Subjective Universe vs. Objective Universe

I apologize if this was already asked, but I did not find the explanation of this readily available in a Setian perspective; so hopefully this will help others who were not 100% on this as well.

What is the Subjective Universe (SU) and Objective Universe (OU) to the Setian philosophy defined as and how it's applied in it's practice and use in Setian workings?


Thanks in advance,

J.W.G

What do you think?

That is a basis from which to discuss.

My take on it.. having no real prior instruction or definition of it. I'll have at it.

Subjective Universe- "subjective" defined: "taking place within the mind and modified by individual bias; "a subjective judgment"

Obviously, subjective being biased and *personal* to each person. The "universe" of a single person. The reality that each of us has, based on our individual experiences, senses, knowledge/education, etc. Each *individual's* reality and universe.

Objective Universe- "objective" defined: "undistorted by emotion or personal bias; based on observable phenomena; "an objective appraisal"; "objective evidence"

The un-biased "universe" not personalized or limited to one's perception. "Universal", or "proven." The best way to understand this for me is, what one would call "scientific fact" or a thing shared and perceived or accepted/proven by all "subjective universes." The *collective* universe and reality perhaps.

Again, I am very new to these ideas; and this is my best attempt to convey my current understanding of SU/OU. I look forward to others to throw in 0.02 cents.

I don't see "subjective" and "objective" as places, as some allegedly do.

It is a habit of unreflective thought to take for granted that the world can be described without particular reference to the act and context of perception, where the nature of things and the laws underlying phenomena are treated as having a neutral ground of existence independent of any consciousness positing that ground [objective]. We even come to see ourselves objectively as 'human-things', jostling with all the other things in that neutral existence. In speaking of life and experience, we then imaginatively adopt a position somewhere outside, looking down upon 'our' life, 'our' experiences, instead of being that life, that experience.

Click to expand...

~The Moment of Astrology: Origins in Divination, Geoffrey Cornelius

We talk, and in communicating objectively we cast things into this realm where there is neutral ground for all things, apart from any particular perspective. But it's still only a perspective from which we communicate. We are never free of the subjective perspective, even in 'our' objectivity.

In monism, this barrier between subjective (looking outward) and objective (being out) becomes merged, so that one perspective "rules them all" (as one ring does in Tolkien's writings).

Hope this contributes.

I will allow some time to fully absorb and let mature in my understanding the information you've presented, Willamena. Don't take my lack of a proper response as disrespectful. Thank you for your energy in responding, it is not in vain. In the mean time, could others who are also very knowledgeable in this area of understanding please respond? This is a concept I do not fully grasp at this time, and feel it is a very big part of understanding the Setian philosophy.

IMO the objective universe is all that is different to the subjective universe....

sinistercurrent said:

IMO the objective universe is all that is different to the subjective universe....

Click to expand...

Hmm.. but here is one *possible* situation where that definition/understanding does not make sense. If the OU is "all that is different to the" SU, then what of facts? Not the facts each person individually perceives to be "true" but concrete, universal facts?

So, in your way of thinking; in a wreck we all know each witness has a different account, no matter how minute the difference may be. So, to Witness A he recalled one way and Witness B recalled it another. So, the different recollection Witness B had in respect to Witness A's own recollection is Witness A's OU experience since it is "different" than his own SU experience?

Either way, sinister.. please be more specific and detailed in your understanding. The one sentence didn't do much for me to understand your own perspective on it.


P.S: I still welcome more perspectives on this original question, guys. It is still unclear. (Cough... Etu Malku, Sireal to name a few. He he).

JWG said:

Hmm.. but here is one *possible* situation where that definition/understanding does not make sense. If the OU is "all that is different to the" SU, then what of facts? Not the facts each person individually perceives to be "true" but concrete, universal facts?

Click to expand...

It seems you got the key... you ask for facts concerning the "objective universe". Would you also ask for facts about your subjective world? If not, why ?

I think you are on the right way.

If you explore various systems of the right-hand path (Buddhism, Hinduism, Christianity....), is there true individuality or do you feel something is missing in these concepts?

If you find "something" is missing, this "something" could be the key to the understanding of the subjective universe.

one way and Witness B recalled it another. So, the different recollection Witness B had in respect to Witness A's own recollection is Witness A's OU experience since it is "different" than his own SU experience?

Click to expand...

