§3. Subjective and objective opinion. Subjective opinion - what does it mean? Subjective and objective opinion - what is the difference
Our thinking is subjective if our starting point is within us and we are focused on expressing our feelings and satisfying personal needs. To think objectively, the starting point must be outside of our “I”, and personal feelings and desires should not influence the understanding of cause-and-effect relationships. Objective thinking attempts to define cause-and-effect relationships in terms of actions rather than feelings, for actions are visible, accessible events, while feelings are internal and private events. Feelings cannot be confirmed objectively, so they have no place in objective thinking.
The question arises: can thinking be completely separated from feeling? In fact, if you think about what constitutes objective, that is, unemotional thinking, it turns out that this concept is more controversial than emotional or subjective thinking. If the mind is completely separated from the feelings, then it turns into a computer that operates only with the information loaded into it. This is programmed thinking. In some exceptional situations the human mind is capable of such functioning. The thinking of a student solving a geometric problem resembles the action of a computer. The student tries to use all the information he has about geometry to solve the problem. If there is not enough information, then the task will remain unsolved, since neither feelings nor personal experience can help him with this.
While a person is alive, his body sends impulses to the brain, informing it about its activities and producing sensations, feelings and thoughts. In the midst of the most abstract reasoning, our mind is not free from the intrusion of personal considerations. We are aware of feelings of irritation, frustration, excitement or calm. Such intrusions make it difficult for objective thinking to work, and it often takes considerable willpower to maintain focused attention on an impersonal problem. Intrusions are minimal when the body is in a state of pleasure and problem solving requires creative effort. Under such conditions, the mind is least likely to be distracted. However, such conditions are rare in a culture or educational system that denies the role of pleasure in the creative process.
If an individual is forced to struggle with painful feelings that invade his consciousness, objective thinking becomes a matter of self-discipline. Painful feelings always cause more excitement than pleasant ones, since pain is interpreted as a signal of danger. To think objectively when the body experiences pain or lack of pleasure, a person must dull these sensations by reducing the sensitivity of the body. This isolation separates the mind from the body and makes a person's thinking mechanical or computerized. Creative thinking, which depends on the free flow of thoughts, occurs only when the body is aware, receptive and free. We cannot help but come to the conclusion that human thinking and, probably, its content cannot be completely free from the emotional mood of the body.
Objective thinking becomes even more difficult if a person tries to be objective about his own behavior. Since behavior is largely driven by feelings, a person must be fully aware of his feelings in order to evaluate his behavior objectively. For example, if a person is not aware of his hostility, he will attribute his negative reaction to other people's hostile feelings towards him. He does not see his actions the way others see them, and therefore is unable to appreciate his role in causing the negative reaction. Without awareness of one's own emotions and motives, a person cannot be completely objective about himself. All the intellect can do is evaluate the logic of human reasoning based on perceived feelings. But if a person is aware of his feelings and is able to express them subjectively, then he can take a truly objective position. He might say, for example, “I feel my hostility and understand why people react negatively to me.” True objectivity requires due subjectivity.
We are much more objective in assessing the behavior of other people than our own. In counseling couples, I have discovered that each spouse clearly sees the other's shortcomings, while being unaware of their own. An old French proverb says that a man is like a postman carrying a double sack of mail slung over his shoulder. The bag in front contains the shortcomings of other people, and in the back contains his own weaknesses. The point is that each of us is blind to our own shortcomings. We literally do not see ourselves; we can only feel what is happening in our bodies. For this reason, I have made it a rule not to argue with those who criticize my behavior. I acknowledge that criticism may not be entirely undeserved.
To be truly objective, a person must recognize and acknowledge his personal attitudes or feelings. Without this subjective basis, an attempt at objectivity turns into pseudo-objectivity. The psychological term for pseudo-objectivity is rationalization. The mechanism of rationalization consists of denying the subjective feeling that motivates a thought or action and justifying one's own attitude or behavior by logical conclusions. When a person says: “I did this because...”, he places responsibility for his behavior on some external force. Sometimes this may be justified, but more often it is nothing more than an excuse for an unsuccessful or inappropriate action. Only such self-justifications rarely satisfy another person. Instead of going into reasons, it would be better to express your feelings and desires. Will Durand noted that “reason, as any schoolgirl today will tell us, serves only as a technique for rationalizing desire.”*
Objective thinking does little to resolve the problems and conflicts that confront us day after day. No mother could communicate with her child on the basis of objective thinking. If she interprets the baby's cry correctly, it is because she senses the feeling behind the cry and responds to the baby's need with feeling. A mother who tries to be objective towards her own children rejects her natural function and, in effect, abandons her children. She is no longer a mother, but some kind of impersonal force. One person cannot relate to another objectively, since objective relationships turn people into objects.
