(October 5, 2017 at 7:14 am)Hammy Wrote:(October 3, 2017 at 9:08 pm)bennyboy Wrote: Nope. It's not in the experience, it's in the definition of "good." That word can be defined however anybody wants, and that is the definition of subjectivity. Something which is intrinsically good is good without being defined so by somebody-- and there's no such thing.Nope. Fail. Because in that case science and logic aren't objective because we have to define that objectivity with words that can be defined how anybody wants.
Words themselves aren't objective. It's what they mean after you define them that's objective.
We don't just make up words and figure out what they mean. We have some observation or idea, and coin a word to represent it. "Apple" means a particular crunchy fruit. "Science" means the process of attaining knowledge through observation and experimentation. "Good" means whatever you want it to mean, based on your individual feelings and predilections. There is great agreement about what "apple" and "science" mean, and little about what constitutes good or bad.
That's because. . . goodness is subjective.