But they did censor galileo for his observations and measurements anyways.
Would you rather me use 8chan's ban as the example? Or are you going to pout about how big tech actually helps "advance science" and "educate the world"
-Emotions preceeds thought, thought preceeds language, language preceeds philosphopy.
-Without perfect knowledgue or infallibility you must on rely experiances and a rough attempt at objectivity by concensus.
-Pure logic is sociopathic and inadequate for what it means to be human anyway.
-Ayn rand was a sped and proved her own ideology cannot achieve praxis all by herself.
Either you're very young, or you have zero understanding of objectivity and subjectivity to say such a thing. There are exactly zero professional researchers who would claim that their branch of science, whether it's physics or literature analysis, is really objective, simply because absolute objectivity is impossible for human beings. Our most objective sciences are only our best shot at being objective, and if you can't accept that there is no point in even having discussion about subjectivity vs. objectivity in the first place.
On the other hand, you're saying that subjectivity is destroying society. Well, do you really think that the world you propose would be any better, even if your ludicrous and unrealistic idea of objectivity could be somehow implemented? Would you really want to live in a society where individual aspiration or opinion would not matter at all, and your place would be determined by some "impartial" entity, that would most likely put you to clean toilets, based on your seeming intelligence? What would stop such unyielding hieararchy from becoming totally corrupted and nepotistic in a blink of an eye?
Rejects the existence of equality, and strives to create a system which actively seeks to measure the most productive/most efficient members of society and reward them for their worth and reward them proportionately.
Every time niggas try to get "stoic", "meritocratic", every time they try to be "objective", it's just a sign of a race in a state of advanced decay. Nations, cultures and civilizations are founded by Chads upon the faculty of pure Will, and when the Chads get replaced by Nerds with their ramblings of "Reason", it's a sign of impending death.
Your understanding of Stoicism is so pathetic that you don't even seem to know that it was the primary Hellenistic successor to the Socratic tradition, which is most essentially an opponent of supposed 'objectivity'. Did you not get the point of the Stoics using the Medea of Euripides so frequently in their discourses on logical ethics?