Understanding Objectivity - Enhancing our Vocabulary

Author: Critical-Tim

Posts

Total: 14
Critical-Tim
Critical-Tim's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 902
3
2
7
Critical-Tim's avatar
Critical-Tim
3
2
7
Topic Description:
We will discuss the many definitions surrounding objective and its counterparts in great depth.
We will consider the word's origin and the philosophical argument presented by the term "Objective Reality."
This is not meant to be a religious forum, which is why I have posted it in the philosophy section.

We will cover the following questions to get started:
What is the definition of Objectivity?
What is the argument presented by the term "Objective Reality?"


Please help productively refine my and others' understanding by following these guidelines:
  • NUMBER 1: Please ask questions and only state a dispute with an example to improve my understanding, this forum is intended to educate with an interactive environment.
  • Be open-minded and curious. Do not dismiss or ignore answers that challenge your reality or beliefs. Try to embrace them as opportunities to learn and grow. Try to approach them with logical, critical, and professional minds, and seek to understand the evidence and reasoning behind them.
  • Be empathetic and respectful. Do not judge or ridicule other people’s perspectives or experiences. Try to comprehend their viewpoints and appreciate their contributions to the larger and more intricate reality. Try to see how different perspectives can form a more complex and complete picture of the world.
  • Be honest and responsible. Always prioritize speaking the truth and avoid making definitive claims when uncertain. Use qualifiers like "about," "I saw," "I think," or "I believe" to convey information accurately.
  • Be clear about the source of your knowledge when sharing with others. This fosters a truthful and respectful environment for discussions.
  • Be relevant and on-topic. Do not deviate from the main topic of the forum. Do not post irrelevant or off-topic comments and links that aren't productive to the questions being discussed.
  • Be constructive and creative. Do not simply criticize or reject other people’s ideas. Try to offer positive feedback, suggestions, or alternatives.
  • Be clear and concise. Try to use clear and accurate language as much as possible. To have effective communication it is necessary to speak understandably.
Critical-Tim
Critical-Tim's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 902
3
2
7
Critical-Tim's avatar
Critical-Tim
3
2
7
Objectivity generally means the quality or state of being independent of the personal perspective, preferences, emotions, or imagination of a person or a group of people. An objective statement, judgment, or claim is based on observable facts and verifiable evidence that can be agreed upon by multiple observers. An objective reality is something that exists as it is, regardless of whether anyone perceives it or not.

Subjectivity generally means the quality or state of being dependent on the personal perspective, preferences, emotions, or imagination of a person or a group of people. A subjective statement, judgment, or claim is based on personal experience and individual interpretation that can vary from one observer to another. A subjective reality is something that exists in the mind, as opposed to the thing as it exists in itself.

The terms objectivity and subjectivity have different meanings and implications in different contexts and disciplines. For example:
  • In philosophy, objectivity and subjectivity are related to the nature of knowledge, truth, and reality. Philosophers debate whether we can ever know objective reality, or whether all knowledge is subjective and relative. Some philosophers argue that there are objective truths that are independent of human minds, while others argue that truth is always constructed by human language, culture, and history.
  • In ethics, objectivity and subjectivity are related to the nature of moral values, judgments, and actions. Ethicists debate whether there are objective moral standards that apply to all people at all times, or whether morality is subjective and depends on personal or cultural preferences. Some ethicists argue that there are universal moral principles that can be discovered by reason, while others argue that morality is a matter of emotion, intuition, or social convention.
  • In science, objectivity and subjectivity are related to the nature of scientific methods, observations, and explanations. Scientists aim to be as objective as possible in their research, by using empirical data, logical reasoning, and peer review to test their hypotheses and theories. However, scientists also acknowledge that there are subjective elements in their work, such as personal biases, assumptions, values, and interests that may influence their choices of topics, methods, interpretations, and conclusions.
The origins and translations of the words objectivity and subjectivity can also shed some light on their meanings and uses. The word objectivity comes from the Latin word objectivus, meaning “pertaining to an object”, while the word subjectivity comes from the Latin word subjectivus, meaning “pertaining to a subject”. The word object originally meant “something thrown before” (the mind or the senses), while the word subject originally meant “something placed under” (the authority or the judgment of another). These etymologies suggest that objectivity implies a sense of detachment, distance, and independence from one’s own perspective, while subjectivity implies a sense of involvement, attachment, and dependence on one’s own perspective.

