Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 57

Thread: Can one fail as human being?

  1. #21
    Silver Member Bartmanhomer's Avatar
    Reputation
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Posts
    2,024
    Religion
    Christian
    Location
    New York, NY USA

    Re: Can one fail as human being?

    Quote Originally Posted by MaskedOne View Post
    Sean isn't trying to defend Trump. He's trying to make you look at something from more than one perspective. If he's pushing your buttons then it's because you aren't actually reading his post correctly. Calm down and look at what he's actually saying instead of flying off the handle.
    Ok I'll reread his post and try again.

  2. #22
    Sr. Member
    Reputation
    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Posts
    176
    Gender
    Female

    Re: Can one fail as human being?

    Can an elephant fail at being an elephant? Can a cat fail at being a cat? Even if your cat acts a little different than other cats, he's still a cat. I don't think any animal (or other living organism) can fail at 'being'. So humans can't either. You are being a human and that's all there is to life. You can't fail at that.

    Of course that has nothing to do with annoying traits. I'm with Sean on this that it's subjective. We have a wannebe-Trump in the Netherlands (Geert Wilders) who I find very annoying and wrong at many topics, yet he has a large group of followers.

  3. #23
    The Gaze of the Abyss B. de Corbin's Avatar
    Reputation
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    8,307
    Religion
    Alchemist and Neo-American Redneck Buddhist
    Location
    Frozen Northern Michigan, near Thunder Bay
    Phrase
    Where are the tweezers?

    Re: Can one fail as human being?

    Quote Originally Posted by Eleanor View Post
    Can an elephant fail at being an elephant?...
    If the distinguishing characteristic of the class "elephant" is "the ability to manipulate objects with its nose," then one could truthfully say that an elephant with a paralyzed nose has failed (in at least one way) at being an elephant.

    It is still an elephant, though, in the same way that a car that doesn't run is still a car.

    To say that a thing has "failed" does not require that it ceases being a member of it's class, nor does it require that the thing fails at some percieved "purpose." All that is required is that the speaker has a metric, and that the observed object falls below the metric.

    A bad essay (for example) is still an essay, it just fails to meet the metric.

    Now, one could argue that the particular metric being used is invalid for one reason or another, but that's a whole other bucket of chum.
    Those who have suffered understand suffering and therefore extend their hand.

    I can't do everything, but I can do something.

  4. #24
    God in the baking Sean R. R.'s Avatar
    Reputation
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    1,036
    Religion
    Theistic Satanism
    Location
    Poitiers, France
    Phrase
    Strength in Will, peace in well-being.

    Re: Can one fail as human being?

    Quote Originally Posted by B. de Corbin View Post
    Now, one could argue that the particular metric being used is invalid for one reason or another, but that's a whole other bucket of chum.
    Maybe not necessarily invalid, but just arbitrary?

    Check out my blog! The Daily Satanist

  5. #25
    The Gaze of the Abyss B. de Corbin's Avatar
    Reputation
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    8,307
    Religion
    Alchemist and Neo-American Redneck Buddhist
    Location
    Frozen Northern Michigan, near Thunder Bay
    Phrase
    Where are the tweezers?

    Re: Can one fail as human being?

    Quote Originally Posted by Sean R. R. View Post
    Maybe not necessarily invalid, but just arbitrary?
    Not arbitrary, necessarily, but certainly subjective. All value judgements are subjective - but this does not make them useless. Decisions have to be made, decisions are made using a combination of objective evidence and subjective value judgements (well, classicly. Now-a-days it appears that evidence is optional).
    Last edited by B. de Corbin; 05 Aug 2019 at 07:26.
    Those who have suffered understand suffering and therefore extend their hand.

    I can't do everything, but I can do something.

  6. #26

    Re: Can one fail as human being?

    I think that realists would disagree with you in the idea that all value judgements were meaningfully subjective.

    Approaching the OPQ as thiugh there were objective criteria, which seems possible at the very least...then sure, you could fail at being human.

    I have no idea what that criterion would be, or if a given person would even care if there were such criteria which wee objective. It’s at least one of the criteria for successful human life that we reproduce, but a failure to reproduce or a refusal to reproduce don’t strike me as weighty failures, however objective they may be.
    Last edited by Rhythm; 05 Aug 2019 at 16:39.

  7. #27
    The Gaze of the Abyss B. de Corbin's Avatar
    Reputation
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    8,307
    Religion
    Alchemist and Neo-American Redneck Buddhist
    Location
    Frozen Northern Michigan, near Thunder Bay
    Phrase
    Where are the tweezers?

    Re: Can one fail as human being?

    Can you give me an example of a value judgement that is not subjectively based?
    Those who have suffered understand suffering and therefore extend their hand.

    I can't do everything, but I can do something.

