Re: Re: Objectivity

On Saturday 21 April 2007, Arik Baratz wrote:
> On 4/21/07, Shlomi Fish <shlomif-ik1l9ssToec+JF/[email protected]> wrote:
> > > No it is not. In my reality this definition sucks. You may buy into
> > > this definition, because you subscribe to some absolute truth. I
> > > don't. We don't have to agree, and our world view is therefore
> > > different. No proof necessary or even possible.
> >
> > If no proof is possible, then I cannot accept your claim, because it
> > lacks any reasoning. So you might have well not said it.
>
> Oh. So you totally deny the value of a formed opinion. 

I do not.

> I guess you 
> don't have a favorite color or a favorite dish either, because you're
> unable to prove that Sushi is better.
>

I do. But such opinions are ammoral. Whether I prefer blondes or brunettes (or 
both) or Perl or Python (or both), or prefer chocolate icecream or vanilla 
icecream etc. is not a matter of Ethics. This is a matter of taste, which 
varries according to many factors, and is useless to argue about.

However, if someone thinks that 2 + 2 = 5 (i.e: [**] + [**] = [*****]), then 
this opinion is illogical. It can be proven to be incorrect. He is entitled 
to his opinion, but everyone can tell it's a lie.

Likewise, Randians believe that Ethics is a matter of logic and very basic 
facts of existence like the biological nature of men and women.  

> I think that definition sucks. I don't accept it. In my reality 

In your reality? Arik, in my reality, I didn't receive this message of yours 
and didn't reply. Sorry, but we share the same reality. Or else interaction 
between us would be impossible.

> it is 
> invalid. You are entitled to your own opinion. Saying that I am not
> entitled to one dismisses me in an offensive manner.

Where did I say that you're not entitled to your own opinion? You are of 
course. You are also entitled to think that 2+2=5, or that A = NOT(A) but 
don't try to base a mathematical proof on it or mathematicians will laugh at 
your face. 

You have made a claim. You didn't prove this claim. Since it is without a 
proof, and I have some counter-evidence (see my message to Nadav), I can 
assume that this claim is false until I am given some evidence to prove it. I 
can say such claims as "Perl does not scale to large codebases", "All Arabs 
are evil", "Drugs be illegal", etc. but until I prove them, they will remain 
as unproven. If you think otherwise, then you might as well say that "Foreach 
A, A is true and NOT(A) is true", and become all-knowing and get done with 
it.

Don't take it personally, you are entitled to think what you want, but I'm 
also entitled to expect you to prove such claims. I won't accept any claim 
without a good evidence, reasoning or proof. Unless, of course claims like "I 
like Mint-flavoured Ice Cream the best", which are ammoral, and a matter of 
taste.

Regards,

	Shlomi Fish

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Shlomi Fish      shlomif-ik1l9ssToec+JF/[email protected]
Homepage:        http://www.shlomifish.org/

If it's not in my E-mail it doesn't happen. And if my E-mail is saying
one thing, and everything else says something else - E-mail will conquer.
    -- An Israeli Linuxer


 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/hackers-il/

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/hackers-il/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    mailto:[email protected] 
    mailto:[email protected]

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [email protected]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/