Nah, you said, "try working with people who have severe mental illness and come back to me when you realise that perception dictates above all". I'm just saying you aren't *submitting* that perspective can be wrong when you say that. As for what you just said, I hope you all the best.

<:Shrug:232210564753915925>

Thanks, I guess.

The other thing you said, that it was "all down to perception", is a misalignment with other things you put out there. Which is part of why Mongolite wasn't about it, I suppose. Didn't seem like you were in such fundamental disagreement as the convo developed to. There's muh piece

i have no idea what's even going on right now, so i'll just agree with you on that

unfiltered nosiness

Mongolite doesn't like non-christian opinions but can't argue his points properly is his big disagreement

Fuck off cunt

I just don’t argue with fucks who aren’t worth my time

@Doktor Goon were you arguing a variant of the is-ought gap or something?

What do you mean?

You are talking about not being able to escape subjectivity

Yes

I guess

Do you think that is inescapable? That conception only is applicable under existentialism/materialism

Being subjective?

Of course it's inescapable

Everyone is an individual and views things in seperate lights

That has no bearing on reality

What does have a bearing on reality

Reality is objective sure but how you interpret the reality is subjective

You can have subjective interpretations that doesn't mean there are no ways of obtaining truth.

I never said that

You claimed it's inescapable

If we can ground objectivity then it is

But is that something we can do

Sure, you start with the principle of being and you can discern plenty of things from obviously correct premises

But on the grounds of discussing things like religion is subjectivity not inescapable

It's plenty escapable

By all being the same faith I assume

But we aren't

@Doktor Goon @Eoppa The scientific method has no scientific proof for its validity. It is incomplete under its own bearing (authority), as the Godel was also able to say. To accept it as true, another reference is needed, and another. Thus it must be ground either arborescently or hierarchically, but it must be ground, as pragmatism dictates.

Yeah idk why you said that but sure

That is correct

It's the argument behind this one

But I'm not arguing scientific method

@Doktor Goon we don't need to be the same faith to argue objectivity

@Doktor Goon replace "scientific" with whatever method you are arguing

I'm completely fucking lost this started with Mongolite telling me I do things by ego

Which if you know anything about psychology that's why anyone does anything

The ego is a spook <:really:591181753625083905>