  8. #28

    Re: Can one fail as human being?

    Not likely, no, given that you view all value judgement as subjective.

    Its one of those differences that are generally intractable, but very often built out of a misconception as to what value theorists (and ethical theories) are referring to with the terms objective and subjective. Realist and other-than.

    Broadly and simply, the difference between the two positions is what a purported fact properly refers to. If it properly refers to a fact of the object, and does accurately report the contents of the purported fact, it’s a realist value statement. Allegedly objective. If it properly refers to some fact about the reporter..the subject, alone, subjectivist.

    With that in mind, you can probably work out how to distribute assertions between the two alleged sets. I noticed comments in your statement that allowed for this directly following the assertion that all value judgement was subjective. What you were referring to with those are what realists are referring to with objectivity.

    - - - Updated - - -

    I’d also add, here, that success and failure are metaphysically neutral. We can succeed or fail by reference to criteria in either category. The answer to the question of whether or not we can fail as humans is a resounding yes either way. Whether or not those failures matter to us, generally...or in some specific case, another question entirely...but some of the same comments cross over.
    Last edited by Rhythm; 06 Aug 2019 at 04:27.

  9. #29
    The Gaze of the Abyss B. de Corbin's Avatar
    Reputation
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    8,307
    Religion
    Alchemist and Neo-American Redneck Buddhist
    Location
    Frozen Northern Michigan, near Thunder Bay
    Phrase
    Where are the tweezers?

    Re: Can one fail as human being?

    Quote Originally Posted by Rhythm View Post
    Not likely, no, given that you view all value judgement as subjective.

    Its one of those differences that are generally intractable, but very often built out of a misconception as to what value theorists (and ethical theories) are referring to with the terms objective and subjective. Realist and other-than.

    Broadly and simply, the difference between the two positions is what a purported fact properly refers to. If it properly refers to a fact of the object, and does accurately report the contents of the purported fact, it’s a realist value statement. Allegedly objective. If it properly refers to some fact about the reporter..the subject, alone, subjectivist.

    With that in mind, you can probably work out how to distribute assertions between the two alleged sets. I noticed comments in your statement that allowed for this directly following the assertion that all value judgement was subjective. What you were referring to with those are what realists are referring to with objectivity.

    - - - Updated - - -

    I’d also add, here, that success and failure are metaphysically neutral. We can succeed or fail by reference to criteria in either category. The answer to the question of whether or not we can fail as humans is a resounding yes either way. Whether or not those failures matter to us, generally...or in some specific case, another question entirely...but some of the same comments cross over.
    Thank you for that. It is interesting - I went on a "realism" quick read internet trip.

    I don't think I can agree with the idea of objective morality (my own inclination leans toward sollipsistic existentialism where "good" means "good for an individual or group" and "bad" means "bad for an individual or group") although I do understand why the idea is attractive...

    ... However, I need to read more...
    Those who have suffered understand suffering and therefore extend their hand.

    I can't do everything, but I can do something.

  10. #30

    Re: Can one fail as human being?

    The old instrumental/intrinsic chestnut. Another point of common division.

    instrumental good, good fors , are alleged realist goods, however. It’s very often the case that people who object to realism are, themselves, realists. Think of all of the value positions that flow from good-for human health and flourishing. Harm based systems. Is health real? Sure. Is it some specific thing floating around like reverse miasma, probably not (lol). Are facts about health true or false without regard to people’s opinions about health or whether or not they care about health? In short, can we possess knowledge about health. Yes.

    Realusts assert that moral statements -can be- like that. That we can have knowledge, like that. That they are capable of being “objective”, true even, in the same way that statements like that are considered to be.

    As a survey of the field ( but not an argument that this survey indicates anything metaphysically) the overwhelming position of value academia is realism. As an observation on human value designation, descriptive value relativism and subjectivism are uncontroversially true, with the caveat that the respective actors still think that they’re engaging in realist value creation.

    TLDR version, realism takes alot of flak on account of people being more familiar with descriptive subjectivists and relativists mistakenly calling their positions “objective whatsits” than it does from any article in the actual position. A position that we as human beings broadly think is true but commonly lack adequate justifications for, personally.

    A great resource on this and other issues ( and any philosophical issue)

    https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/moral-realism/
    Last edited by Rhythm; 06 Aug 2019 at 05:46.

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 8
    Last Post: 22 Jan 2017, 18:55
  2. When averages fail horribly...
    By MaskedOne in forum Catacombs
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 18 Jan 2016, 07:01
  3. Human Sacrifice
    By Medusa in forum Catacombs
    Replies: 47
    Last Post: 14 Sep 2015, 18:13
  4. I fail at plants...
    By Maria de Luna in forum Herbalism
    Replies: 36
    Last Post: 22 Mar 2013, 04:37

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •