• kat_angstrom@lemmy.worldEnglish
    1·
    2 months ago

    I mean, he’s objectively wrong. Objective facts exist objectively. Jupiter had rings and 95 moons long before anyone ever knew either fact. The moon had ice long before anyone ever knew that. Mt. Erebus was a volcano in the Antarctic long before anyone stepped foot in the Antarctic.

    The external universe literally exists; and so do facts.

    • DarkSpectrum@lemmy.worldEnglish
      3·
      2 months ago

      Except the number of Jupiter moons may not have always been the same so the current number is a point in time perspective.

      • kat_angstrom@lemmy.worldEnglish
        1·
        2 months ago

        Plus we may not have discovered them all yet. ;)

        But those undiscovered moons exist nonetheless, if they do

      • Honytawk@lemmy.zipEnglish
        1·
        2 months ago

        Jupiter has a static number of moons in every time frame from every perspective.

        How many depends when you ask, but the above statement is an objective truth.

    • Nougat@fedia.io
      31·
      2 months ago

      Facts exist, but we can’t ever be certain of them. We do not experience reality. We experience what our fleshy input devices capture and transmit to our brains; our brains invent “experience” based on those inputs.

      • kat_angstrom@lemmy.worldEnglish
        1·
        2 months ago

        I am certain of the fact that Mt. St. Helens is a volcano that exists. I am certain of the fact that it erupted prior to my existence upon this planet, and while I have never laid my own eyes upon this volcano, though not for lack of experience I remain certain of its existence based on the shared experiences and existences of millions of others, and the data they have accrued.

        I get what you’re saying with the whole “objective” part of objective reality; but it’s not like you’re going to mount a defense against the existence of Mt. St. Helens, right?

        • SinAdjetivos@lemmy.worldEnglish
          0·
          2 months ago

          you’re going to mount a defense against the existence of Mt. St. Helens, right?

          I will!!! Mostly to try and better illustrate what is being meant by “perspective is not reality”.

          I am certain of the fact that Mt. St. Helens is a volcano that exists.

          A mountain exists in that location that was formed via an underlying volcano, however the name for both is Lawetlat’la.

          I am certain of the fact that it erupted prior to my existence upon this planet

          Volcanoes themselves generally do not erupt, magma chambers erupt through (and via that process create) volcanoes.

          I have never laid my own eyes upon this volcano

          Nor have most. Outside of eruption events the volcano isn’t visible, only the mountain is.

          The volcano Mt St Helens does not exist. Using the mountain of Lawetlat’la as evidence does not make the volcano Mt St Helens exist because while the mountain and volcano are distinct entities, standard naming convention is to call them both the same thing.

          • kat_angstrom@lemmy.worldEnglish
            2·
            2 months ago

            I appreciate the time and effort you spent on this, but it feels more like an argument against words than it does against concepts.

            Colloquially, if I say “a volcano erupted” I’m not being inaccurate, even if it was the magma chamber that erupted; and if I say “Mt. St. Helens erupted”, everyone knows what I’m talking about even if the original name isn’t properly preserved or respected.

            However, I find downvotes distressing so I’m abandoning this thread, and I shall not downvote you just because I disagree. I hope you have a lovely day. :)