If individual experiences are less valued than experiences we can share collectivley then what is that saying about our opinion of the individual.
2007-07-02 06:57:22 · 10 answers · asked by purplepeace59 5 in Arts & Humanities ➔ Philosophy
The idea of objectivity seemed to find a perfect niche in industrial society, where the individual is mostly taken as a means to an end, i.e. an instrument in the chain of production, so I think you're on to something.
I also think greater value is placed on objectivity in societies that are not particularly introspective (mainly the west) - This takes us far from classical Greek philosophy. Socrates would not have liked to see himself as the father of such a system of abnegation of the inner life of the soul. Subjective and objective also call to mind such dichotomies as inner life/outer life, etc..., meditative and active, etc...
A very powerful and compelling branch of western philosophy has made a systematic attack on all that is subjective, or personal, over the last few centuries. Theoretical justifications for this prove to be arbitrary, yet western thinkers still think it very compelling. There is certainly the effects of a society and a culture that is fearful and weary of the inner self at work here.
2007-07-02 07:09:51 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
You're trying to equate subjective reality to individuality and these terms are not interchangeable. Thus it means nothing to compare the two in this way. Subjective reality is the personal experience of reality supposedly unique to everyone. Individuality is a concept that embraces the importance of self or at least accepts the ideal that there is a self. I think that subjective reality and objective reality all fit comfortably within the realm of the individual as they are both manifestations of consciousness that are expressed and shared by individuals on a daily basis. The individual is not undervalued here because the individual is not in question.
2007-07-02 22:58:47 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
I understand that by objective you mean 'experiences we can share collectively'. If this is so then experiences identified, recognised as such and such, and then commonly shared or celebrated are the experience that act as bench marks for individuals. The objective is valued more the subjective only collectively or objectively, whereas each individual is suppose to value their own experiences with the collective approbation in view. In all good societies individual spirit never dies. And if an occasion arises it has been seen that it is often one single individual who come forward to cause a reform or a revolution. I think this is also the value of the collective to be a collective of valued individuals together through common goals, values and identities.
2007-07-02 07:17:17 · answer #3 · answered by Shahid 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Oh boy! Are you as frustrated with those answers as I am? In my opinion, it is MORE essential--not exclusive, but more--to have objective value to ground the meaning or purpose of my life. The reason: I'm not perceptive enough, nor powerful enough, nor responsible enough to be the final word on anything. I need things outside myself to set the standard for my beliefs, attitudes and many of my behaviors. For me, that objective standard is God. But that's a WHOLE other subject, isn't it?
2016-04-01 03:50:31 · answer #4 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Nothing. The collective experience is so rare that we marvel at it. But we consider the individual both objectively and subjectively. On rarest of occasion, the individual experience is so profound that, not do we marvel at it individually, but collectively.
2007-07-02 07:08:41 · answer #5 · answered by Sophist 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I value my experiences highly because I know them. I value yours less because I know only what you tell me of them. Most people feel this way, thus making individual experience MORE valued.
Only saints and some mystics value individual experience -- and individuals -- less.
2007-07-02 09:14:12 · answer #6 · answered by Grey Raven 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
I think it's an instinctive need to have a consensus reality that validates our individual or subjective experience. when it doesn't follow we start to unravel!!!!!!
and what that tells me about the 'opinion of the individual' is that he/she would probably like loads of people to agree with him ultimately...........there's safety in numbers.
2007-07-02 09:24:41 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
There are no individuals. There is no-one in the Universe.
2007-07-02 22:39:13 · answer #8 · answered by los 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
That your reasoning is circular, as it is individuals who form part of the collective group...
2007-07-02 07:05:52 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
NO. You are jumping to conclusions.
2007-07-02 07:04:33 · answer #10 · answered by ndmac 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