Comments posted organically
Homepage

Top Contributors Articles by: Curt_Anderson Donna HatetheSwamp Indy! islander meagain Navy2711 oldedude Ponderer ROB3RT tuk22

Recent Article Activity Most Commented Articles Highest Rated Articles All Articles Most Viewed Articles Articles Without Comments

The most prominent "MAGA leftist" speaks truth about the "No Kings" uh "Protest"
Media by HatetheSwamp (0.0) Last comment by: HatetheSwamp (14 comments)

Fee free holidays.
Politics by meagain (0.0) Last comment by: oldedude (7 comments)

This is the proper and legal way to stop drug smuggling operations
How-to by Donna (5.0) Last comment by: oldedude (16 comments)

Karoline Leavitt's nephew's mother arrested by ICE agents
Crime by Curt_Anderson (0.0) Last comment by: oldedude (26 comments)

Reprise: pb designates December as Woke is the New Vile PRIDE month
Media by HatetheSwamp (0.0) Last comment by: Indy! (19 comments)

The TQs, et.al., snuck the Doddering Old Fool out of the dementia ward to give a speech
Gay & Lesbian by HatetheSwamp (0.0) Last comment by: Indy! (3 comments)

Could Brian Cole Jr. claim Trump's Jan. 6 pardons cover him?
Law by Curt_Anderson (0.0) Last comment by: Donna (24 comments)

Will Trump pardon Brian Cole?
Crime by Curt_Anderson (0.0) Last comment by: Donna (35 comments)

Wapo & pb's Legal Goober #2 blast Tampon Tim...
Crime by HatetheSwamp (0.0) Last comment by: HatetheSwamp (2 comments)

Nigerian Prince Scammed By Somali Immigrant
Crime by HatetheSwamp (0.0) Last comment by: (0 comments)

Hegseth's Signal chats could have endangered troops, watchdog finds
Military by Curt_Anderson (0.0) Last comment by: oldedude (7 comments)

Supreme Court agrees to hear Trump’s challenge to birthright citizenship
Law by HatetheSwamp (0.0) Last comment by: oldedude (9 comments)

We re-watched MIRACLE ON 34TH STREET yesterday By HatetheSwamp November 29, 2025 4:28 am Category: Philosophy (0.0 from 0 votes) Rules of the Post & Tips. Write & edit articles How To Post Here

HolyfreakinfrigginEFFINcow, man! [The 1940s version of the movie... with Natalie Wood.]

I discovered Kierkegaard seriously about 15-ish years ago, and, I saw a different movie yesterday than I ever had before...


From AI:

"...commentators have noted that the film's central themes of faith and belief without proof resonate strongly with Kierkegaard's philosophy:

Kierkegaard argued that belief in a transcendent God requires a non-rational "leap of faith," as God's existence cannot be proven logically. The film mirrors this idea, suggesting that you must believe in order to see the "miracles" (the good deeds and positive outcomes) rather than demanding proof first.

Kierkegaard was concerned with the individual's personal relationship with God, often contrasting it with the abstract, conformist "crowd" or reliance on public reason. In the movie, the characters must make an individual decision to believe in Kris Kringle, often going against the prevailing skepticism of society, psychology, and even the legal system, which relies solely on public, objective evidence.

Subjectivity of Truth: For Kierkegaard, truth is subjective and personal when it comes to faith. The film's resolution doesn't definitively "prove" Santa Claus's existence objectively, but rather relies on an individual's internal acceptance and belief in the idea of Santa. The legal case is even won on a technicality involving mail being delivered to Kris Kringle as "Santa Claus," making the belief a legal reality, which plays with the idea of belief shaping reality."


There was a line in the movie in which Doris, the mother, all but quoted Kierkegaard's notion that one's subjectivity allows perception of truth.

Leap of faith, BABY!

*****

If you care to make sense of pb's jibberish about subjectivity being truth and the power of faith...

... and his constant reminders to po that all of us bring our preferences and prejudices to every moment of our lives,...

... watch the movie at your leisure and note the transformation of Doris Walker.

