/lit/ - Literature

>>14638085
Now say it without the greentext and quotes.

>>13967002
>The difference in quality does not change that we perceive reality. An eagle sees better than us, but that's a matter of higher quality, not difference of sight. No one sees in the 7th dimension.
What about a difference in color? It’s also possible to see completely different shapes, and I know that from not wearing my glasses and then trying to look at something.
>That's dodging the question, is reality real or not? It's a yes or no questions.
It’s can be either or depending on the person.
>I am sending written text through a website on the internet and you are interacting with me, responding and being wrong about metaphysics, epistemology and esthetics. You exist because reality is real and you are real.
>you’re real because I think you’re real
That’s the problem here. You think that what you think applies to everyone else as well.
>What evidence do you have that I am dreaming?
What evidence do you have that you’re not dreaming?
>An arbitrary claim without any principle or fact is meaningless.
We can apply the same logic to reality.
>Is reality real? I am conscious of reality and there are no contradiction in what I am observing,
There aren’t any contradictions because everything is filtered through those special eyes of yours.
>nothing suggests I am a vat in brain or dreaming.
Sounds like something a brain in a vat would say.
>Why would I assume something without any contradiction for me to doubt my senses or perception?
You already assume plenty of things already, so I don’t see why you would have a problem with assuming other things.
>That's objective.
I don’t think we’re going to agree.
>You are conscious of something and for you to be conscious, you need objective data.
Sounds like an assumption.
>What you're subtly trying to argue is that your senses can trick you, which is a claim you have to prove.
Do you seriously think that your senses can’t fool you?
>I'm being intentionally vague as to not expose my hand too early.
I’m have to go to college in a couple hours, puppet master.
>That's subjective and wrong.
For you. For you. For you.
>That's not how objectivity works. If it's objective for me, it's objective for everyone because it's non-contradictory. If it's only true for me, that's subjective.
I was being sarcastic.
>Eh, that's understandable. I can't sleep; too much coffee.
I’m going to have to make some.

I’m posting from a phone, too, so it’s hard to respond and be articulate without straining my fingers and waiting an hour between responses.

>>13960956
>rape is bad

>>13958604
If you can’t defend your property (e.g. your vagina), then you don’t deserve to own it.

>he doesn’t date mentally ill girls with no self esteem that he can abuse mentally and physically for sadistic pleasure
A lot of low testosterone in this thread.

post more nice