Two Senses of 'Objective'

[Veritas Aequitas]

'Objective' is a very loose term but most of the moral fact deniers [PH & gang] are stuck with a dogmatic view of 'what is objective' within the Philosophical Realism perspective;

There are Two Senses of Objective: i.e.

• 1. Objectivity in the Philosophical Realism Sense
  2. Objectivity in the FSK Sense

Reflected in Dictionary Meanings;
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/objective
objective: adjective

• Philosophical Realism Sense
  2 a : of, relating to, or being an object, phenomenon, or condition in the realm of sensible experience independent of individual thought and perceptible by all observers : having reality independent of the mind
  
  ANTI-Philosophical_Realism FSK Sense
  1a : expressing or dealing with facts or conditions as perceived without distortion by personal [beliefs] feelings, prejudices, or interpretations
  
  2b: involving or deriving from sense perception or experience with actual objects, conditions, or phenomena
  
  2d: relating to or existing as an object of thought without consideration of independent existence —used chiefly in medieval philosophy

1. Objectivity in the Philosophical Realism Sense

Philosophical Realism is usually not treated as a position of its own but as a stance towards other subject matters.
Realism about a certain kind of thing is the thesis that this kind of thing has mind-independent existence, i.e. that it is not just a mere appearance in the eye of the beholder.
This includes a number of positions within epistemology and metaphysics which express that a given thing instead exists independently of knowledge, thought, or understanding.[4]
This can apply to items such as the physical world, the past and future, other minds, and the self, though may also apply less directly to things such as universals, mathematical truths, moral truths, and thought itself.
However, realism may also include various positions which instead reject metaphysical treatments of reality entirely.[5][6]

Realism can also be a view about the properties of reality in general, holding that reality exists independent of the mind, ... .
Philosophers who profess realism often claim that truth consists in a correspondence between cognitive representations and reality.[7]

Realists tend to believe that whatever we believe now is only an approximation of reality but that the accuracy and fullness of understanding can be improved.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophical_realism

Philosophical Realism sense of objectivity is to the extent that if no one is cognizing the moon, the moon still exists as real independent of any human entanglement.

As such, there are no objective moral facts because moral expressions can only be made by humans. If there are no humans there are no objective moral facts.

I have argued that Philosophical Realism is not realistic nor tenable.
What is deemed to be objective in this case is merely a thought and if claimed to be real, is merely a reification of an illusion - the thing-in-itself.

2. Objectivity in the FSK Sense
I have argued there is Scientific Objectivity within the Scientific FSK.
viewtopic.php?f=8&t=39286

My definition of what is objective and factual is that which is conditioned upon a specific Framework and System of Knowledge [FSK] or Reality [FSR].
As such objective scientific facts are grounded upon the scientific FSK.

Similarly as above, it is undeniable there are objective moral facts which must be grounded upon the scientific FSK and the specific moral FSK.
Objective moral facts in this case are not related to the subjective rightness or wrongness judgments, opinions and beliefs of individuals or groups that are not verified and justified.

So, when it is claimed the there are objective moral facts, they are claimed within sense 2 above, i.e. scientific objectivity and not in the Philosophical Realism sense of a thing-in-itself as the independent objective thing.

Objections:
The usual objection to the above is the "Objectivity in the FSK Sense" is still about objects of the external sense, i.e. mind-independent.
Response: The object in the FSR-FSK sense is a spontaneous emergence and is realized, thus precedes its perception, knowing, believing, describing or opining as explained below;

Reality: Emergence & Realization Prior to Perceiving, Knowing & Describing
viewtopic.php?f=8&t=40145
What is Emergence & Realization
viewtopic.php?t=40721

[Veritas Aequitas]

The various meaning of the loose term 'objective';

John Rawls on Moral Objectivity
According to Kantian Constructivism, moral Objectivity must be understood as a suitably constructed social point of view that could be accepted by all.
There are no moral facts outside the procedure of the construction of the principle of justice. [Justice-FSK]
Whether some facts will be recognized as reasons for law and justice, or what their weight will be, can only be known from the construction procedure, i.e. only from the actions of the rational actors of the construction when they are adequately presented as free and equal moral persons.
(I will discuss the claims from this paragraph in more detail in the third lecture.)
2nd Lecture: Kantian constructivism in moral theory*
John Rawls

