from conception, or fertilization, or during the always evolving embryo or fetus.
Wizard22 wrote: ↑Wed Oct 11, 2023 11:45 am
Age wrote: ↑Sat Sep 30, 2023 5:32 amAlso, one's first impression of 'objectivity' is vast and varied. For example your first impression of 'objectivity' is most likely very vast and different from mine, which would be very vastly different from "others".
Was your first impression of 'objectivity' really undisciplined, unrestrained, and unkempt?
My first impressions of objectivity were when I tried to imagine Existence, without my Consciousness/Awareness/Experience/Life.
And you?
I do NOT recall.
But, let us NOT forget, I NEVER asked you WHEN 'your' first impression of 'objectivity' was. I ASKED 'you', 'Was your first impression of 'objectivity' really undisciplined, unrestrained, and unkempt?'
Which a 'Yes', 'No', or 'I do not remember', response and answer would have sufficed.
Wizard22 wrote: ↑Wed Oct 11, 2023 11:45 am
Age wrote: ↑Sat Sep 30, 2023 5:32 amBut this conclusion and belief of yours is very False and Wrong, to me.
Wizard22 wrote: ↑Sat Sep 09, 2023 10:13 am
Because the Objective Realm can never match the Subjective Realm.
Why?
What is the 'objective realm' to you, and what is the 'subjective realm', to you?
Did I not already cover this?
But 'your' OWN, very specific, 'subjective' view and perspective of the 'objective realm' is NOT the SAME, to me,
So, what is 'it', EXACTLY, that, supposedly and allegedly by 'you', makes 'your' OWN subjective definition and version the, proposed, true, right, and correct one?
Are 'you' STILL NOT YET RECOGNIZING, SEEING, and UNDERSTANDING that what 'you' call the 'objective realm' is 'your' VERY OWN subjective VIEW of 'things' here?
Wizard22 wrote: ↑Wed Oct 11, 2023 11:45 am
Age wrote: ↑Sat Sep 30, 2023 5:32 amWizard22 wrote: ↑Sat Sep 09, 2023 10:13 am
To do so, would require Omniscience, Omnipotence, and Omnipresence.
Each of which is happening and occurring right NOW.
Wizard22 wrote: ↑Sat Sep 09, 2023 10:13 am
You would need to be—literally God.
Very True, and which is very attainable, and very reachable. In fact this is what is happening RIGHT HERE, RIGHT NOW.
Wizard22 wrote: ↑Sat Sep 09, 2023 10:13 am
Thus the Objective realm is used...by Religion, by Faith, by Charlatans, by Liars, by the Unskilled, by the Uncreative, by all types, good and bad.
So, are you now saying and claiming that the 'objective realm' can actually be attained, and reached?
At the very least, people begin to believe that "Objectivity" has been reached, at certain points. That's kind of the point I'm moving toward... how, why, when, exactly, people believe they've moved from Subject to Object, or as-if entering from a state of lower Belief to scientific Fact, or philosophical Untruth, to Truth.
HOW? By the means necessary to reach the 'evolutionary stage' of 'Objectivity', Itself.
WHY? Because the very purpose of evolution is so that Life, Itself, 'evolves' to COME-TO-KNOW Its(OWN)Self, and the Fact that because of 'evolution', itself, Life, Itself, is continually LEARNING, and BE-COMING WISER.
WHEN? Continually for ALL, collectively. But, WHEN one has reached a position/view that IS IRREFUTABLE, then that is WHEN one has ARRIVED AT and UNCOVERED the Truth, which is, after all, just a Fact that can NOT be REFUTED by ANY one, anyway.
Wizard22 wrote: ↑Wed Oct 11, 2023 11:45 am
That people use these analogies interchangeably, means to me, people have natural intuitions of Objectivity, 'beyond' what one can possibly know.
WHY do 'you' ASSUME, PRESUME, or BELIEVE that there are 'things' that are 'beyond' what one can possibly know?
Would you be willing to provide ANY examples so that we have some 'thing' to LOOK AT and DISCUSS?