****

Also, for fun, AI "MIRACLE ON 34TH STREET/existentialism." As I noted: HolyfreakinfrigginEFFINcow!

Comments Start Below

by islander on November 29, 2025 5:44 am And what good does that do you, Hate ? by HatetheSwamp on November 29, 2025 6:29 am isle, HolyfreakinfrigginEFFINcow, bubba! SS can't contain enuff words to splain what it means to me. Curiously, after Doris Walker said,""You must believe in Mr. Kringle and keep right on doing it. You must have faith in him"," I thought about po and you. You, more than anyone here, you are the vile Doris Walker up to the moment of her repentance... and, you, more than anyone here, are self-righteous about it... but, it's close. You might be better served by AIing "MIRACLE ON 34TH STREET/Existentialism." Kierkegaard was a forerunner of the existentialists. They secularized Kierkegaard but kept the subjectivity and leap ideas. Actually, the movie is about Existentialism, not Kierkegaard directly. But, take it to the bank. The joylessness of Doris Walker's life, at the beginning of the film? That's all your way of thinking offers... at its best. But, you'll never know that unless you change your life's philosophy as did Doris. Trust me, I'm doing the repentance Doris Walker began. The value to ole pb personally in this is that humans don't connect to the truth about themselves until they UNDERSTAND and accept the reality that all of us bring our preferences and prejudices to every moment of our lives,... and consider what is possible for us beyond them. IOW, I'm telling you that YOU don't UNDERSTAND. Baha, and, boohoo. Blessings, bruh. by Navy2711 on November 29, 2025 10:53 am ^^ Freakshow by Indy! on November 29, 2025 11:22 am Took Brown Shorts 40 years to get the meaning behind a family film. Yes Santa Claus exists, Brown Shorts. You can start writing letters to him again. by islander on November 29, 2025 2:57 pm So, Hate, that's what it did for ya. You sound pretty much the same as ever to me. For some reason, I can't say that I'm surprised. by meagain on November 29, 2025 3:00 pm In conversation with a friend of mine this morning, we discussed the belief in Little Green Men. Some peopel believe in that and that they came from Mars. That is a subjective belief, and it makes as much sense as does the Kierkegaard philosophy. Possibly the film, if it had any intention of expressing a subjective belief, was mocking the absurdity. by Indy! on November 29, 2025 6:12 pm It's Hollywood syrup for children. The one reason to watch is prime Natalie Wood - beyond that any halfway intelligent being knows the entire story including the "surprise" ending about 5 minutes into the movie. by HatetheSwamp on November 30, 2025 4:26 am "So, Hate, that's what it did for ya. You sound pretty much the same as ever to me. For some reason, I can't say that I'm surprised." Second to po, Indy, we all wish we were you, baha. by Ponderer on November 30, 2025 5:41 am It's kinda tragic that pedophile's bitch says that so often. Because it's a shame that he can't wish he could just be himself. Now I'm no philosophy scholar by any means. People can throw around philosophers names all day and for the most part it all goes right over my head. I read a couple books way back when. One by Carl Jung I recall. And I really liked Thomas Merton. I saw him as a philosopher. And I gave Philosophy a shot in junior college, but I only made it a few weeks into the semester and the first test. That teacher could have put a crack head to sleep. Anyway, it feels to me that pedophile's bitch is seeing the film as a study in faith where the idea of Santa Claus is used as the subject of it. Ain't? Apart from subjects like Santa Claus or God, I'm wondering how far he goes with his faith in other things before objective rationality and reason can have any sway with him. Because to this casual observer, it appears that his faith in such things as Donald Trump and the Republican Party, and his faith that the Democrats are the personification of evil or something, isn't based on rationality or reason. It appears to me that his subjective faith, peppered with his personal bigotries, supplants any objectivity when he considers anything and everything. And the more facts that conflict with his faith that he can insulate himself from that threaten it, the better. About everything. So... is objectivity subjective...? Is there really no such thing as objectivity, because literally everything is subjective? Because to me, this sure seems to be the case for pedophile's bitch in here. by HatetheSwamp on November 30, 2025 6:14 am "Anyway, it feels to me that pedophile's bitch is seeing the film as a study in faith where the idea of Santa Claus is used as the subject of it. Ain't?" The guy who taught philosophy in pb's first Masters degree said,... because it was a required course that almost everyone dreaded, " All of us have a philosophy." And, that why forums like SS will always exist. The movie is a parable. It's been around for nearly 80 years and people are still watching. Nannies and pappaps gather their grandkids around the big screen and groove on the past. It's not really about Santy Claus. 