Subjectivism Versus Objectivism.

Also, the discussion is subjectivism versus objectivism.

Its simply a train of thought.

Nihilism is utter feminity. There are two types of feminity - chaos feminity and void feminity.

Chaos has some elements of order in it. Just as feminine persons have a semblance of rationality. For instance, Farcturus descended posts occasionally rational truths. But you don’t ever see her replying to forum philosophers like Amorphos, she is stuck in Edward Allen Poe land, mentally masturbating over having sex with her own wolves.

You are stuck in nihilistic void because you want to be. Spend some time doing art or something creativity, giving meaning to your life. Mix it up - write books, do art, do all kinds of invention things.

Even when I am angry and hateful, I can still be happy about it, because it is chaos feminity not void feminity. Theres no pill to fix that - you’re just feeding void bound thoughts.

Ah, the voice of Satyr. He takes his masculine feminization of mankind to the extremes. Pretty soon taking a shit on a toilet becomes a feminine act.

Taking a shit on a toilet is a feminine act. Feminity is good in the right doses. Know when to use it - daemon lore.

Feminity becomes a problem when men are so hypnotised by TV trance (trance and hypnosis is feminine as fuck) that they can’t think rationally.

Yeah, I don’t agree with Satyr’s prognosis on everything which doesn’t make me a true believer, I know.

Its not Satyr I dont steal his shit. Im just discovering the same truths he did.


I do not see a shitty world just one with no objective meaning to it which is what nihilism is. But this does not mean that I as a nihilist cannot find
meaning to my own existence. Also your wonderful but ridiculous panacea is actually nothing more than the product of an over active imagination

It is an axiomatically deductive system of logic and so no it cannot be subjective

So, the symbology of mathematics is an objective one? … athematics … athematics

Mathematics is merely a type of reasoning concerning quantities. Is reasoning subjective?

According to anti realism, yes. It’s very interesting this anti realism is. Just came across it this morning.

Apparently we all live in a Platonic world of make believe.

Mathematics is both subjetive and objective; but primarily it is a subjective system (exactly: a subsystem of the subjective system logic), and secondarily it is an objective system (exactly: an applied subsystem of objective systems).


And we - the humans - judge about subjectivity and objectivity. If we were not capable of using mathematics much more than (other) animals, then we would use it just subjectively, namely for self-preservation (like all [other] animals), and because we would not know or merely instinctively know that, we were also not capable of knowing what “subjective” and “objective” mean.

One of those pills seems to be a special one:



The extremes between these polarities can be seen, in my “mind” by two areas, science’s crux and cognitive neuroscience, both in different ways. Let’s look at science’s crux as I think of it as. Take Newton’s absolute theory of gravitation. Is it “real”? Does it actually describe the world as it really is? Okay, a long came another theory by Einstein with his mathematical equations on general and special relativity. Are either of these two men have the absolute correct explanation of the gravity? I believe a skeptic viewpoint has to be put towards physics these days first. So let’s try this. Physics in Newtonian mathematics is absolute meaning that its based not on probablism, but hip and thigh match with mathematical precision the fabric of gravitational pull. Todays physics is probablism and a chasm exists between Einstein’s General and Relative theories. Does a theory that tries to explain everything really be based on probablism? I just want to pose that question.

The crux of science, I believe, is that it ultimately reduced things to physics, by and large, and physics is based on man made equations. So what are these equations all about? I believe these equations are mental substitutes. That is, we see the world more closely as it is, and we try to make order to it with these equations.

Therefore, the line between objective and subjective and be cut between closely here with mathematics trying to explain the outside world but failing to do so with accuracy because the world is a dapple one filled with irregularities.

In cognitive neuroscience we see the mind and brain can interact with each other. With antipsychotics, with poking the brain in certain areas by electrical shocks, which are getting more accurate as time goes on, by fmri’s watching the brain unfold as we watch as our stream of consciousness explodes. It’s awesome.

I like it how you describe the dependency to use mathematics and equations to understand the universe as mental substitutes. Very nice.

Yes, indeed the world is filled with irregularities. The universe also for that matter.

The objectivist thinker I’ve noticed is an uniformic conformity type thinker who will not stop in trying categorize all of existence into a nice little bow and neat package. Unfortunately for objectivists the universe and planet doesn’t work this way.

This isn’t to say that objectivism isn’t useful in the physical sciences studying subjects like gravity for which it is.

It’s not like one can approach the subject of gravity purely out of subjectivism.