philosophy guff (1 Viewer)

[Jimmy Magee]

Re: New Colour Soul in the top 20!!!

Thing I've been ponderin' lately, and this isn't directed at New Colour Soul or Bunny here. This whole 'taste' thing. Isn't it just a means of saying that one person knows more about the topic and therefore their opinion is more valid? I mean, if a Britney fan comes out and says 'Its all a matter of taste' regarding her musical prerferences as regards somebody who likes, say, Merzbow, or some relapse shit or Lightning Bolt or whatever, the argument goes that the girl is young and silly and hasn't exposed herself or been exposed to enough and varied music. Does this theory not carry forward to all examples? I.E. somebody with a brain who has listened to mor types of music can legitimately declare Morrissey or whatever to br trypeulent (Adjective of trype) and when the Morrissy fan says "Well, its all a matter of taste", its actually not. Or something. I guess what I'm saying is its not really a matter of taste. WHat we call taste can actually be considered not 'good' taste and 'bad' taste but, actually, right and wrong.
No?

Ah the old "things are a matter of taste" v "some stuff is objectively better than others" chestnut...I decided to do a philosophy thesis on this, thinking (naively) that I could decide it once and for all, at least for myself, as it used to bother me lots...but good Jaysus if it didn't turn into an enormous mess very quickly...now I just oscillate unsteadily between the two - generally the latter in the privacy of my own brain and the former when talking to people so as not to offend them with my own arrogance. As far as I could determine, certain factors incline one to view the situation one way rather than the other (e.g. general consensus, finding a link between factual things and whether stuff seems good or bad to oneself), but I couldn't figure out if this meant that it was correct or not to think that way...if you think this explanation of it is confused, you should see how it looks in my brain...

 

[ann post]

Re: New Colour Soul in the top 20!!!

Ah the old "things are a matter of taste" v "some stuff is objectively better than others" chestnut...I decided to do a philosophy thesis on this, thinking (naively) that I could decide it once and for all, at least for myself, as it used to bother me lots...but good Jaysus if it didn't turn into an enormous mess very quickly...now I just oscillate unsteadily between the two - generally the latter in the privacy of my own brain and the former when talking to people so as not to offend them with my own arrogance. As far as I could determine, certain factors incline one to view the situation one way rather than the other (e.g. general consensus, finding a link between factual things and whether stuff seems good or bad to oneself), but I couldn't figure out if this meant that it was correct or not to think that way...if you think this explanation of it is confused, you should see how it looks in my brain...

nearly went to see ya's in sligo, my lift bailed. howd it go?

 

[coast to coast]

Re: New Colour Soul in the top 20!!!

i never said i didn't like it, just that i thought i wouldn't. fucksake. if you can't be cynical here, where the fuck else can you!?

 

[Dixer]

Re: New Colour Soul in the top 20!!!

Ah the old "things are a matter of taste" v "some stuff is objectively better than others" chestnut...I decided to do a philosophy thesis on this, thinking (naively) that I could decide it once and for all, at least for myself, as it used to bother me lots...but good Jaysus if it didn't turn into an enormous mess very quickly...now I just oscillate unsteadily between the two - generally the latter in the privacy of my own brain and the former when talking to people so as not to offend them with my own arrogance. As far as I could determine, certain factors incline one to view the situation one way rather than the other (e.g. general consensus, finding a link between factual things and whether stuff seems good or bad to oneself), but I couldn't figure out if this meant that it was correct or not to think that way...if you think this explanation of it is confused, you should see how it looks in my brain...

Fellow philosophers unite. I reckon it’s just that people use the term ‘taste’ as a catch all safety when they’re insecure in professing a belief or opinion or whatever. Of course, there is really genuine ‘taste’. “Generally the latter in the privacy of my own brain”. I do this shit all the time. It’s amazing what we think to ourselves that we would never openly profess. It’s equally true though that taste is relative to exposure and experience. The more of both had, the better a persons ‘taste’ should be. Like, when you first hear an album you dislike it but ten years later its yr favourite album or some shit. Who can profess an opinion on a subject they know little or nothing about yet the common usage of the word ‘taste’ lets people do exactly that. Like some hack writer in the Herald saying that Saving Private Ryan was 10 times the film that Thin Red Line was. (One example that’s stuck with me through the years). How would he know, prick prolly doesn’t even watch films.

 

[Alan Remorse]

Re: New Colour Soul in the top 20!!!

Fellow philosophers unite. I reckon it’s just that people use the term ‘taste’ as a catch all safety when they’re insecure in professing a belief or opinion or whatever. Of course, there is really genuine ‘taste’. “Generally the latter in the privacy of my own brain”. I do this shit all the time. It’s amazing what we think to ourselves that we would never openly profess. It’s equally true though that taste is relative to exposure and experience. The more of both had, the better a persons ‘taste’ should be. Like, when you first hear an album you dislike it but ten years later its yr favourite album or some shit. Who can profess an opinion on a subject they know little or nothing about yet the common usage of the word ‘taste’ lets people do exactly that. Like some hack writer in the Herald saying that Saving Private Ryan was 10 times the film that Thin Red Line was. (One example that’s stuck with me through the years). How would he know, prick prolly doesn’t even watch films.

hurrah! a philosophy thread. Anyway, relativism is bullshit.

 

[Dixer]

Re: New Colour Soul in the top 20!!!

hurrah! a philosophy thread. Anyway, relativism is bullshit.

Can we get a philosophy section up in this bitch?