Collectively cited by the following sources:
Critical-Tim
Critical-Tim's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 902
3
2
7
Critical-Tim's avatar
Critical-Tim
3
2
7
The main differences between the definitions of objectivity and subjectivity from Miriam Webster, Oxford, and Wikipedia:

Miriam Webster - Objectivity:
  • The quality or state of being true even outside of a subject’s individual biases, perspectives, and interpretations.
Miriam Webster - Subjectivity:
  • The quality or state of being based on or influenced by personal feelings, tastes, or opinions.

Oxford - Objectivity:
  • The quality or state of being not influenced by personal feelings or opinions in considering and representing facts.
Oxford - Subjectivity:
  • The quality or state of being dependent on the mind or on an individual’s perception for its existence.

Wikipedia - Objectivity:
  • The concept of being true independently from individual subjectivity
Wikipedia - Subjectivity:
  • The concept of being influenced by personal perspective, experience, or bias

As you can see, the definitions of objectivity and subjectivity are similar across the three sources, but they also have some variations in wording and emphasis. For example:
  • Miriam Webster uses the word true to describe objectivity, implying that there is a correspondence between reality and representation. Oxford uses the word facts, implying that there is a distinction between objective and subjective knowledge. Wikipedia uses the word concept, implying that objectivity is an abstract idea that may not be attainable in practice.
  • Miriam Webster uses the word biases to describe subjectivity, implying that there is a deviation from objectivity. Oxford uses the word feelings, implying that there is an emotional component to subjectivity. Wikipedia uses the word perspective, implying that there is a diversity of viewpoints among subjects.
  • Miriam Webster and Oxford use the word quality to describe both objectivity and subjectivity, implying that they are attributes or characteristics of something. Wikipedia uses the word concept to describe both objectivity and subjectivity, implying that they are notions or ideas that can be discussed or analyzed.


Critical-Tim
Critical-Tim's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 902
3
2
7
Critical-Tim's avatar
Critical-Tim
3
2
7
Latin:
  • objectivus, meaning “pertaining to an object”
  • subjectivus, meaning “pertaining to a subject”
The words objectivus and subjectivus were derived from the words objectum and subjectum, which were the past participles of the verbs obicio and subicio. These verbs meant “to throw before” and “to place under”, respectively. The words objectum and subjectum were used by medieval philosophers to refer to the logical categories of things that are predicated or asserted, and things that are the basis or foundation of predication or assertion. For example, in the statement “The sky is blue”, the sky is the subject and blue is the predicate. The words objectivus and subjectivus were used to describe the relation of these logical categories to the mind or the senses. For example, an objective thing was something that was presented to the mind or the senses, while a subjective thing was something that was dependent on the mind or the senses.

The words objectivus and subjectivus were used to describe the relation of logical categories to the mind or the senses. An objective thing was something that was presented to the mind or the senses, while a subjective thing was something that was dependent on the mind or the senses.

Greek:
  • antikeimenikos, meaning “opposed, contrary, or objective”
  • hypokeimenikos, meaning “underlying, fundamental, or subjective”
The words antikeimenikos and hypokeimenikos were derived from the words antikeimenon and hypokeimenon, which were the present participles of the verbs antikeimai and hypokeimai. These verbs meant “to lie opposite” and “to lie under”, respectively. The words antikeimenon and hypokeimenon were used by ancient philosophers to refer to the metaphysical categories of things that are opposed or contrary, and things that are underlying or fundamental. For example, in the theory of forms, the forms are the antikeimena, while the sensible things are the hypokeimena. The words antikeimenikos and hypokeimenikos were used to describe the nature or quality of these metaphysical categories. For example, an antikeimenikos thing was something that was objective, real, or universal, while a hypokeimenikos thing was something that was subjective, apparent, or particular.

