Message from @Deleted User
Discord ID: 487119960230068234
If you rephrase the question correctly, then I'll bestow you with my knowledge of ethics and particular philosophers of interest.
That would be the first time you would have said anything of value.
But I'm fairly certain it's a wild goose chase.
The FISA Documents are being declassified tommorow, about 20 pages or so during a press conference with President Trump and others.
**Supreme Commander Otter orders the execution of all those that disagree with him** *Circa 1942*
Will for sure be a good time tommorow.
Did Otter shut down?
Most likely.
That entire situation was a catastrophe.
I'm merely waiting for you to give me accurate perimeters for discussion.
I bet he doesn't even work THODs.
I cannot falsely apply epistemological distinctions to ethics and allow people to persist to continue in discussion with these errant concepts.
It was a very simple question which you apparently spent hours trying to understand.
Actually shut the fuck up
And still do not.
I understand WHAT you tried to say, but you refuse to correct yourself.
which is why I offered you the CORRECT concepts.
Then why was it so hard for you to answer it?
<:PINGREE:459545653350105088>
Why is it rubbish?
<:ToMyDrink:459545654323314710>
for the hundred time.
<:ToMyDrink:459545654323314710>
objective and subjective are **epistemological** distinctions
do you know what epistemology is?
No. Please enlighten me. I want to be impressed.
hundredth
not hundred
epistemology is asking "how we know what we know?"
so for instance
<:SquidDab:459545666725609493>
Kant believes that there is an "objective" reality called the noumenal
HOWEVER
https://archive.fo/AfVxc#selection-1032.26-1032.27 @everyone ***ATTENTION***
we know
we can only experience the "subjective" plane of reality
called the phenomological