1848. The movie was released just when Modernism was beginning to die out, and people were realizing that human knowledge and reason didn't solve anything meaningful. In fact, they were curses. Remember the invention of the A Bomb and the despair it created? The movie was an optimistic approach to understanding the times. And, it explored the meaning and relevance of belief. But, po, no. There were two moments in the movie. When Doris Walker and Fred Galey said things that were all but quotes from Kierkegaard. I was taken aback. by HatetheSwamp on November 30, 2025 6:17 am "It appears to me that his subjective faith,...," As opposed to whatever kind of faith? by HatetheSwamp on November 30, 2025 6:29 am "So... is objectivity subjective...? Is there really no such thing as objectivity, because literally everything is subjective? Because to me, this sure seems to be the case for pedophile's bitch in here." Objectivity is. But, ultimately, in human existence, it's a myth The question is. What you/I do with what's objective when it encounters ls the preferences and prejudices all of us bring our every moment of our lives. Ain't? Certainly. We two handle the objective very differently. by Indy! on November 30, 2025 9:10 am by HatetheSwamp on November 30, 2025 4:26 am "So, Hate, that's what it did for ya. You sound pretty much the same as ever to me. For some reason, I can't say that I'm surprised." Second to po, Indy, we all wish we were you, baha. The first step to rational debate is to properly identify the author. That wasn't my post, Brown Shorts. 😉 by oldedude on November 30, 2025 9:26 am Lead- sorry it took me so long to get to this thread. This would be the exact debate I would expect. It used to be there was a plethora of "liberalism is a religion." Now, those have been swiped off the face of the internet. Cliff note version. These are the four things common to religions. We can argue this all day, and I'm sure a couple of folks will. AND I think setting common ground is much better than people taking shots at each other. These issues are pretty apparent to most religions. It is interesting though, when interject "religion" into liberalism, you're automatically "poking the bear." Just to ensure, there is a VAST DIFFERENCE between "classical" liberalism (which Lead and I are), and modern liberalism. This is what isle had such a hard time with. Locke is absolutely opposed to Mao, Marxism, etc. Beliefs and Believers Liberalism has concepts considered true and express beliefs into words, and the sacred stories for insight. These are things mostly contained in Marxism, Leninism, Guevarian Revolutionary process (which took the political thoughts of Marxism and Leninist construct to talk about the military strategy of guerrilla warfare. This is where I found the biggest of the great propaganda machine. In the "definition" they describe themselves as "inclusive" and "tolerant." I think we can see from the posts here, and from everyday news, that is plain "fictitious" at best. Sacred Writings and Stories Again, the "little Red Book" from Mao, Marx, Che, where there's a whole section in Amazon (several of them on "Black Friday deals"). This also includes "stories" of belief, which is where TPS comes from. This will be timeless, and the libs will have to find their replacement for him in the future. Which I'm sure they will. This is also part of passive- aggressive personality trait and narcissism. And much of narration in these words are the ones created by politicians. I'm going to cut your thought off there. This happens on all sides. AND I agree the right also uses this as a tactic. But that's what makes this worthwhile to look at. Ethics This is THE pillars that has had the most change of liberal thought. Starting with John Locke who argued for the importance of toleration and the separation of church and state. Until recently, liberal societies have become increasingly tolerant of religious diversity. This is reflected in the development of laws and policies that protect the rights of individuals to practice their faith. For example, the United States has a long history of protecting religious freedom, dating back to the First Amendment to the Constitution. I've talked about this often. "Good for thee, but