tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11679714.post115143272970193225..comments2024-03-18T14:37:00.011-04:00Comments on Half an Hour: Networks - Revisiting Objective/Subjective...Stephen Downeshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06140591903467372209noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11679714.post-1152264802208231172006-07-07T05:33:00.000-04:002006-07-07T05:33:00.000-04:00Our language is unhelpful here. You use the expres...Our language is unhelpful here. You use the expressions “adapting to the environment” and “understanding the world”. This is the language of objectivity and it is hard to escape it. We need a work-around perhaps. <BR/><BR/>For the first, for better consistency with your claims, try “adapting to a selected set of the experiences to which I am subjected”. For the second, perhaps “developing through habit a consistent way of responding to familiar experiences”.<BR/><BR/>If something like these are accepted as non-objective alternative expressions then ‘environment’ and ‘world’ are convenient, if misleading, shorthand. In debating the subjective/objective problem we should probably avoid shorthand.<BR/><BR/>But does this solve the problem of usage or simply transfer it to another level? Who or what is adapting and responding? Is there an underlying object (a person)? Or am I a set of ever-changing experiences that can be distinguished from another such set, simply because ‘I’ don’t have access to any other experiences than my own?<BR/><BR/>I don’t think this approach will solve the subject/object problem, but perhaps we don’t need to, unless we particularly enjoy the distraction.<BR/><BR/>If the importance of your picture lies in the ‘greater scope’ that it gives us, then the debate itself is unimportant. It is sufficient to give us this greater scope that we do not (perhaps cannot) know enough to nail an objective concept. It matters not which way we come down on the issue; our scope is not limited by our decision. If that is the case then we do not need to concern ourselves whether the world is objective, subjective or intersubjective. We can get on with exploiting our scope (freedom to think and act) in order to learn. <BR/><BR/>So what is ‘learning’ in this context? Let me try an extended version of my expansion of ‘understanding the world’. Learning is developing through experience, reflection and habit a consistent way of responding to familiar experiences while remaining open to responding differently to unfamiliar experiences and changing our habits in the light of what happens when we respond.<BR/><BR/>I quite like this ‘subjective’ take on learning but would it not undermine the role of the teacher? Or is that the point?Legacy Userhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01184038923177211861noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11679714.post-1151588855316356472006-06-29T09:47:00.000-04:002006-06-29T09:47:00.000-04:00Karyn, I understand where you're coming from, but ...Karyn, I understand where you're coming from, but would argue that you don't need what you think you need.<BR/><BR/>You write, "However, if no truth is absolute and nothing is true in and of itself, then we are adrift in a sea of differing perceptions with no markers. In this environment, there can be no right and wrong and therefore no law."<BR/><BR/>I would ask, "why not?"<BR/><BR/>To see what I mean, imagine yourself just for a moment in a world like the one I describe.<BR/><BR/>Imagine there's no objective truth, no certainty. Imagine you look around you, but you don't know what things are, you hear things, but you can't be sure of what you hear.<BR/><BR/>What would you do? Nothing? Well, maybe at first. But eventually, you start doing things. You can't be sure, but you take your best guess. You don't repeat actions that seem to hurt, and if something seems to help you, you go back to it.<BR/><BR/>Yes, it's uncertain. Yes, you cannot know. But eventually, despite the uncertainty, you get pretty comfortable with your decisions and your actions. Getting the big round things, whatever they are (you decide to call them 'apples') and eating them becomes a habit. And eventually, you start thinking, "I 'know' these are apples."<BR/><BR/>What we think of as 'knowledge' is an adaptation to an environment. It is our sense of comfort with repeated actions, the ease we feel when we recognize things. There is no 'objectivity' here, no 'certainty', but there doesn't need to be. It is enough as it is; we get by.<BR/><BR/>That's the picture I am trying to present.<BR/><BR/>Why is this important?<BR/><BR/>It's important because it allows there to be different ways of adapting to the environment. It gives us greater scope for action, greater scope for understanding the world.Stephen Downeshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06140591903467372209noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11679714.post-1151587965258625262006-06-29T09:32:00.000-04:002006-06-29T09:32:00.000-04:00I fall short of being able to keep up with this de...I fall short of being able to keep up with this debate. One point I agree on though, is who cares whether the pebble empirically <B>is</B> a pebble? I certainly don't care whether my perception of that object as a pebble is objective or subjective - as long as it doesn't get thrown at my kids, my house or my car!<BR/><BR/>However, if no truth is absolute and nothing is true in and of itself, then we are adrift in a sea of differing perceptions with no markers. In this environment, there can be no right and wrong and therefore no law. In fact, even the notions of objective and subjective knowledge cannot be argued in a world where the concept of objectivity is a subjective one. Therefore, your argument that no knowledge is objective must surely fall victim to itself. <BR/><BR/>I recently heard a podcast of one of your presentations where you asked the audience why they were there. They said it was because they knew you were presenting and they supported the views you express, whereupon you agreed that you said things that were right and true. In a world where all knowledge is subjective, I would contend that no-one can make that claim.Legacy Userhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10375480373431330136noreply@blogger.com