Originally Posted by doh123
You really believe that? wow... you honestly believe that everyone, or even most people, with the same exact heap of facts present will think exactly the same about them? I find that very ignorant. Your statement basically implied (though I know it wasn't intentional, or obvious to yourself) that your opinions on the matter are right because its you, and so your opinions are facts, yet anyone who has a different opinion is just an irrational opinion.
I think you have some learning to do about people in general... and I can see why your drawn to Obama...
(PS. I don't like either of the presidential 'choices', equally...)
Hey thanks for the insult and for putting words in my mouth etc. when I tried as hard as I could not to do the same and apologised for any untoward offence as well.
You may infer all kinds of things out of what I said, but that's a subjective journey you are on all by yourself.
For the record, I did not
say nor even mean to imply that certain things are right because "I think them." I find the concept hideously misguided. What I am arguing is, (and this is fairly basic stuff), that not everything is a "he said, she said" subjective discussion. Some things are factual. My argument is that an objective assessment will come down on one side or the other in most issues. My further argument is that people being what they are, objective assessments are not always made.
I do not
think as you paraphrase, that people given the same "heap of facts" will think the same about them, in fact I said the opposite. People will think a whole variety of different things about them. That's the way people are. I'm arguing in a sense (tangentially I guess), that what people "think" includes subjective as well as objective assessments, and further I'm making an appeal for more objectivity overall. Not a bad thing.
At the risk of getting political yet again, a good example would be the Iraq war. Two people can look at this same "heap of facts" and one can think (logically) that it was a foolish unethical endeavour unlikely to do anything but make things worse, whereas the other can look at it and see it as a great idea because they are basing their assessment on subjective immaterial things like religion, country, etc.
In the end, as animals, it is impossible for us to ever completely separate our subjective beliefs from our more objective tendencies, but again, I would argue that the whole deal with being human at all is that we should try. For me the whole purpose of the human journey is to try to be more than mere animals. I'm an atheist myself but I've studied religion quite a lot and this seems to also be the approach of most of the major denominations, at least at root.
PS - I don't expect to learn a great deal more about humans than I already learned in the first fifty years, but I am always open to the possibility.