Walker wrote: ↑Thu Apr 25, 2024 7:56 pm
Wizard22 wrote:It created worse famines, worse warfare, and worse chaos. Africans are severely over-populated in Africa now, as a result.
Seems like such conditions would result in fewer Africans. Food-aid, the usual warfare, and everyday chaos resulted in more Africans. The same situation played out in Gaza. As with Africa, all the aid shipped in resulted in a lot of people who wouldn’t have been there if not for the food shipped in.
You could even objectively say that more food causes more people, and less food causes fewer people.
“Seems like,” is a subjective declaration. Events prove that sometimes subjective and objective correlate.
I just finished responding to Gary in another thread...'Peace' can be an Objective. So too can be 'War'. Some animals flourish in Light. Other animals flourish in Darkness.
The particular Objective, is relative to the particular Subject/Organism/Individual, and its environment.
Objectivity cannot be all-encompassing because seeking Clarity or Reality in life, is not the Objective of most people...or most people simply have a low tolerance for "The Truth".
Objectivity cannot be all-encompassing because environments are different from each other: Mountains, Forests, Oceans, Deserts, Earth, Mars, The Sun.
Therefore the ideal of a "Universal Perspective" only exists as a response for the need as such...why would any organism, any Human, want such a thing? Maybe it's in the vain hope that all of life, and existence, can be understandable, can be 'known' to and integrated within the person with such an ideal? It's an idealization of the end of thinking (therefore suffering).