The words antikeimenikos and hypokeimenikos were used to describe the nature or quality of metaphysical categories. An antikeimenikos thing was something that was opposedcontrary, or objective, while a hypokeimenikos thing was something that was underlyingfundamental, or subjective.

French:
  • objectif, meaning “objective, impartial, or goal”
  • subjectif, meaning “subjective, personal, or dependent”
The words objectif and subjectif were derived from the Latin words objectivus and subjectivus, but they also incorporated some influences from the Greek words antikeimenikos and hypokeimenikos. The words objectif and subjectif were used by modern philosophers to refer to the epistemological categories of things that are independent or impartial, and things that are dependent or influenced by personal feelings or opinions. For example, in the theory of knowledge, an objectif thing was something that was based on facts or evidence, while a subjectif thing was something that was based on experience or interpretation.

The words objectif and subjectif were used to describe the independence or dependence of epistemological categories on personal feelings or opinions. An objectif thing was something that was not influenced by personal feelings or opinions in considering and representing facts, while a subjectif thing was something that was based on or influenced by personal feelings, tastes, or opinions.

German:
  • objektiv, meaning “objective, factual, or real”
  • subjektiv, meaning “subjective, biased, or individual”
The words objektiv and subjektiv were derived from the Latin words objectivus and subjectivus, but they also incorporated some influences from the French words objectif and subjectif. The words objektiv and subjektiv were used by modern philosophers to refer to the ontological categories of things that are factual or real, and things that are biased or individual. For example, in the theory of reality, an objektiv thing was something that existed as it is, regardless of whether anyone perceives it or not, while a subjektiv thing was something that existed in the mind, as opposed to the thing as it exists in itself.

The words objektiv and subjektiv were used to describe the factualness or realness of ontological categories. An objektiv thing was something that was factualreal, or existing as it is, while a subjektiv thing was something that was biasedindividual, or existing in the mind.

English:
  • objective, meaning “independent of personal perspective or bias”
  • subjective, meaning “dependent on personal perspective or bias”
The words objective and subjective were derived from the Latin words objectivus and subjectivus, but they also incorporated some influences from the Greek, French, and German words antikeimenikos, hypokeimenikos, objectif, subjectif, objektiv, and subjektiv. The words objective and subjective were used by various fields of human inquiry to refer to different aspects or dimensions of things that are independent or dependent of personal perspective or bias. For example, in philosophy, objective and subjective refer to the nature of knowledge, truth, and reality; in ethics, objective and subjective refer to the nature of moral values, judgments, and actions; in science, objective and subjective refer to the nature of scientific methods, observations, and explanations; in grammar, objective and subjective refer to the grammatical case of nouns and pronouns; in history, objective and subjective refer to the degree of bias or interpretation in historical research and writing.

The words objective and subjective were used to refer to different aspects or dimensions of things that are independent or dependent of personal perspective or bias in various fields of human inquiry. For example, in philosophy, objective and subjective refer to the nature of knowledge, truth, and reality; in ethics, objective and subjective refer to the nature of moral values, judgments, and actions; in science, objective and subjective refer to the nature of scientific methods, observations, and explanations; in grammar, objective and subjective refer to the grammatical case of nouns and pronouns; in history, objective and subjective refer to the degree of bias or interpretation in historical research and writing.
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,062
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
"Independent of personal perspective or bias."

Is this possible?

How can we achieve a state of independence from ourselves and our independent functional processes.

