Follow Ups Full Thread

Topic - Couldn't Objectivists Possibly Be Wrong? - thetubeguy1954 09:05:54 05/26/06 (59)

• It's all probabilities, Tom. Have said it often. Next question? - Pat D 14:35:14 05/27/06 (0)
• You a subjectivist? Give me a break! - Don T 12:45:59 05/26/06 (0)
• I don’t understand this polarization - Caymus 12:37:22 05/26/06 (0)
• That Isn't Even the Issue.... - Todd Krieger 12:29:20 05/26/06 (36)
• The REAL issue.... - mkuller 13:24:07 05/26/06 (32)
• Science as no "lock on the truth" in a very real sense - real_jj 13:25:02 05/26/06 (31)
• Now that is a truth ! - E-Stat 14:04:04 05/26/06 (30)
• Here's some more truth........... - Dan Banquer 17:23:43 05/26/06 (1)
• That would be *fantasies*, Dan - E-Stat 07:53:37 05/27/06 (0)
• "observationalist " - Isn't that subjective? - Caymus 14:40:33 05/26/06 (27)
• Subjective implies preference - E-Stat 14:56:22 05/26/06 (26)
• Photointerpreters are quite highly regarded within the intelligence community... - clarkjohnsen 08:20:20 05/27/06 (1)
• Big difference - they actually PROVE the accuracy and reliability of their skill every day - Caymus 15:33:29 05/27/06 (0)
• Didn’t Harry Pearson start calling himself an "observationalist" later... - Caymus 15:37:07 05/26/06 (0)
• No, subjective does not imply preference... - real_jj 15:35:16 05/26/06 (22)
• Sure it does - E-Stat 19:35:40 05/26/06 (21)
• Don't apply Webster definitions to technical terms. - real_jj 22:16:37 05/26/06 (20)
• He is right that lay language often clouds concepts, but you are right about his self-provided definitions. - Norm 08:43:09 05/28/06 (0)
• Words and ideas and arguments mean what jj says they mean - Dave Pogue 05:21:11 05/28/06 (18)
• Spare us all! - Pat D 08:53:26 05/30/06 (10)
• Spare us ... all? - Dave Pogue 09:05:54 05/30/06 (9)
• Re: Spare us ... all? - Pat D 17:47:24 05/30/06 (8)
• Take a look, folks (nt) - Dave Pogue 17:54:47 05/30/06 (7)
• Some of us definitely did :) But what can you say? - Ted Smith 22:13:51 05/30/06 (6)
• Perhaps in your dreams . . . - Pat D 04:11:51 06/01/06 (5)
• Why the tone? - Ted Smith 09:20:43 06/01/06 (4)
• What tone? - Pat D 15:35:26 06/01/06 (3)
• Re: What tone? - Ted Smith 18:00:53 06/01/06 (2)
• Re: What tone? - Pat D 20:02:43 06/02/06 (1)
• Re: What tone? - Ted Smith 20:09:21 06/02/06 (0)
• Do you have anything to add, or are you just playing to Clark and Todt? - real_jj 22:31:03 05/28/06 (5)
• Oh pardon me, your highness - Dave Pogue 04:31:43 05/29/06 (4)
• So, going to cite webster as to what "Warm" and "Transparent" mean, eh? - real_jj 10:56:43 05/29/06 (3)
• It is malicious and disingenious to use lay words completely at odds with their normal meaning. But you know that. nt - Norm 12:28:06 05/29/06 (2)
• Norm, you win the monthly prize! - E-Stat 15:19:48 05/29/06 (0)
• You are ordered to retract your professional accusastion immediately - real_jj 13:38:51 05/29/06 (0)
• He the Man! nt - clarkjohnsen 13:06:38 05/28/06 (0)
• That's not the issue either... - real_jj 12:31:51 05/26/06 (2)
• Re: That's not the issue either... - Todd Krieger 12:38:14 05/26/06 (1)
• Line? If somebody likes it, they like it... end of discussion - real_jj 13:22:01 05/26/06 (0)
• dinosaurs were big, lumbering, brutes, yet now scientists say dinosaurs were large, swift, intelligent hunters! - Robert Hamel 10:02:21 05/26/06 (3)
• Re: dinosaurs were big, lumbering, brutes, yet now scientists say dinosaurs were large, swift, intelligent hunters! - thetubeguy1954 13:31:02 05/26/06 (1)
• We are poles apart on some of this - Robert Hamel 16:56:17 05/26/06 (0)
• You don't do group testing.... - real_jj 10:09:16 05/26/06 (0)
• It seems to me that divisiveness is wrong - Ted Smith 09:57:40 05/26/06 (1)
• I don't think it is those who are disinterested in DBTing that are devisive, but I weary of the debate. nt - Norm 12:30:29 05/26/06 (0)
• If Objectivists were always wrong.............. - Dan Banquer 09:40:13 05/26/06 (11)
• Taking too much credit. Being an 'Objectivist' is not the same as being a scientist. - Norm 12:25:29 05/26/06 (10)
• LOL – So you believe scientists use their FEELINGS for proof? - Caymus 13:27:38 05/26/06 (1)
• No, I think that many subjectivists appreciate the limits of scientific knowledge - Norm 14:51:29 05/26/06 (0)
• Know any real scientists that aren't objective? nt. - Dan Banquer 12:36:34 05/26/06 (7)
• I know many who aren't about their wines, guitars, cars, music, violins, and sailboats. - Norm 14:57:24 05/26/06 (6)
• Re: I know many who are about their wines, guitars, cars, music, violins, and sailboats. - Dan Banquer 17:13:22 05/26/06 (5)
• I have tried many components and many tweaks that don't work. - Norm 20:02:18 05/26/06 (4)
• Re: I have tried many components and many tweaks that don't work. - Dan Banquer 05:02:26 05/27/06 (3)
• It would be refreshing were there to be posts here that dealt with technical and scientific discussions - Norm 06:34:10 05/27/06 (2)
• Re: It would be refreshing were there to be posts here that dealt with technical and scientific discussions - Dan Banquer 06:44:51 05/27/06 (1)
• I think you are swimming upstream in a capitalist society to expect no marketing - Norm 08:26:00 05/27/06 (0)
• Did you bother to read anything? - real_jj 09:14:56 05/26/06 (0)

