Dear Classical Wisdom Reader, I remember the day vividly. I had moved to Moscow unwisely in the middle of winter, and finally, around four months later, the first real spring day had arrived. The sun bore her rays magnificently, forcing the city’s residents into an ant-like procession, navigating small trails between the remaining ice blocks and the rapidly increasing streams. It was a glorious day.
I prefer the terms True and False to Subjective and Objective. The latter terms invariably end in an argument about what you believe versus what I believe. In other words, we quickly become enmeshed in a world of subjectivity and the entire point of objective truth gets lost. Sticking with what is true(and what is not true) more easily avoids that trap.
Lots of very interesting questions there, but I’ll focus on “Is subjective EQUAL to objective?”. Starting with the elephant in the room: The blinded subjects are each perceiving a part of the whole elephant with a part of their senses. Mathematically, one side of the equation (the elephant) is much bigger than the other side. Therefore not “equal”.
Dec 4, 2023·edited Dec 4, 2023Liked by Classical Wisdom
Nearly everyone thinks they have access to the objective, but we only infrequently do.
We try to establish the objective in courts of law and in controlled experiments for example. But even those are often flawed and produce subjective or inconclusive results.
Our experience is highly subjective. This doesn’t mean objective reality does not exist. Neither does it mean we shouldn’t strive for truth and objectivity in many circumstances. But we should be careful we’re not labelling our subjective experience as objective — it is often tempting to think we know the whole truth about something when we don’t.
We should also not turn our noses up at the subjective, imo — it is totally crucial to relationships. Understanding others subjective experience is often a first step in making a convincing argument, a tempting offer, an effective olive branch, a potent attack, etc Many seem to think such doesn’t (or shouldn’t) matter in power and politics for example. But I think that is misguided. Leadership is much about making people feel safe and comfortable, secure and given a fair shot, relative to other opportunities. Meanwhile, resentment is a political poison for example. These things need to be managed and they are all tied up in feeling and emotion — the subjective.
Good Afternoon!. Of course, I'm typing this in the afternoon in Grand Prairie Texas, on Monday, and your time of reading this is probably different. So -
I am going to assume from the question an acceptance of "Objective Reality" outside of ourselves. I remember hearing in the 1980's that "perception is reality." This says that subjective reality is at least equal to objective reality. However, perception is not reality. We need to strive to bring our perceptions into closer and closer approximations of objective reality.
Why? You ask in your question "What does Truth matter if it doesn't impact us?" The answer is really, if it is Truth with a capital T, while it may not impact us right at this instant, it very well could at some point. I think it is important to recognized that we are always dealing with a subset of the available information, and even the available information is a subset of all the information. An example is the electromagnetic spectrum. Visible light is a small section of that spectrum, and through our sense organs not directly accessible. Yet, we have radio, X-rays, radar guns, etc. We cannot see radio waves but we made things that could so we could listen to music at home or in our cars broadcast from elsewhere. At one point radio waves didn't matter to anyone, now they matter to almost everyone.
Using the example of the blend men and the elephant, we have no choice but to use our perceptions and individual experiences to assess reality. But left out of that story is another potential that blind people have - they could talk to each other, compare notes, come feel what the other felt, and eventually through cooperation could have arrived at a more complete understanding of what an elephant is. It would always be incomplete, and that takes us back to the idea that we are always dealing with a subset of the available information. We can and should augment the information we can access through further experimentation, communication and collaboration.
Do we have a choice? Yes we do, but the choice we should make is to bring our perceptions into agreement with reality to the extent possible.
In summary, "At what point is our subjective view equal or more important than objective reality?" Answer: At the initial point of gathering information and working toward an understanding. We have our senses and our rational minds. That is the point at which we necessarily start and it is subjective. But, we should always be prepared to adjust our subjective view as more information becomes available. Here is the hard part - we will never have all the available information so we have to work with our subjective viewpoints.
"What does Truth Matter if it doesn't impact us?" Answer: It matters because cultivating a mind interested in Truth can keep you grounded and level headed and more able to respond to a given circumstance or crisis. Recall as well that while a Truth may not impact you now, it may in the future.
"Should we act according to our perceptions and individual experiences?" Answer: We don't really have much choice. What else are we going to react to? But, part of our individual experience should be a recollection that sometimes we are wrong, and need to reassess our perceptions to be more in accordance with reality.
"Do we have a choice?" Answer: Based on my arguments above, it would be easy to say no. But, we do have the choice to regularly check our assumptions and determine if they are still productive or need to change. We should treat all our decisions a provisional, yet go ahead and work with our best understanding until we have a better understanding. Then we should use the better. That is where choice comes into play.
Objective is external not totally in our control.. Subjective is individual perception based (6 blind wise guys) These two will always be at odds. It is in the 'NOW' they both merge and become reality.