Thinking cannot be separated from feelings. Since everything a person does is determined by his desire for pleasure or the avoidance of pain, not a single act of his can be completely impartial, and not a single action can contain personal interest. Any thought is associated with a feeling, and it will either support the feeling or contradict it, depending on the character structure of the individual. In a healthy person, thinking and feeling run parallel to each other, reflecting the unity of the personality. In a neurotic, thinking is often opposed to feeling, especially in cases where there is conflict. The schizophrenic condition is characterized by a dissociation of thinking and feeling, which is one of the typical symptoms of this disease.
In the process of psychiatric work, the helplessness of objective thinking in solving emotional problems becomes obvious. Such thinking is essentially a form of resistance to the therapeutic effort because it maintains the state of dissociation that underlies the emotional disturbance. Any analytical technique, from psychoanalysis to bioenergetics, is aimed at breaking through the patient's pseudo-objectivity to his feelings. Until this happens, communication between doctor and patient remains an intellectual exercise that has no effect on the latter's behavior. As a rule, the most difficult patient is the one who maintains intellectual detachment and detachment from therapeutic efforts.
In light of this fact, one can only wonder why objective thinking is treated with such respect and why the ability to think abstractly is considered the greatest achievement of the human mind. The main emphasis in our educational process is on developing this ability. The reasons for such popularity lie on the surface. Objective thinking, especially abstract thinking, is the main source of knowledge, and knowledge is power. In any civilized society there is a hierarchy of power. The person who has or bestows power occupies the highest position in such a society. Knowledge is an important component of the stability and security of society. However, their importance in ensuring the emotional health of the individual is not great.
Creative thinking, on the other hand, is firmly rooted in a subjective attitude. All significant works of philosophy are biased and very subjective, which is obvious to the receptive reader. Such a personal or subjective orientation not only gives a special flavor to a philosophical creation, but also turns the fruit of intellectual labor into a human document. A book lacking this quality is dry and uninteresting. All other forms of creative thinking, be it science, art or just life, originate in a subjective attitude. This is not to say that a creative person is not able to think abstractly, quite the opposite. However, his abstractions arise from and reflect feelings. Subjectivity and abstract thinking become one.
People are not used to thinking creatively because they have given up subjective thinking. They have been trained to regard such thinking as inferior; do not trust feelings and justify your actions using logical reasoning; not considering pleasure as a worthy goal in life. As a result, their intellectual abilities are either used to rationalize behavior or are occupied with solving non-personal problems. It is not uncommon to find a good abstract thinker who lacks what is called common sense.
Thinking begins with feeling and develops from the need to adapt our actions to the reality of our situation. It ends with a wisdom that recognizes man's connection to the universe of which he is a part. The essence of wisdom, as the great Socrates noted, is to “know yourself.” A person who does not know himself cannot think for himself and is not able to think creatively.
Any person thinks and makes his own conclusions about his knowledge and feelings. Feelings, as we know, are purely individual. Even the understanding of such a simple feeling differs among different people, which is reflected not only in everyday life, but also.Thus, a person's point of view and his worldview are based on his experiences. Despite the fact that the experience may be the same, its interpretation will be different for an individual person, different from many others - it will be subjective.
It turns out that each person has his own subjective opinion and, almost every day, encounters other subjective opinions of friends, acquaintances, etc. On the basis of this, disputes and discussions arise between people, science develops and progress moves forward.
Subjective opinion is something that is inherent in one person, an individual representation of the environment based on one’s own emotions and thoughts.
Objectivity and objective opinion
Objective thinking is not characteristic of any person. Although it is believed that the broader a person’s horizons, the more objectivity in his opinion, the very concept of “objectivity” is much broader.Objectivity is a property of an object that is independent of a person, his desires and opinions. Therefore, such a concept as “objective opinion” in its literal sense cannot exist.
What then do people mean when they use this expression? More often, the title of a person with an objective opinion is given to someone who is not involved in any situation and, being outside it, can assess what is happening “from the outside.” But even this person views the world through the prism of his personal ideas.
An objective opinion can also include a set of subjective opinions. But there are also pitfalls here. If you put all the opinions together, you get a huge tangle of contradictions from which it is impossible to deduce.