Types of Objectivity
Objectivity (philosophy), the property of being independent from perception

Objectivity (science), the goal of eliminating personal biases in the practice of science

Journalistic objectivity, encompassing fairness, disinterestedness, factuality, and nonpartisanship
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Objectivity


Dictionary
objective: adjective
1a : expressing or dealing with facts or conditions as perceived without distortion by personal [beliefs] feelings, prejudices, or interpretations
1b of a test : limited to choices of fixed alternatives and reducing subjective factors to a minimum

2 a : of, relating to, or being an object, phenomenon, or condition in the realm of sensible experience independent of individual thought and perceptible by all observers : having reality independent of the mind
2b: involving or deriving from sense perception or experience with actual objects, conditions, or phenomena
2c of a symptom of disease : perceptible to persons other than the affected individual
2d: relating to or existing as an object of thought without consideration of independent existence —used chiefly in medieval philosophy

3 : relating to, characteristic of, or constituting the case of words that follow prepositions or transitive verbs
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/objective


Objectivity adjective
being the object or goal of one's efforts or actions.
not influenced by personal feelings, interpretations, or prejudice; based on facts; unbiased:
an objective opinion.

intent upon or dealing with things external to the mind rather than with thoughts or feelings, as a person or a book.

being the object of perception or thought; belonging to the object of thought rather than to the thinking subject (opposed to subjective).
of or relating to something that can be known, or to something that is an object or a part of an object; existing independent of thought or an observer as part of reality.

Grammar.
pertaining to the use of a form as the object of a transitive verb or of a preposition.
(in English and some other languages) noting the objective case.
similar to such a case in meaning.

(in case grammar) pertaining to the semantic role of a noun phrase that denotes something undergoing a change of state or bearing a neutral relation to the verb, as the rock in The rock moved or in The child threw the rock.

being part of or pertaining to an object to be drawn:
an objective plane.

Medicine/Medical. (of a symptom) discernible to others as well as the patient.

...........

https://www.dictionary.com/browse/objective
noun
something that one's efforts or actions are intended to attain or accomplish; purpose; goal; target:
the objective of a military attack;
the objective of a fund-raising drive.

Grammar.
Also called ob·jec·tive case [uhb-jek-tiv keys] . (in English and some other languages) a case specialized for the use of a form as the object of a transitive verb or of a preposition, as him in The boy hit him, or me in He comes to me with his troubles.
a word in that case.
Also called object glass, object lens, ob·jec·tive lens [uhb-jek-tiv lenz] .Optics. (in a telescope, microscope, camera, or other optical system) the lens or combination of lenses that first receives the rays from the object and forms the image in the focal plane of the eyepiece, as in a microscope, or on a plate or screen, as in a camera.

.............

.............................
Objectivity, a YouTube channel by Brady Haran
Principle of material objectivity, a principle in continuum mechanics

[FlashDangerpants]

My definition of what is objective

Erm...

[tillingborn]

My definition of what is objective

Erm...

Nicely put.

[Skepdick]

My definition of what is objective

Erm...

That's the "words have objective meaning" gambit...

[Iwannaplato]

My definition of what is objective

Erm...

That's the "words have objective meaning" gambit...

That's the 'this is a reaction as if this wasn't to a specific person in a specific concept' generalization miss.
Yes, certainly, a good number of people could begin a useful discussion of objectivity with a sentence beginning like that. But there's history here with old VA, a history that include sliding definitions when he realizes his old usage/definition led to problems (without acknowledging that), skipped steps, presenting his version, which is marginal, as if it was obviously central/universal/main or objective definition/usage (in the midst of condensension from title to posts) and blurry posting, like the above, where phrases like 'conditioned upon' for example 'science' without acknowledging the steps in his process that are not 'from that FSK' as he would say.