An importing point: the subjective universe of one is different to the subjective universe of another. Do you think that the subjective perception of the OU is different to the subjective perception by another individual?

The objective is ONE, the subjective is MANY...

Bold [ ]'s is my addition to your quoted text.

sinistercurrent said:

[#1]It seems you got the key... you ask for facts concerning the "objective universe". Would you also ask for facts about your subjective world? If not, why ?


[#2]If you explore various systems of the right-hand path (Buddhism, Hinduism, Christianity....), is there true individuality or do you feel something is missing in these concepts?


[#3]Do you think that the subjective perception of the OU is different to the subjective perception by another individual?

[#4]The objective is ONE, the subjective is MANY...

Click to expand...

#1: Certainly not. To my own subjective perception of the OU/SU concept.. each person's subjective universe is *their personal* take on the objective universe.

#2: I feel each religion or practices is *one way* (subjective) of the *many ways* of doing the "same thing in the end" (objective). Now, in my understanding of the right-hand path as it is understood, usually the RHP is about going from a un-connected to the Cosmos consciousness and working toward the realization or consciousness that we are all inter-connected and One. So, the individual is less important or perhaps is a hinderance to the goal of many paths or religions deemed RHP. Such labels are subjective though, no? He he.

#3: Yes, I do feel that; being subjective, each person is subjectively going to naturally differ (subjective universe) in it's WAY of realizing (subjective) the SAME thing (objective), which can be done in infinite different methods (objective universe).

#4: I would tend to be harmonious in this view as well. Each person's individual way (subjective universe) may differ from the next person (another subjective universe), but it still is DOING the SAME, ONE Thing or Destination (objective universe) in a sense.


Awesome and illuminating discussion thus far, thanks.

#1: Certainly not. To my own subjective perception of the OU/SU concept.. each person's subjective universe is *their personal* take on the objective universe.

Click to expand...

Yes. But something more. If we receive images from the objective universe we create our worldview, ideas and such things that based on the outer world. Thus we create patterns in our subjective world by perceiving information from the objective world. Because of this we can say that our subjective universe is linked to a creative aspect. Because of the creative aspect we can create images, thoughts, dreams, emotions and visions in the subjective universe. Between the subjective and the objective universe there is a link: we create pattern that based on informations of the objective universe and by creating new aspects in our subjective universe we transform our I. The "I" works in the objective world, it influences other subjective universes and it manifests themself.

consciousness that we are all inter-connected and One. So, the individual is less important or perhaps is a hinderance to the goal of many paths or religions deemed RHP. Such labels are subjective though, no? He he.

Click to expand...

That was the point. For the western left-hand path the "Self" is the most important thing in the process of Xeper. While the western right-hand path declares that the Self doesn't exists (e.g. Buddhism), that the Self is part of a godly consciousness (e.g. Hinduism) or that the Self has to be a slave of a God (e.g. Christianity). That is the secret of the western right-hand path, the goal is to destroy the Self, while the western left-hand path defines the separated Self as "divine".

sinistercurrent said:

[#1]Yes. But something more. If we receive images from the objective universe we create our worldview, ideas and such things that based on the outer world. Thus we create patterns in our subjective world by perceiving information from the objective world. Because of this we can say that our subjective universe is linked to a creative aspect. Because of the creative aspect we can create images, thoughts, dreams, emotions and visions in the subjective universe. Between the subjective and the objective universe there is a link: we create pattern that based on informations of the objective universe and by creating new aspects in our subjective universe we transform our I. The "I" works in the objective world, it influences other subjective universes and it manifests themself.



[#2]That was the point. For the western left-hand path the "Self" is the most important thing in the process of Xeper. While the western right-hand path declares that the Self doesn't exists (e.g. Buddhism), that the Self is part of a godly consciousness (e.g. Hinduism) or that the Self has to be a slave of a God (e.g. Christianity). That is the secret of the western right-hand path, the goal is to destroy the Self, while the western left-hand path defines the separated Self as "divine".

Click to expand...

#1: Just something that popped in my noggin when I read this. If we create out "subjective universe" from the "objective universe", than couldn't it also be said we, as individuals (subjective) are all connected and One in a sense with the objective universe. Not that one must absolve their Self or SU into the Cosmos/Source (OU).. but rather realize that in one reality they are living in the subjective, and that being a part of the objective as a single individual or individual intelligence; they can also manipulate the objective universe through their subjective universe.

