Evidence

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nonpareil (Post 10360714) Evidence is either objectively verifiable or it is not valid. There is no wriggle room.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Giordano (Post 10360721) I don't wish to do a derail either, so perhaps you would like to start a new thread (or do you want me to)? In any case, I asked for further clarification of a prior post of yours that gave some examples (but I disagreed in my own post). Would you be willing, in a different thread, to discuss these issues more?

Okay, it is simple once you know to look for.

Nonpareil, sorry to drag you into philosophy but the problem is that there is no evidence for your claim itself, because your rule of evidence is not objective itself.

Another version is this:

"I only accept non-subjective evidence."

The problem is that the claim itself is subjective and thus has no evidence.



Now to the bone. Can something be physical and subjective? If yes, then you can't give evidence for it being objective/non-subjective, because it is subjective. That is it or you accept that something can be in the same sense and at the same time subjective and objective.



So please explain what you guys mean be subjective and objective and how that relates to physical?