In the context of VA's posts setting up a flag on that sentence beginning is fair enough. Even sentence beginnings mean, highlight and point to different things in different contexts. It's not just words that don't have objective meanings, chunks don't either. And from VA that chunk means, to me, in part, warning, troubled mishmash ahead.....

(I enjoyed our dialogue in the paradigms thread. It brought into focus much of my own, hm, processes and leanings. And it was interesting in general. Thank you.)

[Impenitent]

My definition of what is objective

Erm...

That's the "words have objective meaning" gambit...

thus spake Webster...

-Imp

[Veritas Aequitas]

Sure, I was just responding to you saying you don't rule it out, explaining what I rule out and why. I'm not afraid of expressing a little bit of confidence towards that position, I think my take on that is more or less correct, "objectivist" though I may be. And maybe I'm wrong in the end, that's okay. Incorrect isn't the worst thing someone can be, not even for a poor ol' objectivist like myself.

(Just for the record, for any potential audience, I don't actually identify as an objectivist in any meaningful way)

Note,
Two Senses of 'Objective'
viewtopic.php?f=8&t=39326

So, you're a so-so objectivist in which of the senses or in both senses?


Do you agree with Scientific Objectivity?
Scientific Objectivity
viewtopic.php?f=8&t=39286

[Agent Smith]

As it seems to me, the problem is quite simple - we're, it seems, in the grips of a delusion or, more accurately, we've failed to notice the obvious, a moral truth that's staring us in the face, but that's a forgivable oversight, animals that we are.

[Flannel Jesus]

So, you're a so-so objectivist in which of the senses or in both senses?

I don't call my self an objectivist in any sense

[popeye1945]

The only world you know is a subjective one.

[Veritas Aequitas]

The only world you [subject] know is a subjective one.

This is merely a truism and will not contribute significantly to the progress [moral and otherwise] of humanity.

[Agent Smith]

I suggest we start off with some basic facts about ethics/morality. What is ethics exactly; I'm especially concerned about its scope vis-à-vis the morally relevant; bracket out deeds, what's left? I'm convinced that Maya has pulled the wool over our eyes. As of this moment, I see peoples at different depths so to speak with obvious consequences in re lumen rationale.

I've pointed to certain key variables I feel are operating in territorium ethica. A little ratiocination should be able to shed much needed light on the matter at hand.

[Veritas Aequitas]

Some edited points to the OP:

'Objective' is a very loose term but most of the moral fact deniers [PH et. al.] are stuck with a dogmatic view of 'what is objective' within the Philosophical Realism perspective.
PH et. al. 'claim' that 'Morality Cannot Be Objective' is fatuous with no credibility.

What PH et. al are ignorant is;

There are Two Senses of Objective: i.e.

• 1. Objectivity in the Philosophical Realism Sense
  2. Objectivity in the FSK Sense

As per: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/objective

• Philosophical Realism Sense
  2 a : of, relating to, or being an object, phenomenon, or condition in the realm of sensible experience independent of individual thought and perceptible by all observers : having reality independent of the mind
  
  ANTI-Philosophical_Realism FSK Sense
  1a : expressing or dealing with facts or conditions as perceived without distortion by personal [beliefs] feelings, prejudices, or interpretations
  
  2b: involving or deriving from sense perception or experience with actual objects, conditions, or phenomena
  
  2d: relating to or existing as an object of thought without consideration of independent existence [used chiefly in medieval philosophy]

1. Objectivity in the Philosophical Realism Sense
Philosophical Realism sense of objectivity is to the extent that if no one is cognizing the moon, the moon still exists as real & independent of any human entanglement.
As such, there are no objective moral facts because moral expressions can only be made by humans. If there are no humans there are no objective moral facts.

I have argued that Philosophical Realism is not realistic nor tenable.
What is deemed to be objective in this case is merely a thought and if claimed to be real, is merely a reification of an illusion - the thing-in-itself.

As such PH et. al. 'claim' that 'Morality Cannot Be Objective' is fatuous with no credibility.

2. Objectivity in the FSK Sense
I have argued there is Scientific Objectivity within the Scientific FSK.
viewtopic.php?f=8&t=39286

My definition of what is objective and factual is that which is conditioned upon a specific Framework and System of Knowledge [FSK] or Reality [FSR].
As such objective scientific facts are grounded upon the scientific FSK.

Similarly as above, it is undeniable there are objective moral facts which must be grounded upon the scientific FSK and the specific moral FSK.
Objective moral facts in this case are not related to the subjective rightness or wrongness judgments, opinions and beliefs of individuals or groups that are not verified and justified.

So, when it is claimed the there are objective moral facts, they are claimed within sense 2 above, i.e. scientific objectivity and not in the Philosophical Realism sense of a thing-in-itself as the independent objective thing.

Objections:
The usual objection to the above is the "Objectivity in the FSK Sense" is still about objects of the external sense, i.e. mind-independent.
Response: The object in the FSR-FSK sense is a spontaneous emergence and is realized, thus precedes its perception, knowing, believing, describing or opining as explained below;

Reality: Emergence & Realization Prior to Perceiving, Knowing & Describing
viewtopic.php?f=8&t=40145
What is Emergence & Realization
viewtopic.php?t=40721

[Atla]

Some edited points to the OP:

'Objective' is a very loose term but most of the moral fact deniers [PH et. al.] are stuck with a dogmatic view of 'what is objective' within the Philosophical Realism perspective.
PH et. al. 'claim' that 'Morality Cannot Be Objective' is fatuous with no credibility.

What PH et. al are ignorant is;

There are Two Senses of Objective: i.e.

• 1. Objectivity in the Philosophical Realism Sense
  2. Objectivity in the FSK Sense

As per: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/objective

• Philosophical Realism Sense
  2 a : of, relating to, or being an object, phenomenon, or condition in the realm of sensible experience independent of individual thought and perceptible by all observers : having reality independent of the mind
  
  ANTI-Philosophical_Realism FSK Sense
  1a : expressing or dealing with facts or conditions as perceived without distortion by personal [beliefs] feelings, prejudices, or interpretations
  
  2b: involving or deriving from sense perception or experience with actual objects, conditions, or phenomena
  
  2d: relating to or existing as an object of thought without consideration of independent existence [used chiefly in medieval philosophy]

1. Objectivity in the Philosophical Realism Sense
Philosophical Realism sense of objectivity is to the extent that if no one is cognizing the moon, the moon still exists as real & independent of any human entanglement.
As such, there are no objective moral facts because moral expressions can only be made by humans. If there are no humans there are no objective moral facts.

I have argued that Philosophical Realism is not realistic nor tenable.
What is deemed to be objective in this case is merely a thought and if claimed to be real, is merely a reification of an illusion - the thing-in-itself.

As such PH et. al. 'claim' that 'Morality Cannot Be Objective' is fatuous with no credibility.

2. Objectivity in the FSK Sense
I have argued there is Scientific Objectivity within the Scientific FSK.
viewtopic.php?f=8&t=39286

My definition of what is objective and factual is that which is conditioned upon a specific Framework and System of Knowledge [FSK] or Reality [FSR].
As such objective scientific facts are grounded upon the scientific FSK.

Similarly as above, it is undeniable there are objective moral facts which must be grounded upon the scientific FSK and the specific moral FSK.
Objective moral facts in this case are not related to the subjective rightness or wrongness judgments, opinions and beliefs of individuals or groups that are not verified and justified.

So, when it is claimed the there are objective moral facts, they are claimed within sense 2 above, i.e. scientific objectivity and not in the Philosophical Realism sense of a thing-in-itself as the independent objective thing.

Objections:
The usual objection to the above is the "Objectivity in the FSK Sense" is still about objects of the external sense, i.e. mind-independent.
Response: The object in the FSR-FSK sense is a spontaneous emergence and is realized, thus precedes its perception, knowing, believing, describing or opining as explained below;

Reality: Emergence & Realization Prior to Perceiving, Knowing & Describing
viewtopic.php?f=8&t=40145
What is Emergence & Realization
viewtopic.php?t=40721

Universal subjectivity is the new objective. One step forward, ten steps back. Well done.