Look what this freeper moron posted to a music newsgroup

Just found this exchange at the Usenet group, rec.music.rock-pop-r+b.1950s:

>>70's and 80's are NOT true oldies, thank you.

> Well. You are certainly entitiled to your opinion

IT is NOT an opinion, it is FACT. Contrary to the fucking LIEbrawls > in our society, truth is OBJECTIVE **NOT** subjective.


Incidentally, this jerk-off is a Canadian, so I'd like to know where he gets off talking about "our" society!

n/t

Calgary? Edmonton? Since the US energy companies own Alberta (thanks to Brian Mulroney), those folks may as well be American freepers.:evilfrown:

There's wingnuts in Ontario and Quebec too. Ours are just a little noiser and nastier.

but you have to admit that the US energy companies do have considerable power in the Klein camp, eh? I think I'll stick with Winnipeg as my home away from home, and perhaps occasionally fish in Alberta. Rest easy, didn't mean to ruffle the feathers, but couldn't resist.

little bit afraid of the homosexuals up there *hee-hee*

Granted, there's quite a bit of cross-posting, but there's plenty of mouth-breathing, knuckle-dragging freepers who like to start arguments there. Luckily, there's some people that like to give them the smackdown.

, aside from ayn Rand (ick!) will tell you that truth is indeed subjective. I know of fundy xian types who tell me that the new testament is "TRUTH!" and never waver on this. But I'm an atheist. My "TRUTH!" is what I can see hear smell touch taste. To a schizophrenic, it might be that the portugese invasion of the US is imminent and that's the "TRUTH!" So....

As a record collector and reader of Goldmine, etc. I always see these fanatical doo-wop/r+b collectors who are such tight-assed purists about their music, and I always suspected that it extended to their political stances; shit, I'm right!

BTW, Mr. RepubLIEcan, as humans age together, so does the definition of "oldies" move forward in years as well. An "oldie" to a fity-year old is the stuff he feels nostagia for, which is not necessarily what a seventy-year old does, or a twenty-five year old does, etc. So fuck you.

You miss the fact that there is a difference between subjective truth and objective truth. That the earth revolves around the sun is an objective truth. What your favorite color is is your subjective truth.

Class dismissed.

Truth, when defined as knowledge, can be divided into two categories: knowledge a priori, and knowledge a posteriori. What you proposed as "objective" truth (the earth revolving around the sun) is, in fact, knowledge a posteriori, which means that it's empirical. While it may be true through observation, it doesn't HAVE to be true (in other words, it's not necessary truth). It could be deemed false if someone had observed (through calculations- we're not using the term "observed" in the sense of "looking at"...we're meaning "collected sensical data") the movement of the Earth differently.
However, although I don't think the definitions of knowledge a priori and "objective" truth coincide, really, knowledge a priori is certainly at least closer than a posteriori to what one could call "objective" truth. 2 + 2 = 4 is knowledge a priori, because the definitions of the terms of the equations, when known, lead to the necessary truth of the equation. In other words, it's impossible for that equation to be false, as the terms are defined.
So, in the future, if you're going to look for "objective" truth, you should look in the realm of the necessary, knowledge a priori (though one could argue that this knowledge is still tainted by the inner workings of the mind- in fact there really, truly, may be no such thing as objective knowledge. We can never know, as our minds are, by definition, subjective).

What was his name again?

;-)

correct me if im wrong but it was the repub that wrote "70's and 80's are NOT true oldies, thank you" right?

if that isnt subjective what is? lol