Stop the subjective argumentation. I know 2+2=4 because it's true and provable. I lament deconstructionism being applied to all academic pursuits.
Again how is that subjective?
I'm not arguing mathematics that is a viewpoint. If you wanna go back that far Pythagorean form... Hell, my whole argument Pythagoras would back.
Mathematics is based on the principle of ratio correct?
How is my argument emotion based? Attention creates worlds.. What i'm saying is the if you are using one viewpoint's standards, like the symbolic form of classification based on mathematical principles of causation to evaluate the 'truth' of another viewpoint?
How will the viewpoint of physical observation evaluate that which it cannot encompass?
Physical science can tell me how the texture of a tree, how many leaves it has, what a tree looks like in infrared...
However it cannot tell me why certain people like trees or why some people only see trees as fire wood?
Again to say that truth is some static object in not the most encompassing definition. What was true yesterday, may not be true tomorrow.
Was the internet true 20 years ago?
My point is truth is more about ratio, balance and harmony.
This is not subjective... this is objective, this is basic arithematic.