English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

11 answers

All knowledge seems to have a subjective element in the understanding that there must be a knowing subject in order for something to be known. Your very physical vantage point shows that your view of the same object will be subjective. This does not carry with it, however, total relativity for at the same time knowledge may be said to be objective in the understanding that there is an object to inquiry. This, though, does not mean that one is never influenced by one's own subjectivity. Try as one might, the conclusions that one will reach from observation will always be a function of one's own past. There is no escaping this. The important thing to realize, though, is that this does not mean that one cannot know an object with a great amount of accuracy. One is able to distinguish between the knowing subject and the known object in the act of consciousness which is composed of sensory experience. The tricky part is to be rigorous with one's subjectivity.

I would offer the idea, though, that we approach truth asymptotically. We are constantly approaching truth, but by the very fact that we are subjects we will never know the object as the object is totally in itself.

2007-03-04 14:43:03 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Yes. I think this is very true and a lot of people are in denial on this particular point. Knowledge, however obtained, is only objective from our given experience of existence in a realm of chance and change.

One should take care not to define subjectivity as negative or objectivity as nothing but a lack of subjectivity. Often objectivity is used to support a subjective position; supports an agenda first and objectivity second. It is interesting that claims of objectivity are so often confined to peer groups.

Human knowledge is both subjective and transitory. For some subjectivity is the enemy. For others it stands as a given and continual source of human understanding. This can be seen in poetry, literature, music, art, religion and numerous schools within human study including psychology and philosophy. The list goes on.

Another way to put the questions is: Does objectivity produce the only worthwhile knowledge?

There is an old story about a college grad that entered Boston Theological Seminary. He came home his freshman year and his mom asked: "How was school?" He replied, "It was great mom. Interesting classes. Got a good room with a view. The food is fine and just a great bunch of people."

The second years he comes home and his mom asks: "How was school this year?" He replies, "Relative to what?" You could say this is a story about some peoples production of 'objective knowledge.'

2007-03-05 00:16:37 · answer #2 · answered by Tommy 6 · 0 0

im afraid u have ur pants-in-a-twist,my friend.

For it is taught that knowledge is subjective-even so-called
science(teachers and researchers) teaches this,as well as
philosophy.
But their is a small and of course growing school of
thought(and research) which teaches and can show that
knowledge,even scientific,is objective.
Obviously they have an
uphill task,so to speak. But all life is a risk- this is taught as
simple darwinism,as everyone knows. And it can be shown that
the only place for "subjective knowledge",as it rightly should be
written, is Art;( but not art-history and the like!)

2007-03-04 22:59:36 · answer #3 · answered by peter m 6 · 0 0

If that were true then the physical world would also be subjective. The problem I think lies in the fact that everyone contains this subjective knowledge, so the substance of this knowledge could never be discerned, weighed, or studied.

2007-03-04 22:38:50 · answer #4 · answered by Julian 6 · 0 0

Nope.

A fact is a fact. However . . . .

The USE of knowledge is subjective, the PURSUIT of knowledge is subjective, and the ability to RECEIVE knowledge is subjective.

2007-03-04 22:44:53 · answer #5 · answered by freebird 6 · 0 0

Wouldn't have it any other way. Only the subjective matter personally to me. I have no emotive force to involve myself with the objective. I get no kick from champagne.

2007-03-04 22:43:45 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Yes. Its subjective according to who's paying out the grant money and/or who has the greatest influince.

2007-03-04 23:07:26 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Yes.

2007-03-06 03:38:39 · answer #8 · answered by love all 6 · 0 0

Yup.

2007-03-04 22:39:11 · answer #9 · answered by Fatsy Patsy 3 · 1 0

ALL KNOLEDGE IS SUBJECTIVE ONLY LOVE OF GOD IS OBJECTIVE.

2007-03-06 03:20:41 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers