This discussion is now closed.

Check out other Related discussions

objectivity

Realist101

13

can anyone claim to be truly objective or view things in an objective way?

what are your thoughts?

Reply 1

by-torslayshisfoe

Well we all view an objective reality in a subjective fashion. So in that sense, everything is perceived subjectively.

Two people can look at a painting, and one can think it's ugly, whilst the other thinks it's beautiful. But they're still looking at the same painting, can perceive the same colours, designs, etc.

And that doesn't mean that there are no objective things. If someone says that London is the capital of the UK, then this is objective and not really subject to individual feeling or interpretation.

Reply 2

Realist101

OP

13

ahh i see. keep em coming people.

Reply 3

RawJoh1

14

Browneyedboi

can anyone claim to be truly objective or view things in an objective way?

what are your thoughts?

We can access an objective reality, like numero_sept says.

Whether that objective reality includes things like morality or aesthetics is a different question. I happen to differ with numero_sept on this one.

Reply 4

Iago

1

If someone says that London is the capital of the UK, then this is objective and not really subject to individual feeling or interpretation.

Is it subject to feelings or interpretation? Perhaps not, with regard to the usual connotations of those terms.

But would London be the capital of the UK tomorrow if all humans were to die today? And what makes us want to say that London is the capital of the UK in the first place?

Imagine an extraterrestrial being, with no knowledge of or interest in human society, language or psychology, were to visit the large array of buildings and roads and so on gathered around the Thames, examining the area thoroughly, but never once speaking to any humans, and ignoring their behaviour. Would he be able to conclude that London was the capital of the UK?

Reply 5

wanderer

2

That's just because 'capital of the UK' wasn't a great example, because its a social fact. Something like 'the peak of everest is the highest point above sea level on earth' is probably better.

Reply 6

by-torslayshisfoe

Iago

Is it subject to feelings or interpretation? Perhaps not, with regard to the usual connotations of those terms.

But would London be the capital of the UK tomorrow if all humans were to die today? And what makes us want to say that London is the capital of the UK in the first place?

Imagine an extraterrestrial being, with no knowledge of or interest in human society, language or psychology, were to visit the large array of buildings and roads and so on gathered around the Thames, examining the area thoroughly, but never once speaking to any humans, and ignoring their behaviour. Would he be able to conclude that London was the capital of the UK?

It still is fact. Even if it's not some intrinsic law of the universe.

Reply 7

wanderer

2

numero sept

It still is fact. Even if it's not some intrinsic law of the universe.

The point is that its not really an objective fact, because 'capital of the UK' isn't a property that exists beyond human thought and interaction.

Reply 8

Iago

1

You're both missing the point slightly, in different directions. But that also kind of helps my point. I didn't make any statement about whether the fact was objective or subjective, I was just trying to show how muddy and particular and fuzzy and complex the whole issue starts to become when you merely begin to look concretely at specific examples. The OP posed a problem - what exactly is the dividing line between philosophical objectivity and subjectivity? Maybe the problem is itself the problem; maybe the problem is in the abstract theorising - the need to uncover some underlying nature or natures to certain parts of or facts in the world - that the problem presupposes.

It is a fact that London is the capital of the UK. This fact is not subject to feelings or interpretations. It is a social fact, arising from human interaction. I broadly agree with the previous 3 statements. "But is the fact subjective or objective?" - where has this question come from? What's hidden? What is missing from what we already know?

Reply 9

samba

6

phawkins1988

We can access an objective reality, like numero_sept says.

Whether that objective reality includes things like morality or aesthetics is a different question. I happen to differ with numero_sept on this one.

Can we. I'd say we can't prove anything more than an intersubjective reality personally.

Reply 10

rawkingpunkster

I believe nothing we know is objective. Everything in textbooks, website, all our knowledge... its not the true, objective knowledge. We just learn and accept whatever is written because humans are contented thinking that they know everything.

Why is blue called blue? Why is London called London, and not some other name, and why is it the capital. Everything that we know was "made up" or computed by us. So we won't really know whether that is objective or not.

In this world, objective truths are taken by consencus of the majority. As long as the majority agrees, it becomes taken to be true. Thats not my way of being objective..

Reply 11

Cookie The Blue Monster

The capital is only London because we say it is. If, say, the government conducts some meetings outside of London, is the capital still London?

Reply 12

by-torslayshisfoe

Iago

It is a fact that London is the capital of the UK. This fact is not subject to feelings or interpretations. It is a social fact, arising from human interaction. I broadly agree with the previous 3 statements. "But is the fact subjective or objective?" - where has this question come from? What's hidden? What is missing from what we already know?

But fact is objective, by definition. That doesn't matter whether it is a social fact or not.

Reply 13

by-torslayshisfoe

samba

Can we. I'd say we can't prove anything more than an intersubjective reality personally.

So if someone says that the moon is made of cheese or the Atlantic Ocean is comprised of fruit juice and not water, is this a valid part of that intersubjective reality?

Reply 14

by-torslayshisfoe

rawkingpunkster

I believe nothing we know is objective. Everything in textbooks, website, all our knowledge... its not the true, objective knowledge. We just learn and accept whatever is written because humans are contented thinking that they know everything.

Why is blue called blue? Why is London called London, and not some other name, and why is it the capital. Everything that we know was "made up" or computed by us. So we won't really know whether that is objective or not.

So if someone says the Sun is a star, is this not objective? It would only be our labelling it as a star that's human convention, not the base existence of it.

Reply 15

samba

6

numero sept

So if someone says that the moon is made of cheese or the Atlantic Ocean is comprised of fruit juice and not water, is this a valid part of that intersubjective reality?

if all us humans think the world is made of fruit juice, then of fruit juice it is made. It's a case of linguistics in my mind.

However if aliens from out of the galaxy, coming from a galaxy with different physics etc look through their telescope and perceive that the moon is made of cheese, to them that is reality.

Reply 16

samba

6

numero sept

But fact is objective, by definition. That doesn't matter whether it is a social fact or not.

Again, a matter of linguistics. If the ancient indians in x country always had the capital as the most northern city, and they came over here, then to them london would not be the capital.

Reply 17

Cookie The Blue Monster

numero sept

So if someone says that the moon is made of cheese or the Atlantic Ocean is comprised of fruit juice and not water, is this a valid part of that intersubjective reality?

You would find that a small percentage of the Atlantic Ocean corresponds to fruit juice - simply because someone had dumped a glass in one day. Similarly, you could find some level of similarity between the material of the moon and some form of cheese. It is our conventions that allow us to make claims against these, and those conventions are purely arbitrary.

Reply 18

by-torslayshisfoe

samba

if all us humans think the world is made of fruit juice, then of fruit juice it is made. It's a case of linguistics in my mind.

Bbut it's not simply a matter of "think". Saying oceans are made of fruit juice is not contrary with the evidence and mere empiricism. So not all knowledge is arbitrary if it can be verified.

However if aliens from out of the galaxy, coming from a galaxy with different physics etc look through their telescope and perceive that the moon is made of cheese, to them that is reality.

There is no different physics.

Reply 19

by-torslayshisfoe

Elmo The Blue Monster

You would find that a small percentage of the Atlantic Ocean corresponds to fruit juice - simply because someone had dumped a glass in one day.

Non sequitur.

Similarly, you could find some level of similarity between the material of the moon and some form of cheese. It is our conventions that allow us to make claims against these, and those conventions are purely arbitrary.

Again, it goes against the evidence at hand and basic empiricism.

objectivity

Related discussions

Latest

Trending

Trending

Articles for you