Or is that what the Setian outlook already acknowledges? Makes sense to me at this point.

#2: So, could not both the RHP and the LHP be "correct" (although its all relative) in their practices. One seeks to obtain Divinity through "absolving" their Self (SU) into Cosmos (OU), thus being one with God or "All." The other, being the LHP.. who decides to refine and strengthen their individuality and Self; reaching "Godhood" or "Divinity."

Could not then one both realize that their Self is part of the "Cosmos" (subjective universe from the objective) and retain the Self while still manipulating the objective universe in which They (subjective universe) are a *part* of? Again, this could be what is already being practiced through Black Magic, no?

"Every Man and Woman is a Star." seems to ring a bell in this. A Hadit in Nuit. (A subjective individual in the objective universe, perhaps?)

JWG said:

#1: Just something that popped in my noggin when I read this. If we create out "subjective universe" from the "objective universe", than couldn't it also be said we, as individuals (subjective) are all connected and One in a sense with the objective universe. Not that one must absolve their Self or SU into the Cosmos/Source (OU).. but rather realize that in one reality they are living in the subjective, and that being a part of the objective as a single individual or individual intelligence; they can also manipulate the objective universe through their subjective universe.

Click to expand...

I would prefer to say that we have a relationship with the Objective Universe
In Setian terms objective and subjective universe are the Universe which is the totally of existence. The difference is that the western left-hand path accept that our perception of the separated existence is true and nothing that must correct.

#2: So, could not both the RHP and the LHP be "correct" (although its all relative) in their practices. One seeks to obtain Divinity through "absolving" their Self (SU) into Cosmos (OU), thus being one with God or "All." The other, being the LHP.. who decides to refine and strengthen their individuality and Self; reaching "Godhood" or "Divinity."

Click to expand...

What is the question? If the follower of the right-hand path tries to seek Oneness with the Objective Universe by giving up his/her isolated existence, then it will be his/her path of living. The eastern tantric left-hand path defines itself as "elite path" that is not designed for the "pashu" (herd animal). I would agree with that. Every individual has the responsibility for his/her own life.

Could not then one both realize that their Self is part of the "Cosmos" (subjective universe from the objective) and retain the Self while still manipulating the objective universe in which They (subjective universe) are a *part* of? Again, this could be what is already being practiced through Black Magic, no?

Click to expand...

The subjective universe is not part of the objective universe. But both are part of the Universe at whole.

You could say 'objective' is the world of the senses, the world of the past (because everything you see/hear/etc took time to reach you, and be processed, so its an after-image), so really the 'objective' world is the world of illusion. The 'subjective' world is the world of perceptions, ideas, concepts, things like mathematics, words, feelings, etc. Thoughts and patterns derived from the objective world, and relating back to an idealized version of it, so as to attempt a more accurate depiction of it in the mind.

I think we are always trying to find this thing we call 'ultimate' reality, and this holy grail will give us a magical understanding of objective reality, maybe to the point where both subjective and objective worlds unite in such a way that we may have the same power over the objective world as we do over the subjective? I guess the question is, is this just an extension of an infantile wish to extend our ids out to engulf the world? Or is it actually a maturation of that wish, manifesting on a higher level? :angel2:

Thank you both for your replies. I am going to respond in more detail in a bit, but before I run off for today's errands; I'd like to shoot a thought out before I forget it.

So, could we all agree on this statement as a simplified example to try and explain the concept of the OU/SU?

Each person has a different and individual take (subjective universes) on the same event (objective universe).

Note: "event" could be interchangeable with different words, this is just one isolated example of the larger possibilities to apply the OU/SU concept.

In my case, I can agree...

sinistercurrent said:

That was the point. For the western left-hand path the "Self" is the most important thing in the process of Xeper. While the western right-hand path declares that the Self doesn't exists (e.g. Buddhism), that the Self is part of a godly consciousness (e.g. Hinduism) or that the Self has to be a slave of a God (e.g. Christianity). That is the secret of the western right-hand path, the goal is to destroy the Self, while the western left-hand path defines the separated Self as "divine".

Click to expand...

well identified!

JWG said:

Each person has a different and individual take (subjective universes) on the same event (objective universe).

Click to expand...

I would word it: each person has a unique take (subjective perspective) on the same event (universe) and can experience it (subjective) or talk about (or even think about) it (objective).