The difference between ethical atheism and nihlism is that ethical atheists have more faith

[genkaus]

This is a very optimistic view of the intellectual project. In reality, no one can check every single aspect of everything that they believe, there is philosophy that is embedded into their thoughts and the final process of their very short stay on earth does not relate to the effort involved in transcending their cultural makeup. People are a product of their times.

You don't have to. All you need to do is to show that some aspects transcend their cultural makeup in order to show that it is possible.

You ever hear that Public Enemy song where Chuck D starts talking about fighting the power? I think that's what you need to do, you need to fight the power (of technocracy and its psuedo-religious claims to "objectivity"). I think the power is the "objective" knowledge of some people who use their power to rule others. Postmodernism is sort of a wacky movement, but I think there is some truth to it.

So, you'd have us abandon the actual objective knowledge we've gained for your subjective one? Pass.

The powerful make a standard to call their understanding objective and make another standard to call others subjective. It is all rhetorical games. People are small, they can't know much. That is the way it is.

Unless the powerful can show their standard to be objective - that won't be of any consequence.

You have absolutely no reason to suppose that your faculties are reliable or that they represent anything remotely the way it corresponds to anything.

Actually, I do have a very good reason to suppose that. My faculties work.

Would you see that a pig's sense perceptions are "objective"? What about a mosquitos? Is not the concept of objectivity just a way for one to value his opinions greater than enough?

I don't know much about a pig's or mosquito's sense perceptions. Perhaps you could tell me.

And no, the concept of objectivity is a to evaluate how well one's opinions line up with reality.