Without an object, how can a subject be?
- Thich Nhat Hanh
I prefer the terms True and False to Subjective and Objective. The latter terms invariably end in an argument about what you believe versus what I believe. In other words, we quickly become enmeshed in a world of subjectivity and the entire point of objective truth gets lost. Sticking with what is true(and what is not true) more easily avoids that trap.
Lots of very interesting questions there, but I’ll focus on “Is subjective EQUAL to objective?”. Starting with the elephant in the room: The blinded subjects are each perceiving a part of the whole elephant with a part of their senses. Mathematically, one side of the equation (the elephant) is much bigger than the other side. Therefore not “equal”.
Nearly everyone thinks they have access to the objective, but we only infrequently do.
We try to establish the objective in courts of law and in controlled experiments for example. But even those are often flawed and produce subjective or inconclusive results.
Our experience is highly subjective. This doesn’t mean objective reality does not exist. Neither does it mean we shouldn’t strive for truth and objectivity in many circumstances. But we should be careful we’re not labelling our subjective experience as objective — it is often tempting to think we know the whole truth about something when we don’t.
We should also not turn our noses up at the subjective, imo — it is totally crucial to relationships. Understanding others subjective experience is often a first step in making a convincing argument, a tempting offer, an effective olive branch, a potent attack, etc Many seem to think such doesn’t (or shouldn’t) matter in power and politics for example. But I think that is misguided. Leadership is much about making people feel safe and comfortable, secure and given a fair shot, relative to other opportunities. Meanwhile, resentment is a political poison for example. These things need to be managed and they are all tied up in feeling and emotion — the subjective.
Good Afternoon!. Of course, I'm typing this in the afternoon in Grand Prairie Texas, on Monday, and your time of reading this is probably different. So -
I am going to assume from the question an acceptance of "Objective Reality" outside of ourselves. I remember hearing in the 1980's that "perception is reality." This says that subjective reality is at least equal to objective reality. However, perception is not reality. We need to strive to bring our perceptions into closer and closer approximations of objective reality.
Why? You ask in your question "What does Truth matter if it doesn't impact us?" The answer is really, if it is Truth with a capital T, while it may not impact us right at this instant, it very well could at some point. I think it is important to recognized that we are always dealing with a subset of the available information, and even the available information is a subset of all the information. An example is the electromagnetic spectrum. Visible light is a small section of that spectrum, and through our sense organs not directly accessible. Yet, we have radio, X-rays, radar guns, etc. We cannot see radio waves but we made things that could so we could listen to music at home or in our cars broadcast from elsewhere. At one point radio waves didn't matter to anyone, now they matter to almost everyone.
Using the example of the blend men and the elephant, we have no choice but to use our perceptions and individual experiences to assess reality. But left out of that story is another potential that blind people have - they could talk to each other, compare notes, come feel what the other felt, and eventually through cooperation could have arrived at a more complete understanding of what an elephant is. It would always be incomplete, and that takes us back to the idea that we are always dealing with a subset of the available information. We can and should augment the information we can access through further experimentation, communication and collaboration.
Do we have a choice? Yes we do, but the choice we should make is to bring our perceptions into agreement with reality to the extent possible.
In summary, "At what point is our subjective view equal or more important than objective reality?" Answer: At the initial point of gathering information and working toward an understanding. We have our senses and our rational minds. That is the point at which we necessarily start and it is subjective. But, we should always be prepared to adjust our subjective view as more information becomes available. Here is the hard part - we will never have all the available information so we have to work with our subjective viewpoints.
"What does Truth Matter if it doesn't impact us?" Answer: It matters because cultivating a mind interested in Truth can keep you grounded and level headed and more able to respond to a given circumstance or crisis. Recall as well that while a Truth may not impact you now, it may in the future.
"Should we act according to our perceptions and individual experiences?" Answer: We don't really have much choice. What else are we going to react to? But, part of our individual experience should be a recollection that sometimes we are wrong, and need to reassess our perceptions to be more in accordance with reality.
"Do we have a choice?" Answer: Based on my arguments above, it would be easy to say no. But, we do have the choice to regularly check our assumptions and determine if they are still productive or need to change. We should treat all our decisions a provisional, yet go ahead and work with our best understanding until we have a better understanding. Then we should use the better. That is where choice comes into play.
I think this is an interesting question. I've had this discussion with many people before, but it's always a good convo.
I'd propose, though, that it's difficult to establish "objective" where subjects are the ones determining what is "objective."
Objectiveness (is that word?) really only means that there are X number of subjective perceptions that agree on a given phenomenon.
So, I'd say subjective wins the day. There really is no objective that can get out from under a subject's perception.
Objective is external not totally in our control.. Subjective is individual perception based (6 blind wise guys) These two will always be at odds. It is in the 'NOW' they both merge and become reality.