The violence needed to accomplish this would be out of proportion with whatever good it might bring. And it might result in a worse system.

No. Not even close.

Anyway, found your blog through Google blog search(a first for me!) and will have to subscribe! Good stuff!

I think some see multiculturalism as a void that needs to be filled out – with their ideas.

How to protect diversity if you accept everything?

I don’t know whether it’s underfunded or not, but it’s certainly not unfunded.

I’d be interested to see some hard data on the funding for malaria and diarrhea treatments. Otherwise we’re just spreading rumors. Well, rumor has it that malaria and diarrhea treatments, which could save millions of lives, are underfunded because they aren’t sexy diseases.

Diarrhea is a symptom, not a disease so I’m unsure how to respond to that point.

Neither one gets the press that AIDS does though.

I have differentiated between subjectivity and objectivity NOT at ultimate level. I have differentiated them only at practical level.

My views can be “mess” … but they are whole original views. Those are all my subjective views, therefore.

You are free to dislike. I also can dislike yours. Because as a matter of fact, our views are having clash. I have not presented any objective facts! And Subjective things can create clash between people. I have also explained this fact in my first mess.

Regards!

I’ve got to tell you, I find your comments and your 2 articles to be a philosophical mess.

BTW - I’m a grad student in philosophy, so I don’t think the problem is with me and my reading ability.

It is one thing to describe how you use a set of words and to display the interconnected meanings of the words. This is good and helpful work.

But it is quite another thing to define things (and not just words). In order to properly define objectivity one first has to clarify what this thing, objectivity, is. What do you mean to pick out with the word objectivity? Help me bring it before my mind for consideration. Once you have picked the the thing out, then can you proceed to define the thing. Not before.

It is basically pointless to argue over what the word objectivity should rightly pick out. There is some point to it, but it is philosophically uninteresting.

Confession - at this point in my philosophical journey I find the objectivity/subjectivity distinction to be a lost cause. I think I understand the common notions and various options, but in my view they all break down.

“Jhon is Doctor”, is an objective statement. There is an external “object” that can verify the truth value of this statement. That external “object” is composed of following two things:

1- His Doctorate Degree Certificate and;
2- Act of verification of that certificate from the issuing University etc.

Now Come to subjective statements:

“Jhon is wise”, is a Subjective Statement. There cannot be any external “object” (like certificate etc.) that can verify the truth value of this statement.

Subjective statements are NOT supported by external “objects”.

But it doesn’t mean that subjective statements cannot be supported by anything!

Subjective Statements are supported by one’s “internal information”.

In my first article referred in my previous comments, I have identified three distinct components of that “internal information”. Those components are:

1- Objective facts which are part of our “internal information”. —- I have shown in that article that if someone states this part of his “internal information”, that statement cannot be regarded as “subjective”.

2- Personal Observations and Experiences. — For example, a person is an eyewitness to an event. Now if he states that event in his words, then those statements also connot be regarded as “subjective”. I have mentioned sufficientt reasons in that article that those statements are still objective.

3- Personal Conclusions that a person draws out of his own personal observations and experiences:

I have shown in details, in that article, that only this component of “internal information”, if described verbally or in written form, assumes the form of true “Subjective Statements”.

I really think it wrong to find the meanings of Objectivity and Subjectivity in grammatical terms of “subject” and “object”.

Secondly,,, if a class of people agree on a particular definition of “goodness”, and the statement: “Cake is good” comes up to that definition of “goodness”, then the statement “Cake is good” is Objective for that class of people.

For those people, the “Objective Evidence”,,, or “External Object” is that agreed upon definition of “goodness”.

regards!

For you, a statement is objective if it can be confirmed by evidence. That is one way to use the word objective. That is not how I use it. It is less in tune with the etymological origins of the word, but really that’s not worth much anyway.

Also, to state that something as good is NOT merely to report your affections toward it. The thing also has to be judged to be WORTHY of your affections, if it really is good and not merely desired. We have knowledge of the goodness and badness of things in addition to our varied desires and affections for things.

But in my opinion, your teacher was right. Subjectivity or Objectivity should not be seen in the fact whether it says something about subject or object.

The statement “I like cake” is objective.

The “truth value” of this statement can be confirmed by an “objective evidence”.

Objective Evidence is I myself in this case.

If you have doubt whether I really like cake or not,,, you can verify or confirm it from me (i.e. the objective evidence). Then I will verify that I really like cake. As a matter of fact, I like cake!

And the statement “Cake is good” is subjective. If I say “Cake is good”,,, then I cannot confirm this statement through any “objective evidence”. It is just I “feel” that cake is good. Many other people also can feel like that. But some people may not feel like that.

For details, you can check my following two articles:

1- Nature of Subjectivity and Objectivity:
http://khuram.wordpress.com/2006/08/30/nature-of-subjectivity-and-objectivity/

2- Subjective/ Objective Statements:
http://khuram.wordpress.com/2006/08/30/subjective-objective-statements/

Regards!

I’ve been conflicted lately about sweatshops. Sounds strange, but there’s actually a case in favour of them. At least as a transitional thing on the way to better things.

Surely they are awful enough that we should try very hard to hurry up the transition.