not for me" when one party uses the same tactics against opponents. Rituals and Ceremonies These are established that involve special, deliberate and repeatable patterns of behaviour providing opportunities for members of a tradition to enact the beliefs and commemorate important past events by bringing them into the present. Examples of that with the left, are demonstrations or protests. I think the "No Kings" has been a good example, although they are slowly being marred by violence. That's too bad, but as I said after the first rally, is predictable. This provides support and community much like going to a liberal "church." Not a bad thing, and the greats in classic liberalism might go about it in a different way. studocu.com epublications.marquette.edu numberanalytics.com by Indy! on November 30, 2025 9:34 am All well and good, Odorous - but let's get to the REAL issue here... Do you believe in Santa Claus? 🧐 by oldedude on December 1, 2025 4:36 am po- My wife and I were discussing your "dilemma" in believing this. She believes in the 7-day theory, Which I don't care. Just to let you know, for folks learning about the bible, this is a huge issue. So there is ZERO mocking here, we both went through the same thing. She recommended "God's Not Dead." a movie about a college professor that is much like many here, and a student that's goes on a "quest" at a very high risk (to the student for his grade). You can take it or not, see it or not, whatever you want to do. The second one is a factual piece of a NYT? reporter and his quest to disprove the Bible, and is based on his book. Both of these articulate what I'm not really good at. Anyway, nothing but a thought. by HatetheSwamp on December 1, 2025 4:41 am Well said, OD. IMO, the issue is not the ability of Indy's brain. It's the condition of his heart. Sad. by islander on December 1, 2025 6:08 am Subjectivity of Truth: For Kierkegaard, truth is subjective and personal when it comes to faith. It appears to me that what Hate and many others who try to use Kierkegaard to support what they believe is true, are missing, is that Kierkegaard was not talking about truth. He was talking about a subjective and personal belief. What is probably true is that unless he is lying, Hate believes what he's claiming (Hate believes X) is probably true, but that does not mean that X is true. by oldedude on December 1, 2025 8:03 am He was talking about a subjective and personal belief. I agree with that. I think it's good to have faith in something other hatred of anyone that is different, big government, tolerance, and the ability to be inclusive. As you and I spoke a couple of months ago, "Your personal belief" is not what the leftists were more than a decade ago. LAWFARE, "free speech" "for thee, but not for ye." persecution of those that might disagree with you. Lead and I are "classical liberals," and we object to the neo liberalism that is now the dim party. Classical liberalism, would weep at the lack of diversity in neo liberalism that's now "mainstream" leftist ideals. MLKJr was a classical liberal. He was also hated at the time by the racists. NOW, the former racists are classical Liberals. He actually understood diversity. Separation of Church and state, meaning the govern can't force a person to have or not have a religious. And according to Locke, Jefferson, MLK Jr, you are to look further than that into a person's character. by Indy! on December 1, 2025 9:55 am MAGAts trying to psychoanalyze me. Now that's funny. Got news for you two bozos - neither one of you know anything about me. Odorous can't even remember the actual facts about my life that I've disclosed on this board. by meagain on December 1, 2025 12:27 pm Neoliberalism is classic liberalism. An attempt to revive the laissez-faire culture. Liberalism today is closer to what Mill thought it should be reformed to be. Socially conscious and progresssive. by oldedude on December 1, 2025 4:10 pm Except, you're no where near inclusive. Look at your own rhetoric. Hateful and filled with distain of those not thinking like you. Locke is turning over in his grave. And the racist DEI programs? I really don't think the word means what you think it does. by HatetheSwamp on December 1, 2025 5:36 pm You're mischaracterizing Kierkegaard and pb. And, isle, y'ain't that stoopid. by oldedude on December 1, 2025 7:20 pm Lead, were starting this again. Already. Same points. Same thing with wrongagain. by HatetheSwamp on December 2, 2025 5:14 am From isle: "It appears to me that what Hate and many others who try to use Kierkegaard to support what they believe is true, are missing, is that Kierkegaard was not talking about truth. He was talking about a subjective