Some people just assert Santa Claus exists. When asked they tell the tell what they think is the truth. Some people (mainly young) know that God exists? They don’t say they believe. They state what they are sure is the truth. Does Santa exist after any of these?
The second person didn’t answer the question and both could be answering subjectively.
Well, let us know if anyone asks the question meaning what you think it means (and let us know the context) And if anyone gives you a better answer about Mozart being good….you know where it’s not their subjective opinion about what makes Mozart objectively good….let us know. Cuz poisoning is a strong categorizing, so we must be missing out on something really good.
The person saying it is presuming an objective truth. They are answering your question. The people not using that phrase are doing the same thing. Does Santa Claus exist? Yes, he does. That second person just responded with their belief about what is true objectively. Just as the first one did. What set of words in answer to that question would mean it was not a belief the person had? Whatever your original Santa Claus question was. Show us an objective answer to the question. Whatever the wording, the person is asserting their belief in what is objectively true. (unless they are lying, or farting or answering a question about cacti etc - just to head of that derailing)
Yeah, confusion is a hell of a drug! I have no concerns yet I must expose. I meant they can even answer something objective by mere chance
Quite odd, to me they are mainly old. Some people believe in the lack of god, for example, and are sure of it. So I don’t know what that entails
How come?
For example: “Yes” or “No”, as long as that doesn’t mean their subjective belief.
How would anyone know?
What would say objective and what would say subjective?
How would they interpret the question correctly and answer such that you thought ‘Ah good, an objective answer, not just what they believe to be true.’?
What is not you? I am consciousness.
They very precisely gave the only answer they think is not correct. They answered What are you?
How could it possibly not be? Or is there an objective belief? Please give a scenerio where someone answers yes or no to the question Does Santa Claus exist and it is not their belief?
Of course it means they’re unable to respond in a way that satisfies you. If they respond the sensible way, as if it’s about taste, you start accusing them of poisoning the conversation. But you want them to respond some other way, but you can’t explain that other way or show examples. You can’t even figure out how to respond the way you expect yourself.
You’re the poison. You’ve certainly poisoned this conversation, that’s clear.
I think it’s time you started being more charitable towards people who interpret your questions to be about taste.
“I like it” - subjective
Now, you can say… is it objective that you like it? I suppose that’s objective. That person does like it.
“Yes” - objective (at least, perhaps)
All answers are objective until shown otherwise, I think that’s the standard. “Did you have sexual relationships with that woman?” was not about if he thought, but if it happened
Oh, mega-typo, at the beginning of the sentence I wanted to type ‘not you’, I meant to change it to ‘you’ and I totally forgot. Sorry there. “Who are you?” would be the question, you are right, that person answered ‘what are you?’ or ‘who are you?’.
What do you mean? A belief about something that is objectively true? Let’s say someone believes something exists instead of nothing at all. “Does Santa exist?” “No”, and that person simply doesn’t believe it exists nor it doesn’t exist.
It’s not a matter of satisfaction at all, and not even about the people in this thread. You stated a lot of assumptions from other people in this conversation - I’ll just disregard that, as if all those assumptions are deleted.
Now, if they respond about taste, they’re not responding the sensible way. They are responding the usual way. Both are not the same.
If it is asked “is it raining outside?”
Yeah, you are sure others poisoned this conversations: I agree
Then show us a sensible way to respond. We’re not asking much, we’re asking you to live up to your own standard.
Is Mozart’s music good?
If you can’t show us what a sensible answer looks like, I think it’s fair to say that you aren’t being sensible here at all.
to the question does Santa Claus exist?
Right but perhaps he hallucinated or fantasized or his idea of a sexual relationship, potentially, is racially different from what we mean - no contact, he peeked in her window and masturbated. But the point is that is his belief. Perhaps we interview her, ask her and she says no. Perhaps both a lie detector test while answering. We are dealing with beliefs about what is objectively true. Even if they just answer yes or no.
It doesn’t matter if the person is right or wrong for us to understand it as their belief. Their belief may be correct or it may not be. We answer with our belief (with or without belief/believe/think in our response) of what is objectively true. I believe Santa exists but he doesn’t is not an accurate sentence. I both believe Santa exists and don’t believe it - that could be accurate.
What is a subjectivized answer to that question?
Huh? Others? What are you talking about?
Is English your native language?
I’ve tried this too. Perhaps you have the right cast of the dice.
