Subjective means Irrational

The resolution is "Subjective is Irrational". This is an exact quote of Sagey. He attempts to move the goal post by saying that's not what he really meant and attempts to redefine the resolution. I clearly stated in the first round the resolution is to be interpreted defining the terms in the oxford dictionary. He attempts to loop hole this by rewording the resolution. He accepted the challenge and therefore agrees with the resolution and wording as it is, originally quoted from him. I reject this attempt as a semantic attempt to build a straw man argument.Case 1 Sagey confirms my positionIt is clear that Sagey sees his own opinions as reasonable. He votes according to his prior held belief instead of on the merits of a debate. To put the following in context the majority of Reason for Decision (RFD) he provides follow this pattern: "(implicit Sagey agrees with A) I (Sagey first person) vote for A. Because I have this personal history or I have this personal contention with B's premise, or B is obviously wrong because his arguments didn't convince me. These are the actions of Sagey:http://www.debate.org..."Firstly the dictionary reference Con sourced is Wrong, the literal translation of Atheism means "Without God". so there is something wrong with the reference...Proving that Merriam-Webster is a biased Dictionary which I've known for a decade now. I prefer less biased and conceited sources"- So your opinion about the Merriam-Webster dictionary had a defining outcome of the debate. Interesting so many others scored that debate differently. Con won 20 to 8.http://www.debate.org..."...Christianity from overbearing, overzealous and too often annoying Christians who irrationally scream persecution when people stop them Proselytizing. Freedom of religion is not helping the situation... but no Proselytizing is allowed nor tolerated, from any religion or non-religion."- Funny in a debate about it being unjust to prove or disprove someone's religion Sagey appears to be doing a lot of preaching. His platform for public office includes removing Freedom of Religion (sarcastic).http://www.debate.org..."... Pros arguments were more rational but only slightly..."- Again Sagey votes according to his own contentions and opinion despite the fact that Con forfeited half the debate.http://www.debate.org..." besides Asexual people do exist on both sides, I've had clients and friends who are asexual..."- Sagey's personal history and evidence again. Luckily other voters were not so biased. 7 to his 1http://www.debate.org..."Pro put up the better fight and provided more convincing sources, as Pro had Con backtracking and reeling from blows to the logic centers of Con's frontal lobes. Besides, I couldn't understand Con's mathematics. :-( I've become a dunce at Maths"- Sagey's mathematical frontal lobes were reeling from Con's attacks based on high school math. But no matter Sagey votes in accordance with his opinion and a lack of understanding doesn't stand in his way.If Sagey chooses to be intellectually honest, and is really pro of the resolution, he should willingly forfeit his right to vote.Case 2 Social circles of trustSince Sagey enjoys a personal narrative as evidence, I'll illustrate this point with a story. I have a twin brother who has to my knowledge has never lied to me. He tells me the truth even when he knows I would disapprove. I trust my brother. This is a belief of mine. It is a feeling and an opinion. So it is subjective. Yet to me it is reasonable to trust my twin brother. It follows principles of validity based in abductive reasoning.Trust is a subjective thing. In some systems the credibility of a source is given a ranking based on the trust opinion of some one else. Because the process of ranking follows principles of validity it is a rational process. Hence the subjective "Trust" is rational not irrational. Assume two agents A and B where A has an opinion about B, and B has an opinion about a proposition p. A recommendation of these two opinions consists of combining A’s opinion about B with B’s opinion about p in order for A to get an opinion about p[1] easily expressed in the formula: This is not a trust attribute applied on objective grounds. It is applied on subjective grounds. It follows a mathematical process. A rational process. Therefore Subjective is Rational.Case 3 LegalIn a court case juries are asked to way the evidence and give an opinion to a person's guilt or not guilty. This is to say their opinion is a reasonable doubt. The oxford dictionary gives a definition of reasonable as "Based on good sense".[2] What is meant by sense? The only definition of sense that applies is A feeling that something is the case. A feeling is subjective. So therefore in the legal sense to convict requires a subjective rational.This is only further exemplified by the DC Court ruling. When an expert wittiness was unwilling to assert "certainty" the higher court upheld the inclusion of the expert testimony. Concluding, "In light of the foregoing authorities, we conclude that trial courts should not require a “reasonable degree of scientific certainty” before admitting expert opinions but may exclude expert testimony based on speculation or possibility." So an Expert Opinion is just that an opinion and it can be thrown out of court if it is speculation. Usually speculation is used in terms of validity for objective assertions. but this is case of using in terms to subjective assertions made by an expert.Case 4 All Logic is subjectiveOur actions and claims are never 100%. We go with what evidence at the time indicates the best reason. It is not just the case that 100% is in question. How is the determination for a piece of evidence being 45% or 65% likely.[5] In fact most of our every day decisions are subjective rationales. The choice of the ’best’ course of action almost always involves trade-offs among multiple objectives. And, even when factors can be ‘objectively measured’ the relative importance of the objectives remains subjective. Therefore, all important decisions are subjective - See more at: http://expertchoice.com... The choice of the ’best’ course of action almost always involves trade-offs among multiple objectives. And, even when factors can be ‘objectively measured’ the relative importance of the objectives remains subjective. Therefore, all important decisions are subjective - See more at: http://expertchoice.com... [6] The resolution is accepted and explored by scientist.[7]ConclusionSagey's first round was just trolling as indicated by his Comment, "Might as well use this debate to poke fun at Idiots who base their beliefs entirely on Subjective Nonsense". He uses the debate and the votes he cast as a podium to espouse his views, most with anecdotal personal narratives in place of evidence. His Subjective is Irrational. But not all Subjective is so. Some are Rational. Sagey doesn't know the difference.[1]http://persons.unik.no...[2]http://www.oxforddictionaries.com...[3]http://www.oxforddictionaries.com...[4]http://www.consumerlaw.com...[5]http://www.philosophyetc.net...[6]http://expertchoice.com...[7]http://www.eui.eu...