Trajk Logik wrote: ↑Fri Aug 25, 2023 4:29 pmI don't see the distinction between "subject" and "object" as meaningful.
It's meaningful because it distinguishes what is true and false to most people. People, by default, cling to their subjective opinions as 'true', and confirm with their emotionality and personal sentiments. This is why most people are easily deceived by Western propaganda, indoctrination, religious dogma, etc. Logic, reason, and rationality help raise a person's mental faculties "out of" engrossment in subjective emotionality and sentimentality, to a degree. Most humans cannot use logic—and those that can, tend not to do it well, falling again and again into fallacious reasoning, usually returning back to appeals to emotion (Subjectivity).
Subjectivity refers to the strong bias an individual has, to his/her own preference, which can be manipulated, or flawed through many other, physical manners. People are born with genetic defects, for example. People have audial and visual 'blind spots'. And "objective" outlook, again, allows a person some mental abilities to compensate or 'overcome' these deficiencies, through greater knowledge, awareness, information. If you become aware of your visual blind-spots and deficiencies, for example, it would make you better at...baseball, tennis, racquet sports in general, anytime fast ball objects fly toward and away from you. MMA fighters, for example, take advantage of blind-spots and faints, to overcome other fighters.
I'm surprised that you don't see any of that as '
meaningful'...?
Trajk Logik wrote: ↑Fri Aug 25, 2023 4:29 pmWhen you are in a deep dreamless sleep do you become an object?
Kind of, yes...a comatose person loses their 'subjectivity' by how loss of consciousness represents deprivation of your Subjective experience/life.
Trajk Logik wrote: ↑Fri Aug 25, 2023 4:29 pmHow do you know you are the same subject when you wake up as you were when you went to sleep?
Memories,
You remember what you were before you went unconscious. If a person suffers Amnesia, then much of their Subjective-identity is lost.
Trajk Logik wrote: ↑Fri Aug 25, 2023 4:29 pmSubjectivity is relational information. It is information about objects relative to the observer. Consciousness is subjective in nature. Consciousness is an informational model of the world, or immediate environment relative to the observer imbedded in that world/environment. Consciousness not only includes information about the world, but the self as well. The difficulty in attaining objectivity is trying to separate the information in consciousness that is only about the world from the information about the self. Visual perceptions also include information about light in the environment. Turn out the lights or close your eyes and the visual information changes, but does that mean that the object you were observing changed?
You touch on a point I was hoping Skepdick would get to...in order to have 'Subjectivity', apart from Objectivity, the individual needs to
differentiate him/herself from the environment. That is your 'Identity'. Yes it is subjective, because identification "draws the line" between subject and object. Identification is the very distinction, of the S-O distinction.
So as Skepdick claimed, if you have no identity, then you have no subjectivity, and you are (...somehow) "the same as the environment", "at One with God" as the Abrahamics would interpret, or "at One with Nature" as the secularists would interpret.
Trajk Logik wrote: ↑Fri Aug 25, 2023 4:29 pmYour perspective of objects in the world only ever include one side of the object for a period of time. In a 4th dimensional world our two-dimensional perspective is missing information. In interacting with other observers occupying different spaces and/or different times can we try to achieve some semblance of objectivity.
Some say, probably you included, that objects are what is the case independent of any observer, or a view from nowhere. The observer effect in quantum mechanics seems to imply that objects are what is the case when they are observed - that objects exist as a measurement of some observer. The act of observing is actually taking a measurement. The question then is how is it that different observers can agree on what is there from their different perspectives. There must be something there independent of our observations that we can agree on, so it could be that the observer effect in QM is the result of an incomplete theory.
Yes I agree mostly, but I'd go further and claim that the object seen from multiple (Subjective) perspectives does not need 'agreement' to Exist objectively, but rather the 'agreement' is a confirmation among the Subjects, inter-subjectively. Like you mention, it is an avenue that the lesser and least self-conscious and self-awareness would interpret as 'Objective', compared to, perhaps the more intelligent, trustworthy, best capable of 'logical or rational' judgment, that the objective thing exists "beyond the senses".
I'd go further to say that yes, at a point, it does become a "leap of faith" to believe things exist which you cannot directly see or confirm. Does the Moon exist when you don't see it, or are asleep? Yes, but since it is not a matter of sensual appearance, it must be believed in. You believe the Moon is there, does not disappear, and holds to some type of Universal consistency or Natural Law, by which objects do not cease to exist, when unseen and unperceived: Metaphysics, Matter is not randomly created and destroyed, based on human perceptions.
Trajk Logik wrote: ↑Fri Aug 25, 2023 4:29 pmWhen I observe you, I see a body - a solid, physical object, not unlike a table or chair. I can only infer that there is a subjective consciousness as relational sensory information by the way you behave. You don't behave as if you occupy my space, or some other space, but your space. You move around objects and interact with them based on your position in space-time not some other, or others might believe you to be insane or hallucinating. The difference between your behavior and some other object is simply that you can act on information at a distance. You can move around other things in the environment without having to bump into them first. You use the light and air in the environment to inform you of the location of other objects in the environment (seeing and hearing). As such, your subjectivity is nothing special or distinguishable from an object. Only the degree of access to relational information (conscious awareness) and information retention (memory) (both of which entail subjectivity) that differs between objects.
Humanity has developed instincts, similar to other Mammals, that our Subjective perspectives and experiences are similar to our kinsmen and tribe. So a group of monkeys or gorillas, intuit that one-another (for example) has the same fear response to... a tiger, a lion, a snake, etc. Animals are affected emotionally, far before they are affected rationally.
So I think the presumption of a "shared consciousness", ties in directly to Subjectivity. There are deep levels of implicit trust between human strangers, on instinctual levels.
