2. This argument is not reliable.
You consider objective and subjective to be absolute complements, this is your belief, so all the arguments and comparisons you developed next are based on your opinion, not on a correct an objective statement. This obviously prove nothing.
By the way, your assumptions about objective and subjective being absolute complements are more than arguable.
[I][B]The illusion of opposites[/B]
Since objectivity does not guarantee truth, and since subjectivity is not necessarily false, it makes sense that objectivity is not the exact opposite of subjectivity. Subjectivity and objectivity are different ways of knowing.
Mistaking subjectivity and objectivity as opposites can lead to problematic positions in philosophy, morality, and ethics.
There is a false notion of subjectivity and objectivity in which these are conceived as opposed and mutually exclusive. They are opposed because of the imaginative schema of the subjective as 'in here' and the objective as 'out there'; this is so common as to be almost universal. In the search for objective knowledge in the natural sciences and the human sciences, subjective elements in the researcher are to be eliminated; the objective is good, all subjective elements are bad and interfere with the 'objectivity' of results. In this case subjective lumps together everything that goes on in the mind, prejudice, bias, self-interest, as well as hypotheses, ideas, judgments, values. Knowledge becomes so objective, so logical, and so controlled by rules and methods, as to be able to do without human minds. Objectivity is to be attained by eliminating the subjective.
In this context the critical problem is inevitably presented in terms of a bridge between the subjective in here and the objective out there.
However, there is an alternative way of viewing the notions of subjectivity and objectivity, to view them as complementary rather than opposed.
You can ask me for more sources if you are interested.
Maybe they dont have the look of existance and nonexistance because they are not absolute complements, so this may explain why I don't understand the absolute complementing of them, because it is just an ilusion created in your mind...
in conclusion, your arguments are not valid, including the comparison with dogs and existence, is not aplicable.
So, until now, we know your arguments have demonstrated that my sentence is objective, but, at the same time this arguments have been proved to be inaccurate.
3.You still fail to understand the original statement's meaning.
We are again at the beginning, and the problem remains the same, you dont understand what i wanted to say with the original sentence. This is probably my fault, I apology, i'm not good at explaining things, and even less in other languages.
I'm not saying gut feelings are neither objective nor subjective.
I'm saying that the concept of objective and subjective does not always imply gut feelings. That's all...
let me use your dog to put a clarifying example of the "underlying" of the problem:
The existence of a dog prove the existence of a mammal.
The existence of a mammal prove the existence of a dog.
I pointed out this relation:
and you answered me with this one:
Subjectivity is not strictly related to a dog. ->Subjectivity may not be related to a dog.->
"subjectivity and objectivity "(the concept, the idea) may not be related to a dog.->
subjectivity and objectivity arent strictly related to a dog.
This relation is the one i was trying to point out when i made this statement.
And this is not the same than saying:
A dog isn't strictly related to subjectivity and objectivity.
You said that trading must be objective if you dont want to involve gut feeling in your strategy.
Then i should answer you:
"Trading must not be a mammal if you dont wanna involve dogs in your strategy.
You that have been trading with bears would say: wtf is saying this fool. "
Something similar happened to me with gut feeling.
If I put "subjectivity and objectivity" was to make sure I let you know I was referring to the concept. But anyway the sentence stay objective one way or the other.
Do you finally understand my point? all this posts to "prove" something trivial...
LOL, looking back, i will admire anyone who takes the time and the determination to read and understand this 2 long and boring posts. This is what i wanted to avoid 2 posts ago.