and personal belief." Bull$#!t! And, gang, isle ain't that stoopid From AI: "For Kierkegaard, truth is not just an objective fact but a deeply personal and lived reality, captured by the phrase "truth is subjectivity". This means that while objective truths exist, their meaning and importance are only realized when an individual personally appropriates them through their commitment and passion, making the truth something that is lived and not just known intellectually>. He distinguished between knowing objective facts, like the shape of the earth, and the subjective truth, which is the individual's proper relationship to that fact." pb's recollection is that isle has been here longer than po. And, isle's been making this same point about Kierkegaard and pb and truth since we started batting this around. Gang, It's what all of us DO with reality that ultimately matters. That seems obvious to me. What's not obvious is why isle and his whole lot seem to be afraid of, I dunno, their personal accountability for what they do with raw, objectiv, reality. by oldedude on December 2, 2025 6:37 am Lead- the last two paragraphs especially, DITTO. I think Lead and I are saying the same thing in different ways. THAT is the character of a person. You get to "Choose" your reality. You can either live well or be a victim of your own life. If you're hateful, a continual victim of life, and continually "must" (for some reason or another) degrade others, that's YOUR CHOICE. by oldedude on December 2, 2025 6:42 am concha- MAGAts trying to psychoanalyze me. Now that's funny. Got news for you two bozos - neither one of you know anything about me. Odorous can't even remember the actual facts about my life that I've disclosed on this board. Interesting, you were not mentioned anywhere in that post. THAT is a narcissist speaking, because "everything is about you!" You're proving what I'm saying on the daily basis. No need to remember anything you project to others. by HatetheSwamp on December 2, 2025 6:56 am On pychoanalyzing Indy: I ain't doing that... ... but I am perplexed. Indy's thinking has radically changed for the worse. He used to be an independent thinker who, IMO, marched to the beat of his own drummer. Now?, he's run-of-the-mill woke and TDS. Nuthin more. by HatetheSwamp on December 2, 2025 7:35 am "I think Lead and I are saying the same thing in different ways. THAT is the character of a person. You get to "Choose" your reality. You can either live well or be a victim of your own life. If you're hateful, a continual victim of life, and continually "must" (for some reason or another) degrade others, that's YOUR CHOICE." Bang on. For me, Kierkegaard is like a favorite preacher. I know I'm old, but about 20 years ago, I went through a personal spiritual revival. It began a journey which ended in my disliking institutionalized Christianity. About five years into it, I stumbled on Kierkegaard whose name I barely knew. But, I recalled that a guy I was a close acquaintance in grad school was a big K fan... and, I admired that guy. So, out of curiosity, I began to play with Kierkegaard's thinking. I discovered that much of my journey was leading me to the place that Kierkegaard had been. So, I jumped in headfirst. It's the hot wired connection between belief and action... i.e., obedience to the teaching of Jesus... that enlivens me... And, it's people like isle's apparent, I dunno... though he'll deny it... hate of the Kierkegaard way... that befuddles and deeply concerns me. by Indy! on December 2, 2025 9:48 am Señorita Welfare (post 27): concha- MAGAts trying to psychoanalyze me. Now that's funny. Got news for you two bozos - neither one of you know anything about me. Odorous can't even remember the actual facts about my life that I've disclosed on this board. Interesting, you were not mentioned anywhere in that post. THAT is a narcissist speaking, because "everything is about you!" You're proving what I'm saying on the daily basis. No need to remember anything you project to others. Funny. Not only can you not remember any of the actual facts about my life I've revealed on the board here - you can't even remember (or bother to research) the conversation you're referring to - making yourself look even dumber... Brown Shorts (post 17) by HatetheSwamp on December 1, 2025 4:41 am Well said, OD. IMO, the issue is not the ability of Indy's brain. It's the condition of his heart. Sad. by Indy! on December 2, 2025 9:54 am And now Brown Shorts feels like he has to match your stupidity by trying throwing you a life line... by HatetheSwamp on December 2, 2025 6:56 am On pychoanalyzing Indy: I ain't doing that... Everything following that line proves you can't... Brown