• Fawkes@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    3 days ago

    Lol is this serious? You realize that just because a lot of people believe something doesn’t automatically give it a single shred of authenticity.

    Theoretical question, if Harry Potter were to eventually sell more copies, would that make it more authoritative than the bible?

      • Fawkes@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        3 days ago

        I didn’t know reality was so malleable as to be manipulated by belief.

        • jdr@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          6
          ·
          3 days ago

          I was being silly, but for real even if there is an objective reality (reasonable but hard to prove) it’s going to be perceived reality that’s relevant for most human matters.

          • Fawkes@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            ·
            3 days ago

            Strongly disagree. Your perception of what the most efficient method of energy generation is, is entirely irrelevant. Your perception of geology and biology is entirely irrelevant. Opinion and feelings are not acceptable substitutions for objective reality.

            • jdr@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              5
              ·
              3 days ago

              I’d argue objective reality is irrelevant, if everyone thinks Pelletiers are more efficient than stream turbines then that’s what’s going to get built. Maybe the use breeder reactors in the Realm of Forms, but here I’m stuck with coal because of PR.

              • Fawkes@lemmy.zip
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                2 days ago

                If you want to argue that objective reality is irrelevant, then you need to abandon any and all notions of it. Jump off a cliff, objectively reality says you’ll die. Cut off your arm, objective reality says it won’t grow back. Drink bleach, objective reality says you’ll die.

                You’d only argue against objective reality when it’s convenient for supporting beliefs.

                • jdr@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  3
                  ·
                  2 days ago

                  You first!

                  This is well-trodden philosophical territory that I don’t think we’re going to add much to.

                  • Fawkes@lemmy.zip
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    ·
                    2 days ago

                    No it isn’t. This is the basic laws of physics. Philosophy asks questions that science cannot answer. You’re not asking coherent questions, you’re making self-defeating claims without basis. That’s not philosophy, it’s religion.