Subjective Judgments

[coberst]

Subjective Judgments

 

What do we mean when we consider one judgment to be subjective while another is objective?

 

I think that when a person, an agent, makes a judgment about an object we must take into account the stability of the agent and the stability of the object. When the object is another agent the stability is different than when the object is an inanimate thing with an essence that changes only under rare or substantial forces.

 

The agent has many forces working on her or him when a judgment is made. Depending upon the ability of the agent in dealing with those forces determines to some extent the variability of the agent.

 

In making a judgment regarding a matter of physics the agent can be considered to be very stable because the physicist is trained to disregard subjective forces plus the paradigm of that particular natural science places tremendous controls on the agent. Also inanimate objects are unlikely to disturb the agent to nearly the degree as does political and social thoughts.

 

The agent making judgments about political or social thought has tremendous internal forces pulling in an irrational direction plus the object of consideration is almost always one or more agents with tremendous irrational forces at work also. I guess that there are seldom if ever paradigms involved in political and social domains of knowledge.

[coberst]

The natural sciences deal only with entities that can be measured. For the natural sciences ‘to be is to be measurable’. The natural sciences deal only with objective judgments. Objective judgments are judgments dealing only with entities that can be measured.

 

Subjective judgments are about all other entities.

[InfiniteNow]

What do we mean when we consider one judgment to be subjective while another is objective?

 

I think that when a person, an agent, makes a judgment about an object we must take into account the stability of the agent and the stability of the object. When the object is another agent the stability is different than when the object is an inanimate thing with an essence that changes only under rare or substantial forces.

I can tell you what I mean...

 

I really see no difference between "objective" and "subjective" that is not itself subjectively imposed. Basically, it's ALL subjective, regardless of the object in question. It always passes through our perceptual filters, even mathematical equations. Also, there seems to be growing consensus in QM indicating that the observer is in large part within the system being studied, never truly absent from that system.

 

So, to answer your question, I consider the difference between a subjective and objective judgement to be a self-imposed paramater or semantic boundary, whereby one does little to minimize the impact of self and other the does much to minimize the impact of self.

[coberst]

I can tell you what I mean...

 

I really see no difference between "objective" and "subjective" that is not itself subjectively imposed. Basically, it's ALL subjective, regardless of the object in question. It always passes through our perceptual filters, even mathematical equations. Also, there seems to be growing consensus in QM indicating that the observer is in large part within the system being studied, never truly absent from that system.

 

So, to answer your question, I consider the difference between a subjective and objective judgement to be a self-imposed paramater or semantic boundary, whereby one does little to minimize the impact of self and other the does much to minimize the impact of self.

 

It certainly makes sense to me that measurability is an important and major consideration when making judgments.