Quote:
Originally Posted by Terrapin_Station
Yes it is. I'm not just talking about aesthetics above. Evaluative statements a la good, bad, better, worse, etc. PERIOD are noncognitive. They have no truth values. Or we could say that they're subjective--they're not extramental facts. Insofar as that's the case, it's subjective. It's an agreement (among the people who agree and can exert some social influence about this) about how people FEEL about guitar playing (or whatever we might be talking about if we make it broader). It's an agreement about what people prefer or not. That's subjective. Nothing is factually correct or incorrect, true or false, just because people agree on it. To claim otherwise is to commit the argumentum ad populum fallacy. So you are an objectivist to an extent. But objectivism is factually incorrect on this stuff, because it's an extramental fact of the world that there are no extramental facts regarding whether anything is good, bad, better, worse, etc. Rather, your view about this is showing your complete imbecility when it comes to the ontology of this stuff.
|
We may end up needing to agree to disagree to stay away from further name calling, which I did start, and I apologize. But if the bold were true, guitar lessons would be completely irrelevant. And again, I want to focus on the fact that I have admitted a few times that Jimmy Page is not a mediocre guitar player, but he's certainly not skilled in the art to be considered one of the best. He's sloppy a lot of the time, and the only thing he's particularly amazing at is creating a rhythm that the rest of the band can feed off of. I don't even want to mention songwriting because it's been mentioned here before. But the ability to play guitar isn't always subjective if you take into fact that many of the greats spent their whole lives trying to master their craft.
Threaded Mode