Shorts (continuing)... ... but I am perplexed. Indy's thinking has radically changed for the worse. He used to be an independent thinker who, IMO, marched to the beat of his own drummer. Now?, he's run-of-the-mill woke and TDS. Nuthin more. MAGAts only see one group outside of themselves - the people who saw thru their orange master from day 1. You see us as the enemy - as you should - because we're going to bring down your hero. Not because we hate him - he's too irrelevant for hate - because unlike you MAGAts, we love our country and see what that fucking asshole (and you MAGAts) are doing to it.. by HatetheSwamp on December 2, 2025 10:00 am Indy, Ole pb ain't analyzing you, merely observing. by islander on December 2, 2025 11:12 am That's fine, Hate, as long as you realize that there is such a thing as objective reality and objective truth, and you don’t try to use subjectivity is truth to defend a personal belief regarding objective truth or objective reality as if reality or truth is dependent on your belief. If you’re not using “subjectivity is truth” that way why even use that phrase to describe ” "what you do with truth or reality"... How you handle reality or truth is not a definition of truth or reality. by HatetheSwamp on December 2, 2025 11:45 am "If you’re not using “subjectivity is truth” that way why even use that phrase to describe ” "what you do with truth or reality"... How you handle reality or truth is not a definition of truth or reality." isle, Only as a matter of history and content. It's how Kierkegaard stated it. Since then, Kierkegaard provides bedrock for the discussion of the concept. Ole pb'll acknowledge that, as is the case with many philosophers, his thought is brilliant but his manner of expressing it is well below average. One AI outlet makes sense of Kierkegaard in this way... "When Kierkegaard (writing pseudonymously as Johannes Climacus) stated that "truth is subjectivity," he meant that the most important, existential truths are not discovered through detached, objective reasoning but through a deeply personal, passionate, and committed mode of existence. It is about how one relates to a belief, not just what one believes as an abstract fact. Objective truths are facts that are universally verifiable and independent of an individual's perception (e.g., mathematical formulas, scientific laws, historical dates). Kierkegaard did not deny these exist, but argued they are ultimately insufficient for living a meaningful life. Subjective truth concerns a person's inner commitment and how a belief shapes their life and identity. This is where authentic existence and meaning are found. For objective truth, the "what" (the content of the belief) is paramount. For subjective truth, the "how" (the individual's passionate, inward relationship to that belief) is what matters. An "objective uncertainty held fast in an appropriation-process of the most passionate inwardness is the truth". Of course, Kierkegaard goes further. Hence the Doris Walker comment about believing in Kris Kringle... and the fact that, 80 years later, the movie attracts interest. by Indy! on December 2, 2025 12:26 pm Not sure I could illustrate this point better myself - the level to which you do NOT understand (or "see") me... Me (post 31): MAGAts only see one group outside of themselves - the people who saw thru their orange master from day 1. You see us as the enemy - as you should - because we're going to bring down your hero. Not because we hate him - he's too irrelevant for hate - because unlike you MAGAts, we love our country and see what that fucking asshole (and you MAGAts) are doing to it.. ===================================== Brown Shorts (post 32) Indy, Ole pb ain't analyzing you, merely observing. You just confirmed 100% with what I said. From Dictionary.com... observe [uhb-zurv] verb (used with object) observed, observing to see, watch, perceive, or notice. He observed the passersby in the street. You THINK you are observing, but you are really doing is the old Brown Shorts "perception is reality" nonsense. you WANT me to be TDS - therefore TO YOU - I am. But REALITY - proves you are not even close to understanding who I am or what I think. And Odorous? He might as well be "observing" from Mars. He's merely taking sad moments from his own life and trying to project them on me. Like you - another case for Dr. Freud. by Indy! on December 2, 2025 12:29 pm by islander on December 2, 2025 11:12 am That's fine, Hate, as long as you realize that there is such a thing as objective reality and objective truth, and you don’t try to use subjectivity is truth to defend a personal belief regarding objective truth or objective reality as if