Contradictions and absolute truth
Science strives for objectivity. The laws of physics, mathematics, and other scientific fields exist regardless of human knowledge and experience. But who discovers these laws? Of course, scientists. And scientists are ordinary people, with a large supply of scientific knowledge based on the experience of other scientists, etc.It turns out that understanding all the open laws of the Universe is an ordinary accumulation of subjective opinions. In philosophy, there is the concept of objectivity, as the sum of all possible subjective options. But no matter how many of these options exist, it is impossible to put them together.
Thus, the concept of absolute truth was born. Absolute truth is an exhaustive understanding of what exists, the most “objective objectivity” and it is impossible to achieve such an understanding, as philosophers say.
Therefore, having heard “from an objective point of view”, treat the following words critically and do not forget that for any “objective opinion”, if you wish, you can find a dozen more objective objections.
Is it possible to completely, completely and undoubtedly trust the ideas of modern science? If, as is well known from history, she changed her views quite dramatically?! And it will change!
Is truth what is “objective”? And what is “objectively” true?
What is “objectivity”?
Is it all that is the same or close to each other for all perceiving people? Or at least for most people?
The majority, for example, believes that this is black, and that is white, and therefore this statement is considered “true”. And some of the minority are sure that there are at least fifty shades of gray and forty shades of green! And after some time, “suddenly” the majority changes their opinion and agrees that there are many shades of colors... And this new idea becomes “objective”... That is, “objective” is not necessarily “true”!
It is believed that the “objective” does not depend on the desires and opinions or abilities of an individual, specific person. A person can “see” and “hear” only as much as his personal limitations and technical capabilities allow!
Is it possible to treat yourself “objectively”?
The question is, of course, interesting. You usually treat yourself well. So? Well, it’s unpleasant, uncomfortable to treat yourself badly, although you may not be a very good person. Objectively. Otherwise there will be depression.
- What does this word “objectively” mean, anyway?
- It means that it is not “subjective”!
It seems understandable, at first glance, as with all words that are obviously “understandable” to the level of understanding of children...
Looking at this sad world, I came to the unequivocal conclusion that any (!!!) information, any events are perceived by most people not as a set of facts, not as something supposedly “objective” or “subjective”...
Each person obviously has a well-defined general “picture of an event”, a “picture of the world”, a set of cliches, clichés, cells... A person is used to understanding everything exactly the way he is used to... Quite sincerely. And such people perceive everything only in the paradigm, only within the framework and channels of these ideas. Everything that does not fit their pre-existing attitude and way of understanding is discarded, not noticed, it is not given significant meaning, it is not noticed...
For example, someone A is a scoundrel. It's "known". B - good. It's "obvious". S - good. This is what all my friends think, for example. D - bad. Well known...
The person sincerely believes in this. But an ordinary person is intellectually weak and lazy... Unconsciously or subconsciously, a person has what “in fact” is true for him. That is all.
No matter what happens, no matter what a person is told, such a person will interpret everything within the framework of these general template, stereotypical understandings and ideas.
Most people are “zombified” by a set of “historically” developed ideas about everything... Especially adults. It is very difficult for a person to go beyond his cliched thinking. It's convenient, it doesn't require much mental effort... It's understandable. It's not annoying...
You can never “out-argue” such people. And don't! Let them go through their forest... Even the grave will not correct the hunchbacks...
“Objective” is something that is necessarily true for all people!? So? An objective attitude, an objective opinion, an objective judgment, objectivity - this is all that does not depend on the personal qualities of a person, is not subjective, personal. And with the word “subjective” we characterize something specific, personal, individual, our own, inherent only in a given individual, a specific person.
“Objectively” - this means completely independent of the specific characteristics of the perceiving and speaking subject! That is, it does not carry qualities, personality traits, and is not subjective. Is this possible in principle? After all, it’s always me or someone else who speaks and expresses thoughts. This is a fact. Where does the “objective” opinion come from then?
- Didn't understand. After all, it’s me personally who thinks, and not someone on the cloud... Is everything that comes from me always “subjective”?
- Well, it’s quite simple: subjective is everything that you personally think about something or someone and what differs from the thoughts of other people... This is the opinion of an individual subject - a person. He differs from all others in his personal characteristics.
- So objectively - this is an opinion, a representation of a large group of people, a crowd, society, a state? The same for everyone. Where is this opinion formed and located?
- In the heads of some, individual people! Subjects.
