Not sure why this got removed from 196lemmy…blahaj.zone but it would be real nice if moderation on Lemmy gave you some sort of notification of what you did wrong. Like an automatic DM or something

  • @hoshikarakitaridia
    link
    0
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subjectivity_and_objectivity_(philosophy)

    Well, let’s look at geopolitics. The War in Ukraine. Putin says that the War is important to get rid of Nazis in Ukraine. A lot of ppl in Russia believe him.

    I know for myself I don’t believe it.

    Let’s walk through your definition: it’s a big thing I think. So either me or they are objectively right. Well depending on if you define this as “actual morality”. That concludes in your definition this can be objectively determined.

    Well let’s walk through Wikipedia’s philosophical definition.

    Can my opinion be formed independent of mind? That is, without bias, perception, emotions, opinion, imagination or conscious experience? Well I have biases against against Putin because I try to be neutral, but there’s a lot of news articles highlighting bad politics from him. I have a certain perception about starting wars on an argumentation without good evidence. My emotions tell me that ppl dying is bad. My opinions tell me that there is no justification for a war if it clearly isn’t a very limited defense against an attack. I do have an imagination of what the war looks like and what the consequences will be. And last but not least, ppl talking about how their relatives died or my father talking about his time in the army has left a conscious experience on me in that regard.

    As you can see there’s a lot going on that wants me to make this “objectively true” for me, but I really can’t split all of these influences from my opinion, therefore this is not objectively determined via Wikipedia’s definition.

    Now I submit to you that you can’t find anyone who doesn’t have these biases to make the statement that the war is either right or wrong under that definition while being objective, per definition.

    Which brings me to the conclusion that on this topic, your definition of it and Wikipedia’s definition on it fundamentally differ and bring me to opposite conclusions. This means either your definition is the one we should follow, or Wikipedia’s, and I have to say I’m gonna make my choice.

    Btw this is in no way a dig at the idea that I wish there was some things that everyone knows are wrong, but I just think ppl are ppl and it doesn’t work for most things.