reality or truth is dependent on your belief. If you’re not using “subjectivity is truth” that way why even use that phrase to describe ” "what you do with truth or reality"... How you handle reality or truth is not a definition of truth or reality. He doesn't understand that believing perception is reality doesn't make it true. Easy example... He keeps accusing me of falling in love with Kamala (although he is the one and only person who ever talks about her on the board)... When I have told him more than once I didn't even vote for her. His "perception" is wrong - ergo his "reality" is also wrong. by HatetheSwamp on December 2, 2025 12:33 pm Whoa, bubba. pb never suggested that you voted for Cackles, only that you have a crush on her. by oldedude on December 2, 2025 1:26 pm PARANOIA WILL DESTROY YA! View Video by Indy! on December 2, 2025 1:35 pm by HatetheSwamp on December 2, 2025 12:33 pm Whoa, bubba. pb never suggested that you voted for Cackles, only that you have a crush on her. And other than your imagination - what evidence do you have to support that perception? I don't talk about her - only you do. I've never defended her. I didn't vote or support her in 2020. I didn't vote or support her in 2016. While I was off this board and hanging on twitter I had a running comic strip poking fun at her and her failings. So what evidence do you have to support your (obviously misguided) perception? Don't be afraid to look up "evidence" if necessary. by Indy! on December 2, 2025 2:25 pm Ooops - got my years wrong. Actually it was 2020 and 2024. 🙂 See that? Can't even remember when she ran. by oldedude on December 2, 2025 6:44 pm too many drugs... by Indy! on December 2, 2025 7:41 pm I wish. 🙂 by HatetheSwamp on December 3, 2025 4:11 am Indy, pb has no doubt that you weren't mesmerized by Cackles three years ago. But early on in her 107 days, your tone suddenly changed. It's like you suddenly really saw her. Sorta you were Tony, and Kammy, Maria in West Side Story. by islander on December 3, 2025 6:30 am ”Objective truths are facts that are universally verifiable and independent of an individual's perception (e.g., mathematical formulas, scientific laws, historical dates). Kierkegaard did not deny these exist, but argued they are ultimately insufficient for living a meaningful life.” ~ Hate Nobody assumes they are sufficient for that purpose. AI States: Existentialism does not reject the concept of truth entirely, but it challenges the idea of a single, objective, detached truth that applies to everyone in the same way. What some philosophers and people who think they’re philosophers do is over-complicate simple ideas or thoughts. The above simply states that people respond to truth and facts differently. That really goes without saying. Existentialism deals with emotions and feelings which of course are subjective. It’s not dealing with the question of whether something is true or not. Truth applies to an assertion. The earth is flat is an assertion, and you can ask if it is true or not. If someone tells you that they feel anxious, the only question of truth that could be applied to that is, ”do they really feel that way?” If they do, it’s true that they feel anguished... If someone says that they personally believe the story of Noah’s Ark is literally true; does that make it true for them? No. It only seems true to that person because that person believes it’s true. His belief doesn’t make it true for him or anyone else. Subjectivity is not truth. Truth is that which conforms to reality. We need to have a firm foundation built on objective facts in order to make rational decisions and ensure that what you call a leap of faith is not a leap from realty into madness. by oldedude on December 3, 2025 6:55 am What I find funny is the "ASSumption" that everyone's reality is the same. Obviously, the snowflakes have a very different reality than I do. That doesn't mean either of us are wrong. Period. isle "insists" his version of his truth is the only one that counts. My view is that most of what he talks about has little to do with anything I care about. And what is typical of libtards, is forcing their "thoughts" on others. And as I've said, that is extremely far away from classical liberalism and is woke hegemony (thanks Lead). by islander on December 3, 2025 7:10 am OD, whether you know it or not, whether you believe it or not, objective reality is the same for everybody. What is different is how you feel or respond to it. Your emotions and feelings are subjective...Reality is not. by HatetheSwamp on December 3, 2025 7:33 am "Subjectivity is not truth. Truth is that which conforms to reality." For a moment, there, I thought you were able to