I believe everyone can agree with is 'subjective' i.e. based on the personal perspective or preferences of a person, a subject.Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Tue Jan 16, 2024 9:42 pm So here. Here's another way of it being explained:
"Subjective most commonly means based on the personal perspective or preferences of a person—the subject who’s observing something.
In contrast, objective most commonly means not influenced by or based on a personal viewpoint—based on the analysis of an object of observation only."
(Dictionary.com)
However, what is 'objective' needs more refined and careful thinking;
The typical meaning of objective is,
"not influenced by personal feelings, interpretations, or prejudice; based on facts; unbiased:"
https://www.dictionary.com/browse/objective
What is fact?
"that which actually exists or is the case; reality or truth:"
https://www.dictionary.com/browse/fact
What is actual?
"existing in act or fact; real:"
What is real?
"existing or occurring as fact; actual rather than imaginary, ideal, or fictitious:"
What is true
"being in accordance with the actual state or conditions; conforming to reality or fact; not false:"
All the above meanings are from Dictionary.com
It is obvious from the above, what is objective is merely going round in circle and do not represent anything of substance, realistic or recognizable.
What is most recognizable as objective and factual [true, real, actual, ] are scientific facts.
But scientific facts only has 'currencies' as qualified to the human-based scientific framework and systems [scientific methods, peer review, etc.].
Since the ground of the scientific framework is human-based, it is based on a collective of subjects, i.e. inter-subjects interactions and consensus.
In this case, scientific facts as objective is based on intersubjective interactions consensus.
As such, what is objective is grounded on the subjective, albeit intersubjectivity via a collective-of-subjects.
And note, what is the the most real and objective scientific fact is at best a polished conjecture.
Realists will claim that there is something that is really real independent of the scientific methods.
This is merely a speculation and an ASSUMPTION.
To attempt to reify this assumption as real is delusional.
There are Two Senses of 'Objectivity'
viewtopic.php?f=8&t=39326
My point is;
What is objective [fact, real, actual, true] must always be qualified to a human-based Framework and System of Knowledge [FSK] [of varying degrees of objectivity within a continuum] of which the scientific FSK is the most credible and objective.
On this principle, we can have theological facts, truths and objectivity as conditioned to human based theological FSK.
But the objectivity of the theological FSK [based on faith] relative to the empirical based scientific FSK (as a standard index of 100/100) is merely at the other extreme of negligible objectivity.
So the question of what is objectivity must be deliberated within the above considerations without compromise.
Discuss??
Views?