Homosexual help

[Asher]

In the realm of real numbers and mathematics, 1 + 1 = 2 is objective, not subjective, and is therefore correct.

Correct, by definition, means lacking flaws or errors. I don't see how the popularity of a practice suddenly removes flaws or errors, but what do I know? I'm simply a science guy.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Can you demonstrate to me that we live in an objective reality? Can you show me that we aren't simply a construct of someone? Or that we are force fed to believe a line of reality? Can you prove to me any of it? Decartes' "I think therefore I am" is nice, but doesn't answer it.

In that case, if there is no proof of objective reality, how can anything be objective within it? It's simply subjective based on what you percieve and what you think you know.

Likewise, flaws or errors are determined by our perception of things. A prime example of a variability of 'correct' is a traffic accident. An officer can talk to 15 different people and they'll say 15 different things. How do you come up with a 'correct' answer of what happened? Most of time, which point is more in agreement will win out. If the points of disagreement are close, the officer may make credibility determinations, but in the end what is the 'correct' answer is flexible.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
Can you demonstrate to me that we live in an objective reality? Can you show me that we aren't simply a construct of someone? Or that we are force fed to believe a line of reality? Can you prove to me any of it? Decartes' "I think therefore I am" is nice, but doesn't answer it.

Which is why "correct" cannot be used in the fairy world of social sciences, but only in rigidly defined constructs like mathematics.

In that case, if there is no proof of objective reality, how can anything be objective within it? It's simply subjective based on what you percieve and what you think you know.

Yep.

Likewise, flaws or errors are determined by our perception of things. A prime example of a variability of 'correct' is a traffic accident. An officer can talk to 15 different people and they'll say 15 different things. How do you come up with a 'correct' answer of what happened?

You can't ever come up with a "correct" answer of what happened, only the most plausible which can be dealt with as being the consensus, and therefore the acceptable answer, or if you prefer, effectively correct.

[Imran Siddiqui]

only in rigidly defined constructs like mathematics.

Which is, as you said, a construct. And thus, since there is no objective reality, it must be a subjective terminology which is fenced in by the defined construct. That doesn't make it any less subjective in the whole scheme of things. Even if you look at the world mathamatics, there is still an entire world just outside of it... it doesn't exist in a vacuum.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
Which is, as you said, a construct. And thus, since there is no objective reality, it must be a subjective terminology which is fenced in by the defined construct. That doesn't make it any less subjective in the whole scheme of things. Even if you look at the world mathamatics, there is still an entire world just outside of it... it doesn't exist in a vacuum.

For all intents and purposes, mathematics does exists in a vacuum. It was developed to help us understand our world, but it is not dependant on it. It has its own rules, and as long as it stays in the sandbox of mathematics, it is isolated from the subjective real world.

That's not guaranteeing there's always a perfect mapping from mathematics to the real world, because the real world IS subjective. But inside the isolated world of mathematics, we can deal with objectiveness: 1+1=2 is objectively true for real numbers, and this is determined using mathematics entirely.

It is not objectively true to say 1 person +1 person = 2 persons, because that then maps to the outside world, which is subjective.

[Provost Harrison]

That's racist Asher! Black christians can protest too!

[Asher]

?

[Provost Harrison]

From the last page...I never noticed there was a page 4

[Provost Harrison]

Oh BTW, you call yourself a 'scientist'? LOLOLOLOLOL

[Asher]

Originally posted by Provost Harrison
Oh BTW, you call yourself a 'scientist'? LOLOLOLOLOL

Do you know what the S stands for in a CS degree?
Do you know what the Sc stands for in BSc in CS?

No need to be bitter because you can't get a good job with half of a PhD -- some of us "scientists" are actually useful and can apply their knowledge to better the world, rather than working at McDonalds and whining about being a virgin in their late 20s.

[Provost Harrison]

You haven't been keeping track of my life have you recently Asher. I am now in London, earning a lot more money than you

[Asher]

Originally posted by Provost Harrison
You haven't been keeping track of my life have you recently Asher. I am now in London, earning a lot more money than you

How much are you earning, and how much is the average there?

You'd better be, I'm a frickin' intern and not even done my undergrad.

And why would I keep track of your life. It's always the same ol' sob story, the setting just changes sometimes.

[Provost Harrison]

The S/Sc is there to make it sound like a science, making you feel like you have a sense of self-importance, so you can go onto bulletin boards and tell people who are a scientist

[Asher]

Originally posted by Provost Harrison
The S/Sc is there to make it sound like a science, making you feel like you have a sense of self-importance, so you can go onto bulletin boards and tell people who are a scientist

You do realize that you don't need to wear a lab coat and play with beakers all day to be a scientist.

scientist

n : a person with advanced knowledge of one of more sciences [syn: man of science]

computer scientist

n : a scientist who specializes in the theory of computation and the design of computers

[Provost Harrison]

But you need to have studied a science first