No I don’t think he would ever reflect on what he’s said here and even question for a second that he might have communication problems.
He knows full well that when people ask each other, is this music good, they’re looking for an opinion. He also knows full well that he can’t clarify what his question means, and he can’t answer his own question. So when he asks other people, he expects them to throw away how they use words with everyone else (unprompted, they just have to know that they’re not expected to use words the same way with him) and understand the meaning of his question when he can’t express the meaning clearly or even answer his own question.
He’s not sensible. He’s not reasonable. He’s conversational poison, and he’d never question himself. He doesn’t have that sort of thing in him.
Well, no, not quite that; I meant it then becomes clear (to me) that the question is whether Mozart’s music is objectively good (whatever that means—a parenthesis I already added in my first reply).
I suppose you’re right. In any case, stay tuned.
Well, I disagree. I mean, sure, killing a healthy baby could be good for some (things) but not for others. But good or bad must always be for some (one and/or thing(s)). If it’s good as a means, then the question is "to what end?"; and if it’s good as an end, then the question is “whose end?”
The reason I said the answer must be “I don’t know” is that the question seems to be whether Mozart’s music is good for the whole or the all (what you’ve called “the universe”). And now you seem to be supporting that by pointing to this other thread of yours:
“yes”
That answer can be wrong, tho.
I like Santa. Now, apart from joking, you can say -for example- “no”.
Yes, but the question is not if he hallucinated, but if he had sexual relationships with that woman. I doubt it will be clearer if I say “Actual sexual relationships with that woman”…is it clearer to you? There is no way to make it clearer.
You CAN be dealing with subjective answers even if the answer is “YEESSSSS”, but you can be dealing with an objective answer too.
Yes, you can misunderstand it as the belief ot that person, in the case that the answer is not about the belief of that person.
“I think it is” or “Laura told me to bring an umbrella”
I agree: you think that. It just isn’t the case. When some people ask about if Mozart is good, some ask for an opinion, some don’t, and so on. It has been already talked about.
Not at all. I think that’s utilitarianism. But then, is the universe good?. If you need an end, then the question you are asking is not about if it is good, is about if it is ‘good for’, and that’s another thing altogether.
Don’t the the arguments against the existence of dog too seriously 
Utilitarianism is about actions. Good and bad, however, are not necessarily about actions.
As a general or universal question—"is the universe good for the universe?"—, this question is meaningless.
Well, like I said, the good could also be an end in itself; but then the question is, whose end? A good end for one is not necessarily a good end for another. (An Aristotelian example: it may be good for an acorn to become an oak tree, but not for a human being.)
No no, I’m on to you: you’re asking whether Mozart’s music is good when seen from a dog’s eye view. 
Fair enough! I stand corrected
Yeah, I put up the universe since the universe is not good for anything else, but it can be good. The existence of something at all, is it good? I’d say yes. Is it good for something? Obviously not, it cannot be ‘good for’ something else. The ‘good for’ question is another question altogether.
You’d be surprised: Do Spiders like music? - The Australian Museum Blog
Well, I disagree. Precisely because it cannot be good or bad for anything or anyone, it can’t be good or bad, period.
“Universally valid moral rules, valid for all people at all times, can support themselves on the Platonic rational principle founded on the Good, on God—on some cosmic spider in Nietzsche’s language.” (Laurence Lampert, Leo Strauss and Nietzsche, page 71.)
That would only be when the lie or are confused about their own beliefs. A person honestly answering the question Does Santa exist?
with
Yes, he does, but I don’t believe he does,
has some kind of mental problem or doesn’t understand English.
They are trying to give an objective answer, but their answer is what they believe to be the case. Or they are lying, drunk, damaged in some way.
That’s them expressing their belief about what is objectively true.
That’s the same as when someone says yes.
We don’t have access to true speak mode. We answer with our beliefs about what is objectively true.
Yes? You’d be satisfied with that answer, without any reasoning?
Is Mozarts music good? Yes. Is Taylor swifts music good? Yes. Is cunt and the gangs music good? Yes.
What does yes mean here? What has this person done to determine that the answer is yes instead of no? What’s the criteria?
None of that matters to you because you’re not really a good communicator.
See, at least the people who answer with their opinion are making it clear what their answer means. The people who just say “yes”, you have no idea what they mean. You’re satisfied by that answer because you have many failures of communication.