What is not subjective?
Objects
biological parents
>>285617
my penis being in your mom's vagina
>>285617
OP is a fag
memes
Nothing is subjective. A statement is composed of words and those words have definitions. If any of those words are lacking in definition, it can't be considered a proper statement. People casually use language wrong so much that they forget what "proper" is.
>>285619
What aren't objects?
DEEZ NUTZ
That something in some sense is.
>>285617
Biological impulses.
>>285617
It's, ironically, subjective
>>285617
Math. Unless you're teaching common core.
>>285832
nope
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RlMMeqO7wOI
>>285617
Nothing is subjective.
The fact that the correct answer for many questions has yet to be proven does not mean that the people who hold incorrect views are any less incorrect.
>>285863
>Invented or discovered
None, they are described.
>>285617
numbers
>>285885
doesnt touch question of realism
>>285863
No matter who you are, 1+1=2. It's not subjective.
As to your video... well... the nose knows.
>>285754
Ideas.
Which are subjective.
>>285920
Mathematics is a language, among other things. Not "subjective", but not "objective" either.
>>285920
Math is a human invention
>>285920
the question is whether there are only entities in the world to which this formula applies. or whether there are much more entities which remain hidden from this contingent version of mathematics. your conviction in the universal truth of 1+1=2 is then comparable to searching lost things under a bright street lamp.
Death
>>285989
If you have one thing, and then you add another thing, you have two things.
>>286028
ok, thanks for solving this mystery with common sense and grammar school illustrations.
Location
>>286062
What reference frame?
>>285953
But isnt objectivity an idea?
Saturn rules this reality
>>286636
The rings shackle us
>>285617
cogito ergo sum :)
Music
Self, the expereincer
>>285617
the sterility of rationalism, the fertility of empiricism.
>>285920
The fact that 1+1=2 is subjective because 1+1=10 in binary.
only the statement "everything is subjective", nothing else
If you'd actually bothered to read Nietzsche you would all know how questionable a subject/object distinction even is.
Instead of using these absolutes, make use of what we know from deterministic theories or psychology. "Relative" would be a much better word than subjective or objective to describe things like taste or knowledge, where obviously the environment, genetics etc have tremendous control over what is possible but individuals do contain variations. e.g. young uneducated proles are statistically more likely to use arguments like "taste is subjective" to justify the things they are partial to (again, media that appeals to such a demographic) whereas a professor who has studied in the same area for decades will use more "objective" language and ideas to justify or communicate his interest in the same thing, his tastes will correlate with the highly knowledgeable demographic for this thing.
My examples were for aesthetics but this applies to anything really, since this is clarifying our theory of language/the world.
>>285617
Death. The end of the subject.
>>286293
Yeah but objectivity isn't an object
Burnt toast cannot be unburnt.
>>285711
"Jilaxan Vordexinod luerser"
It's a proper statement, I just made it.
But can you comprehend?
>>285920
Mathematics are only useful insofar as they're rigidly consistent. This doesn't necessitate numbers being "real" in the platonist sense, though.
There is some sense or intuition of an objective world behind our perceptions, but since we are subjects ourselves, we can never escape subjectivity. A brain couldn't contain true knowledge of the universe since it is a localized part of a world much larger than it can really grasp, and the structure and function of itself takes up matter and energy. Sorry if I'm not making sense, maybe somebody could frame this idea more elegantly.