Follow Ups

• That Isn't Even the Issue.... - Todd Krieger 12:29:20 05/26/06 (36)
• The REAL issue.... - mkuller 13:24:07 05/26/06 (32)
• Science as no "lock on the truth" in a very real sense - real_jj 13:25:02 05/26/06 (31)
• Now that is a truth ! - E-Stat 14:04:04 05/26/06 (30)
• Here's some more truth........... - Dan Banquer 17:23:43 05/26/06 (1)
• That would be *fantasies*, Dan - E-Stat 07:53:37 05/27/06 (0)
• "observationalist " - Isn't that subjective? - Caymus 14:40:33 05/26/06 (27)
• Subjective implies preference - E-Stat 14:56:22 05/26/06 (26)
• Photointerpreters are quite highly regarded within the intelligence community... - clarkjohnsen 08:20:20 05/27/06 (1)
• Big difference - they actually PROVE the accuracy and reliability of their skill every day - Caymus 15:33:29 05/27/06 (0)
• Didn’t Harry Pearson start calling himself an "observationalist" later... - Caymus 15:37:07 05/26/06 (0)
• No, subjective does not imply preference... - real_jj 15:35:16 05/26/06 (22)
• Sure it does - E-Stat 19:35:40 05/26/06 (21)
• Don't apply Webster definitions to technical terms. - real_jj 22:16:37 05/26/06 (20)
• He is right that lay language often clouds concepts, but you are right about his self-provided definitions. - Norm 08:43:09 05/28/06 (0)
• Words and ideas and arguments mean what jj says they mean - Dave Pogue 05:21:11 05/28/06 (18)
• Spare us all! - Pat D 08:53:26 05/30/06 (10)
• Spare us ... all? - Dave Pogue 09:05:54 05/30/06 (9)
• Re: Spare us ... all? - Pat D 17:47:24 05/30/06 (8)
• Take a look, folks (nt) - Dave Pogue 17:54:47 05/30/06 (7)
• Some of us definitely did :) But what can you say? - Ted Smith 22:13:51 05/30/06 (6)
• Perhaps in your dreams . . . - Pat D 04:11:51 06/01/06 (5)
• Why the tone? - Ted Smith 09:20:43 06/01/06 (4)
• What tone? - Pat D 15:35:26 06/01/06 (3)
• Re: What tone? - Ted Smith 18:00:53 06/01/06 (2)
• Re: What tone? - Pat D 20:02:43 06/02/06 (1)
• Re: What tone? - Ted Smith 20:09:21 06/02/06 (0)
• Do you have anything to add, or are you just playing to Clark and Todt? - real_jj 22:31:03 05/28/06 (5)
• Oh pardon me, your highness - Dave Pogue 04:31:43 05/29/06 (4)
• So, going to cite webster as to what "Warm" and "Transparent" mean, eh? - real_jj 10:56:43 05/29/06 (3)
• It is malicious and disingenious to use lay words completely at odds with their normal meaning. But you know that. nt - Norm 12:28:06 05/29/06 (2)
• Norm, you win the monthly prize! - E-Stat 15:19:48 05/29/06 (0)
• You are ordered to retract your professional accusastion immediately - real_jj 13:38:51 05/29/06 (0)
• He the Man! nt - clarkjohnsen 13:06:38 05/28/06 (0)
• That's not the issue either... - real_jj 12:31:51 05/26/06 (2)
• Re: That's not the issue either... - Todd Krieger 12:38:14 05/26/06 (1)
• Line? If somebody likes it, they like it... end of discussion - real_jj 13:22:01 05/26/06 (0)