Originally Posted by
RonnieBird
This is an extension of "subjective reality", except that in your version the individual doesn't just perceive the world in his own way, but a way which is suggested by some third party or outside entity.
Well, you see the problem with that, don't you ? If "reality" isn't just perception ,but a common perception from an outside entity, then you're actually back in a full circle to objective reality, and consequently objective morality since you have acknowledged the existence of this superior entity which defines reality and morality and, therefore , somewhat proved at least the possibility of God.
I prefer Thomas Aquinas' proofs, but in fairness he did it deliberately.
I think you've created your very own philosophy here, which we might call "objective subjectivity". I don't think it really works, but it's an interesting idea. Here's the thing though - if none of its true anyway, why do you prefer one version to another ?
I take the view that there is such a thing as the objective truth,and that all the rest is either a lie or a mistake.
I also take the view that examining philosophy too closely is at the best of times the road to the mad house, but if these people here are correct about you and I being the same person arguing and conversing with each other , we have a serious mental illness.
That's by the by, but here's my proof in this question. A number of people here have versions of the truth regarding whether you and I are one in the same - I have mine, you have yours, and they have theirs. However , one version is not only true, but by virtue of that disproves your suggestion that all versions are lies !
Reply With Quote