Quagmire for this brilliant post

Let me share a little story with you. A college student is sitting in a philosophy class on the first day of school. The professor introduces himself and begins to lay out some of what will be discussed in his class throughout the course of the semester. As part of his introductory speach he make the statement, "...there are no absolutes". From the back of the room, a hand is raised. The professor, looking a little bit bothered that someone had nerve to interrupt his speach reluctantly acknowledges the student. "Yes, what is it?" he says. The student stands up and asks, "I just wanted to know, sir... did you mean that last statement, absolutely?".

How can the professor answer? If he answers Yes to defend his position then he has just provided evidence to contradict the statement that he has made. But If he answers No, then he has just disavowed the very point he was trying to make and abandoned his position. His premise is an untenable position.

I think this Objectivist/Subjectivist thing is kind of like the professor and the student: It's a conundrum. From the Objectivist point of view, the Subjectivist places himself in an undefendable position... "There are no absolutes, everything is relative and subjective." However, it would be a huge mistake for the student to conclude that because the professor's position wasn't tenable, this proved that the polar opposite was true --- that EVERYTHING is absolute. Where I think both of these groups make their biggest mistake is to take the most extreme position within their philosophy. The Objectivist can defend the statement "There ARE absolutes", but he cannot defend the statement "EVERYTHING is absolute. Likewise, the Subjectivist can't defend the statement "There are NO absolutes" but he can defend the statement that "SOME THINGS are not absolute".

As this story relates to the audio enthusiasts who post here, IMHO the more polarized their positions are within their philosophy, the more untenable their arguments become. It's no wonder that there always exists this impasse between the two groups: because as the positions become more extreme they also become less credible. Unfortunately, due to human nature they become less civil too.

Just some food for thought.