- So the opinion of an individual subject is a subjective opinion, by definition! It turns out that an “objective” opinion always arises in the heads of specific subjects and is expressed by these individuals? How, in this case, can one find out that this opinion is objective, and not vice versa?
- Well, when this “opinion” is simultaneously shared by many people, when they believe that it arose among them of their own accord, and when it coincides... A group, collective, so to speak, opinion. And most importantly - the same.
- Can the majority be wrong?
- He may still be wrong. Almost always. History bears witness.
- ???
- Until some subject explains to this majority that they are wrong!
- So it’s impossible! The majority always considers themselves right. This is the basic principle of democracy!
- Yes! Democracy is such an objective thing!
- But it turns out that “objective opinion” is the opinion of the smartest subject in society, with whom everyone agreed?
- Well, something like that... Everyone must admit and agree that someone expressed an “objective opinion” and it is also recognized as true in their heads. Typically this recognition occurs after the subject's death. It happened that way. So as not to spoil objectivity...
- This means that any “objective” opinion is always the opinion of some individual subject - a subjective opinion - which all people consider true.
- Yes! They believe it. Faith is the basis of knowledge!
- So what is the fundamental, philosophical, scientific difference between “objective” and “subjective” opinion?
- Only to the extent of faith in his rightness. Loyalty. Justice. Truth. Obsessed with this truth...
- What if a bunch of people, through the media, begin to impose on everyone that this opinion is the most true, correct and fair?
- This is true! It's business as usual now. To counter this, people have a subjective opinion. The criterion for the truth of an objective opinion is a subjective opinion!
- Dialectics, damn it... It turns out that there is no objectively objective opinion in nature.
- Yes! No!
- People are always presented with a certain opinion, which is called objective. A person believes if everyone around him believes in it. Is this the main criterion of “objectivity”?
- If you don’t want to believe, think. And few people can do this. It's always been like this. To do this, you need to know as much as no one knows...
- So it’s easier to believe and live like everyone else - objectively, according to their subjective ideas?
Subjective is not at all the opposite of objective. Any “subjective” may well be “objective” - if millions believe in it. And something “objective” is not necessarily not “subjective” and “true”. Truth is a different category, not necessarily related to “objectivity.”
The subjective may be true in an objective sense, but be considered incorrect in certain circumstances.
The objective is considered to really exist, regardless of the individual qualities of specific subjects who represent it.
Subjective is what bears differences and introduces features into formulation and understanding, due to the individuality of the qualities of specific individuals.
The objective is produced from the subjective by cutting off the specific, concrete, personal, and arises as a form of generalization of the ideas of individual people. It is always the same, the same in basic, root, main parameters and essence for everyone. But it is not necessarily true.
Reviews
You yourself said that what is objective does not depend on a person’s opinion. Such objects, therefore, need to be considered. For example. The Earth revolves around the Sun, the Sun flies along its trajectory in the galaxy and so on for thousands of years. This is objective and does not depend on our opinion. Also, 2+2=4 is objective, does not depend on opinion.
Even if the subject expresses it, this does not mean that some fundamental law of the universe is born of the subject.
In this case, the subject only broadcasts the received knowledge. (You will say that it may not be accurate. Yes, maybe, or maybe it’s just not complete, but a part, but all the same, if it’s a part, then it still remains objective , independent of us)
This is objective - not when an opinion coincides, but this is a specific fact or even a law (physical, etc.). If some phenomenon is doubtful and not clear, then it is verified by repeated experiments, and only then a conclusion is made about the correctness of our conclusion, etc.
The laws of nature are objective and not invented by subjects. Otherwise, we could not rely on them as the foundation of many discoveries.
We rely on the laws of nature not because we believe in them, but because they exist objectively and without our faith in the nature of the universe.
Another example... a hundred people, or a thousand, gathered... and very strongly believe that by waving their arms they will fly to the clouds like birds (without devices).. but... no matter how much they wave and believe, they will remain on the ground. Because you can’t argue against the objective Laws of Nature - believe it or not, and you are a slave to these laws and the framework of Nature (the Universe).
Objectivity and, first of all, the objectivity of information as the quality of the information fields surrounding us is extremely important both in everyday life and for professional self-realization.
Unfortunately, often the subjectivity of judgments, which are disguised as the objective opinion of some specialist, does not allow us to correctly understand the problem and make an adequate and objective decision. Let's figure out what objectivity is, whether it is possible to distinguish it from subjective opinion, and how to correctly present information in professional activities and in everyday life.