 

[coast to coast]

Re: New Colour Soul in the top 20!!!

hurrah! a philosophy thread. Anyway, relativism is bullshit.

tisn't

 

[egg_]

Re: New Colour Soul in the top 20!!!

Anyway, relativism is bullshit.

from the internet encyclopedia of philsophy:

Although there are many different kinds of relativism, they all have two features in common.

1) They all assert that one thing (e.g. moral values, beauty, knowledge, taste, or meaning) is relative to some particular framework or standpoint (e.g. the individual subject, a culture, an era, a language, or a conceptual scheme).

2) They all deny that any standpoint is uniquely privileged over all others.

That's not bullshit.

 

[P. Littbarski]

Re: New Colour Soul in the top 20!!!

from the internet encyclopedia of philsophy:

Although there are many different kinds of relativism, they all have two features in common.

1) They all assert that one thing (e.g. moral values, beauty, knowledge, taste, or meaning) is relative to some particular framework or standpoint (e.g. the individual subject, a culture, an era, a language, or a conceptual scheme).

2) They all deny that any standpoint is uniquely privileged over all others.

That's not bullshit.

What about absolute truth.

You can't logically argue against the existence of absolute truth. To argue against something is to establish that a truth exists. You cannot argue against absolute truth unless an absolute truth is the basis of your argument. Consider a few of the classic arguments and declarations made by those who seek to argue against the existence of absolute truth…

"There are no absolutes." First of all, the relativist is declaring there are absolutely no absolutes. That is an absolute statement. The statement is logically contradictory. If the statement is true, there is, in fact, an absolute - there are absolutely no absolutes.

"Truth is relative." Again, this is an absolute statement implying truth is absolutely relative. Besides positing an absolute, suppose the statement was true and "truth is relative." Everything including that statement would be relative. If a statement is relative, it is not always true. If "truth is relative" is not always true, sometimes truth is not relative. This means there are absolutes, which means the above statement is false. When you follow the logic, relativist arguments will always contradict themselves.

 

[spady]

Re: New Colour Soul in the top 20!!!

It’s amazing what we think to ourselves that we would never openly profess.

Hence the problem with booze and my good self.

 

[egg_]

Re: New Colour Soul in the top 20!!!

You can't logically argue against the existence of absolute truth.

Doesn't mean relvativism is bullshit. There's no logical contradiction in saying "From the standpoint of humans in this universe there is no absolute truth", and that's what counts

 

[ann post]

Re: New Colour Soul in the top 20!!!

Doesn't mean relvativism is bullshit. There's no logical contradiction in saying "From the standpoint of humans in this universe there is no absolute truth", and that's what counts

i think relatives are bullshit.

 

[guy of the tiger]

Re: New Colour Soul in the top 20!!!

I don't get along with one of my aunties, but I wouldn't write them all off.

i think relatives are bullshit.

 

[Dixer]

Re: New Colour Soul in the top 20!!!

Doesn't mean relvativism is bullshit. There's no logical contradiction in saying "From the standpoint of humans in this universe there is no absolute truth", and that's what counts

Hall of mirrors relativism? Each mirror reflecting the others but nothing except mirrors to be reflected?
I find this manner of relativism wishy washy but at the same time get it hard to throw my lot in with the absolutists. This is gonna quickly degenerate into a theological argument if we're not careful. Actually, I think a lot of philosophical problems like this exist because of linguistic limitations. The languages we use correlate to ceryain contexts and attitudes and people need to coin new phrases for new cocnepts etc. Wittgenstein might have something to say about this but where is he when you need him? Feckin dead.

 

[ann post]

Re: New Colour Soul in the top 20!!!

Hall of mirrors relativism? Each mirror reflecting the others but nothing except mirrors to be reflected?
I find this manner of relativism wishy washy but at the same time get it hard to throw my lot in with the absolutists. This is gonna quickly degenerate into a theological argument if we're not careful. Actually, I think a lot of philosophical problems like this exist because of linguistic limitations. The languages we use correlate to ceryain contexts and attitudes and people need to coin new phrases for new cocnepts etc. Wittgenstein might have something to say about this but where is he when you need him? Feckin dead.

but my uncle is left handed in the mirror.

 

[egg_]

Re: New Colour Soul in the top 20!!!

Hall of mirrors relativism? Each mirror reflecting the others but nothing except mirrors to be reflected?

Pete, praps this should break out into the Arts and Culture board?

Some things are real and true. If you kill me I am dead. E=mc^2. Stuff like that. But that can all fit under 'relativism' quite easily, cos for certain things we all share the same standpoint (our species, our universe).

Anyway, arguing about relativism and absolutism is kinda daft. Like you say, they're just words. Just you can formulate words in such a way as to ask a certain question doesn't mean that the question has an answer, or even is a meaningful question

 

[egg_]

Re: New Colour Soul in the top 20!!!

Hall of mirrors relativism? Each mirror reflecting the others but nothing except mirrors to be reflected?

Actually, hold on a second - I don't know what you mean by this. Or, I kinda do, but I can't see what it's got to do with the thing I said that you quoted

 

[Bunny]

Re: New Colour Soul in the top 20!!!

Philosophy is very time consuming.

 

[snakybus]

Re: New Colour Soul in the top 20!!!

I'm kinda busy but whatever egg said, I disagree with it

what was it you said egg?

 

[egg_]

Re: New Colour Soul in the top 20!!!

Something clever, snake, you wouldn't understand