RFD: uk.rec.audio.vinyl
"Kurt Hamster" wrote in message
On Tue, 1 Jul 2003 06:26:07 -0400, Arny Krueger used
to say...
"Kurt Hamster" wrote in message
Please give me an example where "better" is objective. I can't think
of one.
You're sitting in a Sherman tank and I am sitting in a M1A1 tank. We
are a thousand yards apart and both are locked and loaded with one
round, and poised to fire. I think that objectively speaking, one
tank is better than the other, a fact that will become abundantly
clear about 2 seconds after we fire our respective weapons.
I won't think it's better because it killed me.
Hey Kurt you dimwit, you won't be thinking - you'll be dead. When you're
dead you are incapable of subjectivism, right?
Also anti-war
protestors would not consider it better because it killed someone.
In many cases the essence of anti-war protest is fear of the injury and/or
death that is part of war. Clearly true of many during the Vietnam war.
Would a person who is fearful of injury and/or death pick anything but the
"better" tank? I seriously doubt it!
So once again 'better' is subjective.
I'm supposed to think that you've made some kind of a logical argument to
support his conclusion, Kurt? I hate to clue you in at this late date in
your life Kurt, but hand-waving and fallacious examples don't prove a thing.
'Better' is a non-exact comparative adjective.
Straw man argument. I didn't claim that objective judgments have to be
precise.
Get used to the fact.
What fact?
Yet another example of the sloppy thinking of subjects, if you can even call
it thinking. I believe the preferred subjectivist word is "feeling". With
bogus arguments like these, Kurt can't feel his way out of a wet paper bag!
|
Linear Mode