UNDERSTAND. Alas... I still "assert" you're not that stoopid. It's your subjectivity that's the problem. You are Doris Walker before repentance. And, you are, entirely, missing the point. "We need to have a firm foundation built on objective facts in order to make rational decisions..." HolyfreakinfrigginEFFINcow, man. You've regressed. You've doubled down on Doris-ism. She once was a hard-headed disciple of common sense-ism. You? You're unrepentant. Remember: Human knowledge and reason created the weapons of nuclear war. "As for me and my house,..." we'll serve a greater god. Just for [my] fun. Splain to us how you form "a firm foundation built on objective facts," to know "What is the most BEAUTIFUL... COLOR!!!!! by HatetheSwamp on December 3, 2025 7:36 am "OD, whether you know it or not, whether you believe it or not, objective reality is the same for everybody. What is different is how you feel or respond to it. Your emotions and feelings are subjective...Reality is not." Sheesh, man, isle. Now splain to us how you can disagree with the proposition, subjectivity is truth. by islander on December 3, 2025 7:53 am Hate, you still haven’t quite grasped the difference between objective facts (Truth), and feelings and emotions. Determining the most beautiful color is based on subjective values of the one perceiving the colors. It is not a fact belonging to the colors. It is a subjective feeling of the perceiver. You do know what a color is, don't you? by HatetheSwamp on December 3, 2025 7:59 am "Hate, you still haven’t quite grasped the difference between objective facts (Truth), and feelings and emotions." Ah ha!!!!! The only definitions of words ... in the universe isle centers... are isle's. Sheeeeeeeeeeeesh. What closed-mindedness! What friggin narcissism!!!!! by HatetheSwamp on December 3, 2025 9:48 am isle, Ole pb needs you to UNDERSTAND one thing: pb UNDERSTANDS that the two of us disagree about what truth is. pb's a GOP. You ain't. pb's a GOP precisely because the GOP is the home of openness and inclusion, acceptance, tolerance, diversity and freethinking. It's an essential value, by which I live, to respect sincere belief in others. As I have read you, over the years, you are a fundamentalist of the Enlightenment. Kierkegaard's thinking is a strong, rejection of the Enlightenment. Of course you and I disagree... and always will,... unless, of course, you repent, as did Doris Walker....so she and her child could live happily ever after... ... bahahahahahahahahahaha ha ha haha ha! C'mon man. Crackasmile! by Indy! on December 3, 2025 10:29 am by HatetheSwamp on December 3, 2025 4:11 am Indy, pb has no doubt that you weren't mesmerized by Cackles three years ago. But early on in her 107 days, your tone suddenly changed. It's like you suddenly really saw her. Sorta you were Tony, and Kammy, Maria in West Side Story. Translation: "I got nothing, Indy." That - again - was your perception. I was against the orange ass monkey - not for Kamala. There's a difference. by HatetheSwamp on December 3, 2025 10:38 am Indy, No need to be ashamed the quality of your TrumpHate changed when Cackles was leading the ticket. by Indy! on December 3, 2025 11:25 am Brown Shorts, I don't know who you think you're fooling. We all know the only reason we're even having this discussion is because you love Kamala. You're the one who always brings her up - not me. You're the one who can't stop talking about a person who's out of politics completely. You're the one who invented the crazy "Ds 'foisted' Kamala on me so I had to vote for the orange ass monkey" conspiracy theory. You are the guy who obviously was deeply in love with her, still are head over heels for her and simply cannot make it thru a single day without somehow referencing her. And that's not perception - that's reality. You can not go a SINGLE DAY without bringing up Kamala Harris. by oldedude on December 3, 2025 8:39 pm And you fall for it hook, line, and sinker every fucking time. What a Maroon!. by HatetheSwamp on December 4, 2025 3:19 am "I don't know who you think you're fooling. We all know the only reason we're even having this discussion is because you love Kamala." I wouldn't call it love per se, but I would love to see her become the Howard Stassen of the 21st century. by oldedude on December 4, 2025 4:49 am Lead- It's a childhood infatuation. by HatetheSwamp on December 4, 2025 4:51 am OD, It's soooooooo FRIGGINcute. by oldedude on December 4, 2025 4:58 am Hahahahaha. Go To Top

Find old posts & articles

Show Most Recent Articles Articles by category: Politics+ Religion+ Law & Crime Military News Media History Health Sports+ Humor Entertainment Misc.

Report spam & abuse SelectSmart.com home page