Wizard22 wrote: ↑Wed Oct 11, 2023 11:45 am
And certainly beyond anyone's Capabilities to know.
Like 'what', for example?
Wizard22 wrote: ↑Wed Oct 11, 2023 11:45 am
There are Epistemological limits at play, limits to a human's knowledge, intelligence/IQ, logical analysis and deductions, or even, willingness to risk about what is True or False.
Oh, are 'you' under some sort of illusion that FOREVER MORE 'you', human beings, exist IN the 'human being' stage?
Are 'you' NOT YET AWARE that 'you', human beings, are ONLY A PART, and/or A STAGE, IN the 'continual evolution' of 'Life', Itself?
Wizard22 wrote: ↑Wed Oct 11, 2023 11:45 am
Age wrote: ↑Sat Sep 30, 2023 5:32 amWizard22 wrote: ↑Sat Sep 09, 2023 10:13 am
In these, the lesser examples, the worst of humanity, poses itself as "equal to" the highest and best of humanity.
And what is the 'highest and best' of humanity, exactly?
Wizard22 wrote: ↑Sat Sep 09, 2023 10:13 am
The presumption is, to analogize, that all Architects are equally valid and good. But that is not true, in form or practice. A failed Architect, has his buildings crumble to the ground, or bridges collapse, costing lives.
Could it never be the "builders" of buildings that have caused buildings to crumble, nor the materials themselves? Is it always the "architects" who cause buildings to crumble, or bridges to collapse?
Is Causality subjective or objective?
The word 'causality', to me, is just a word that denotes, means, or refers to that ALL 'things' were 'caused', and as well as have an 'effect' ON "other things'.
'Causality', itself, to me, is neither 'subjective' nor 'objective', as the words 'subjective' and 'objective' mean or refer to some 'thing' else.
Wizard22 wrote: ↑Wed Oct 11, 2023 11:45 am
Where is the Cause?
Where is the 'Cause' of 'what', EXACTLY?
Or, WHERE 'Cause', Itself, IS, EXACTLY, is just IN 'thought' and 'thinking', and/or IN the very 'thing', which IS Creating EVERY 'thing'. And 'that' is JUST IN the ABILITY of matter to move about FREELY. 'This ABILITY' is what HAS, IS, and WILL Cause AND Create EVERY 'thing'. Which, by the way, are just 'subjective' or 'relative' views of the One and ONLY Truly Objective Thing, which REALLY ONLY EXISTS. BUT, 'I' think 'you', "wizard 22", will find most of 'you', human beings, are quite some way off from Truly comprehending, understanding, and thus learning, in the days when this is being written.
But do NOT worry, BECAUSE of 'evolution', itself, learning, comprehending, and understanding the above COMES SOON ENOUGH, for 'the rest' of 'you'.
Wizard22 wrote: ↑Wed Oct 11, 2023 11:45 am
Determining Causes and Causality, assigning blame, is a matter of Justice and Justification. Those who
Judge Rightly, are claimed to have an
objective sense of the universe, all the way up to how the Abrahamics envision their God (Absolutely Just and Righteous).
But WHO are 'those', supposedly, 'Judges Rightly'?
Wizard22 wrote: ↑Wed Oct 11, 2023 11:45 am
Age wrote: ↑Sat Sep 30, 2023 5:32 amOkay, but so what?
What is your so-called 'object' here?
So, what does 'objectivity' require, exactly?
I think that it is
Subjectivity that has all the "requirements", not Objectivity.
Objects require
no energy to Exist.
So, the object known as 'the sun', for example, to you, does NOT require ANY energy, right?
Wizard22 wrote: ↑Wed Oct 11, 2023 11:45 am
Meanwhile, Subjects, you, me, anybody else, require immense energy to exist, and to form and have Consciousness.
So, what is 'the subject', which 'you' call 'you', 'me', or 'anybody else', made up OF, EXACTLY, which 'you' also CLAIM requires IMMENSE ENERGY to exist, to form, and TO HAVE 'Consciousness'?
And, are 'you' ABSOLUTELY SURE that it is 'you', or 'me' who HAS 'Consciousness'?