Ask Tarik.
Critical-Tim
Critical-Tim's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 902
3
2
7
Critical-Tim's avatar
Critical-Tim
3
2
7
-->
@zedvictor4
No, it is most certainly impossible to view the world independent of personal perspective or bias. We are subjects of being and view everything through our perspective of the world. However, it is possible to strive towards viewing the world objectively, such as the Buddha, finding inner peace and self-detachment.
Athias
Athias's avatar
Debates: 20
Posts: 3,192
3
3
9
Athias's avatar
Athias
3
3
9
-->
@zedvictor4
"Independent of personal perspective or bias."

Is this possible?

How can we achieve a state of independence from ourselves and our independent functional processes.
Well asked. Perhaps this will be remembered when propositions of "external reality" are posited.

Athias
Athias's avatar
Debates: 20
Posts: 3,192
3
3
9
Athias's avatar
Athias
3
3
9
-->
@Critical-Tim
No, it is most certainly impossible to view the world independent of personal perspective or bias. We are subjects of being and view everything through our perspective of the world. However, it is possible to strive towards viewing the world objectively, such as the Buddha, finding inner peace and self-detachment.
In other words, strive towards an impossible end?
Critical-Tim
Critical-Tim's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 902
3
2
7
Critical-Tim's avatar
Critical-Tim
3
2
7
-->
@Athias
Striving towards objectivity is not that you will strive towards viewing the world independent of perception but independent of emotion, which often causes us to make unsound judgment and erroneous decisions. As a result, it is better to view the world through a non-emotional and self-detached state, often associated with the definition of objectivity, which is impossible to achieve, yet we are capable of striving towards and improving our decisions.
Athias
Athias's avatar
Debates: 20
Posts: 3,192
3
3
9
Athias's avatar
Athias
3
3
9
-->
@Critical-Tim
The utility one finds in one's, for lack of a better term, "method" of perspective is ultimately subject to individual discretion. I wouldn't state one is "better" than the other. Personally, I think it's all dependent on circumstance. There are certain circumstance where being emotional is appropriate. Though I do not maintain this as it concerns the subjects of debate.
Critical-Tim
Critical-Tim's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 902
3
2
7
Critical-Tim's avatar
Critical-Tim
3
2
7
-->
@Athias
I agree that emotions are important because they are necessary to have meaning. However, I believe emotions should never supersede an emotional detached standpoint. If my emotions tell me to buy an expensive car that I can barely afford this is unacceptable and I must think practically and in a way that my emotions disapprove, But in a circumstance where my emotionally detached self claims that neither option is optimal then my emotions can make the further choice. For example, two cars are practical and expense and affordable yet one I like over the other and therefore with the emotional detached self approving of both options the emotional side can then choose between those options.

12 days later

Critical-Tim
Critical-Tim's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 902
3
2
7
Critical-Tim's avatar
Critical-Tim
3
2
7
-->
@Athias
You were correct on the uselessness of the word objectivity. It is irrational to believe in a reality beyond perception without perceiving it. The word I was looking for and accidentally defined as the underlying consistency throughout subjectivity for a rational definition of objectivity, was actually the definition intersubjectivity.

In essence, objectivity is a theory, while subjective and intersubjective can be known.
Athias
Athias's avatar
Debates: 20
Posts: 3,192
3
3
9
Athias's avatar
Athias
3
3
9
-->
@Critical-Tim
You were correct on the uselessness of the word objectivity. It is irrational to believe in a reality beyond perception without perceiving it. The word I was looking for and accidentally defined as the underlying consistency throughout subjectivity for a rational definition of objectivity, was actually the definition intersubjectivity.

In essence, objectivity is a theory, while subjective and intersubjective can be known.
So we're back to square-one: on what basis is one "theorizing" objectivity, if a reality independent of perception can neither be experienced nor rationalized?

Critical-Tim
Critical-Tim's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 902
3
2
7
Critical-Tim's avatar
Critical-Tim
3
2
7
-->
@Athias
Theorizing objectivities existence is useless, since we can never prove nor experience objectivity. However, I would like to emphasize the importance I believe in recognizing intersubjective concepts and using them as the foundation for communication as they are mutually agreed being intersubjective.