Subjective vs. Objective and the confusion

[Quiddity]

The words "subjective" and " objective" cause lots of confusion. Their misuse is responsible for subjectivism in ethics. Ethical subjectivism is the view that moral judgements are nothing but statements or expressions of personal opinion or feeling and thus that moral judgements cannot be supported or refuted by reason. Careless use of the terms "subjective" and "objective" also leads to odd views in metaphysics, e.g., the denial of material reality (idealism); and odd views in epistemology, e.g., the claim that all statements are equally warranted. In other words, if you're careless about how you handle the concepts of subjectivity and objectivity, you can end up saying there's no such thing as morality, reality, or truth!

The ordinary non-philosophical (i.e., oversimplified) view is that the word "subjective" is the complete opposite (negation or contradictory) of the word "objective." If something is subjective, it's not objective; if something is objective, it's not subjective. "Subjective" is thought to mean "from someone’s point of view." " Objective" means "not just from someone’s point of view." An objective matter is one that everyone (who is sane, rational, and appropriately informed) will agree about. "Subjectivity" connotes lack of objectivity. Ethical subjectivism is the view that since we can’t be "objective" about morality, morality must be purely "subjective."

Thinking Critically about the Subjective-Objective Distinction

Thoughts?

 

[Kilgore Trout]

I think people generally paint objectivity in whatever way best supports their subjective views.

 

[Me Myself]

To be fair, nothing thought is completely objective ( according to english dictionaries at least)

In any case, yes, shoulds and shouldnts are subjective in nature. You can decide some goals for morality and then have it be less subjective, but it will only be less subjective when measured by your goals, without similar goals or a consensus of which should the goals of morality be, you have vast suectivity all over again.

To one morality should be about what (they think) god says/has-said, to the other one, that is completely irrelevant, it should be about (what he thinks is) allowing the greatest freedoms and to other, that is nonsense, it should be about (whar he thinks) will make everyone happierif everyone lived by it, but to ither you have to start with the understanding that NOT EVERYONE will live by it, and construct your morality from there up.

So if you cannot even agree on the goal,.... Well yeah it is incredibly subjective. Then agreeing on the ways to achieve said goal? That might be more measurable... To a point

 

[Sunstone]

Intersubjective verifiability seems to be a more useful concept than objectivity.

 

[Quiddity]

I think people generally paint objectivity in whatever way best supports their subjective views.

ROFL....that is certainly a wonderful way of avoiding all things universal. That would be no fun.

 

[Me Myself]

Intersubjective verifiability seems to be a more useful concept than objectivity.

A more credble one at least (or t ats what my subjectivity tells me )

 

[Quiddity]

Intersubjective verifiability seems to be a more useful concept than objectivity.

Where would math fall into with that descriptor? Would the verifiability be a slave to scientific methods only?

 

[Sunstone]

Where would math fall into with that descriptor? Would the verifiability be a slave to scientific methods only?

There is nothing that I know of which suggests that math is necessarily a descriptor of reality. Why else seek to empirically verify theoretical physics, for instance?

 

[Me Myself]

Math is a how not a what to do, but a how to do it. Morality is about what to do. Math may help to act moraly, but math cannot define for us what is moral and what is not.

Now if you show me how it can, I am reading. o.o

 

[Sunstone]

Where would math fall into with that descriptor? Would the verifiability be a slave to scientific methods only?

Great question, by the way.

 

[Quiddity]

There is nothing that I know of which suggests that math is necessarily a descriptor of reality. Why else seek to empirically verify theoretical physics, for instance?

Exactly.

Would you consider math subjective or intersubjectively verifiable?

 

[Sunstone]

Would you consider math subjective or intersubjectively verifiable?

Both.

 

[Quiddity]

Both.

Interesting.

Thanks.

 

[1137]

I always explain it in that something is objective if it would remain true even if nobody was around to observe and know that it is true. For example (to the best of our knowledge), with no sentient life the earth would still orbit the sun. So, "the earth orbits the sun" is an objective fact. Something is subjective when it is not true independent of the mind. For example, "I am better than you" may be a fact to me, but it is not a fact that can survive independent of my mind.

 

[Me Myself]

I always explain it in that something is objective if it would remain true even if nobody was around to observe and know that it is true. For example (to the best of our knowledge), with no sentient life the earth would still orbit the sun. So, "the earth orbits the sun" is an objective fact. Something is subjective when it is not true independent of the mind. For example, "I am better than you" may be a fact to me, but it is not a fact that can survive independent of my mind.

To be fair, we cannot know if such a thing exists.

 

[The Sum of Awe]

The words "subjective" and " objective" cause lots of confusion. Their misuse is responsible for subjectivism in ethics. Ethical subjectivism is the view that moral judgements are nothing but statements or expressions of personal opinion or feeling and thus that moral judgements cannot be supported or refuted by reason. Careless use of the terms "subjective" and "objective" also leads to odd views in metaphysics, e.g., the denial of material reality (idealism); and odd views in epistemology, e.g., the claim that all statements are equally warranted. In other words, if you're careless about how you handle the concepts of subjectivity and objectivity, you can end up saying there's no such thing as morality, reality, or truth!

The ordinary non-philosophical (i.e., oversimplified) view is that the word "subjective" is the complete opposite (negation or contradictory) of the word "objective." If something is subjective, it's not objective; if something is objective, it's not subjective. "Subjective" is thought to mean "from someone’s point of view." " Objective" means "not just from someone’s point of view." An objective matter is one that everyone (who is sane, rational, and appropriately informed) will agree about. "Subjectivity" connotes lack of objectivity. Ethical subjectivism is the view that since we can’t be "objective" about morality, morality must be purely "subjective."

Thinking Critically about the Subjective-Objective Distinction

Thoughts?

Actually, Objective is an unbiased truth while Subjective is an opinion-based truth.

ob·jec·tive
/əbˈjektiv/
Adjective
(of a person or their judgment) Not influenced by personal feelings or opinions in considering and representing facts.


sub·jec·tive
/səbˈjektiv/
Adjective
Based on or influenced by personal feelings, tastes, or opinions.


Subjectivism seems to have the correct usage.

 

[atanu]

I used to hold that as long as one is a subject, separate from the object, one's views are subjective. But, it occured, whether this view is objective or not?

I think Godel has answered this through math.

 

[1137]

To be fair, we cannot know if such a thing exists.

You mean something external of the mind?

 

[Me Myself]

You mean something external of the mind?

External to our experience.

 

[Me Myself]

Actually, Objective is an unbiased truth while Subjective is an opinion-based truth.

ob·jec·tive
/əbˈjektiv/
Adjective
(of a person or their judgment) Not influenced by personal feelings or opinions in considering and representing facts.


sub·jec·tive
/səbˈjektiv/
Adjective
Based on or influenced by personal feelings, tastes, or opinions.


Subjectivism seems to have the correct usage.

Te problem withh that is that everything thought is considered an opinion, and that "personal" can get preeeeeeety ambiguous.