What is it
What is objectivity and why do you need to be able to recognize it? In philosophy, there has long been a scientific debate about the objective and the subjective, as well as about truth and truth. As a result of centuries-old disputes, philosophers have found a point to separate these concepts.
They established that the objectivity of truth is its immutable quality. Then, apparently, the expression appeared: “Everyone has their own truth, but the truth is the same for everyone.” Based on this, we can derive the definition that:
- Objectivity as a quality that is not associated with personal judgments and interests, is not based on preferences, exists on its own and does not depend on evaluation. It is based on constant values, objective facts, conclusions supported by scientific research, etc. This is a quality that cannot be challenged or changed at will. It is based on scientific or other practical knowledge about the object.
- The opposite of this quality is subjectivity. In this capacity, everything is connected with opinion, judgment, assessment, personal criteria and desires. Subjectivity always starts from the subject. Subjective information is information created or modified by a subject.
For example, when we talk about such qualities as practicality, beauty, taste and others, we inevitably give a personal assessment or use personal subjective experience, which means our reasoning is subjective. When we talk about exact quantities (time, weight, and the like) or about scientific facts, this is an objective opinion, since we take as a basis indisputable data or facts.
It is interesting that from the point of view of semantic analysis of the Russian language, subjectivity is almost always expressed by an adjective, while the use of verbs in speech enhances the perception of information as objective.
Why is it important to be able to transform information into an objective opinion? Primarily because in this form people better perceive what you want to tell them. Subjective opinions are likely to be questioned, ignored, or become the source of controversy. Objective opinions will be taken seriously. At the same time, you can use this skill both in the professional sphere and in everyday life.
Let's say you want to convince your manager that the path you have chosen to resolve an issue is correct. If your objective opinion is based on scientific data and conclusions made earlier and not challenged by anyone, you will most likely be able to defend your point of view. If you present the same information, but only as your own judgment, the result may be the opposite.
Of course, there are areas where there is not and cannot be an objective opinion. Art - painting, music, theater - is always perceived subjectively, i.e. are assessed by each individual based on his preferences. Subjective judgment is also possible in those scientific fields where there is no consensus yet, and it is not yet possible to draw final and objective conclusions, since there is a lack of accurate scientific data.
Let's take, for example, the reasoning of astronomers about the structure of the Universe. It is technologically impossible to measure its dimensions or obtain information about the physical processes occurring in it. Information about the Universe is scattered, which does not allow us to see the whole picture.
But even the discoveries already made were not always immediately accepted by the scientific community. History knows cases when discoveries made by scientists were considered for a long time only a subjective opinion. In such cases, only time could turn a scientific hypothesis into an objective truth.
Reality. Objective or subjective
Another important question that philosophers and psychologists ask: is reality an objective or subjective category?
In psychology, objective reality and subjective reality have become stable concepts. When working with an individual, it is important to understand what the individual’s attitude is towards each of them, how she evaluates them, who, in her opinion, influences their formation.
Children often take the opinions of parents or adults with authority as objective reality. Therefore, it is important to teach a child to form his own position and distinguish subjective opinion from objective facts.
Open your child to the world of objective knowledge and science. Tell us about how scientists explore reality and make discoveries and how objective knowledge helps us in life. Author: Ruslana Kaplanova
The concept of objectivity of information is relative. During the information process, the degree of objectivity of information always decreases. This property is taken into account, for example, in legal processes, where the testimony of persons who directly observed events and those who received information indirectly (through inferences or from the words of third parties) is processed differently.
To no less extent, the objectivity of information is taken into account in historical disciplines. The same events recorded in historical documents of different countries and peoples can look completely different.
Specialists have the necessary methods for testing objectivity and creating new, more reliable data by comparing, filtering and selecting source data;
Availability of information.
Availability of information is a measure of the ability to obtain this or that information.
Relevance of information.
Relevance is the degree to which information corresponds to the current moment in time.
The commercial value of information is often associated with relevance, as well as completeness. Since information processes are extended over time, reliable and adequate, but outdated information can lead to erroneous decisions.
Late receipt of information, firstly, delays the decision-making process, leads to the implementation of activities in conditions of greater uncertainty, and secondly, leads to a decrease in the value and reliability of information, since at the time corrective actions are taken based on it, it is in some is becoming obsolete.
However, we cannot agree with the opinion that lately received information has no value. This is incorrect for the following reasons:
firstly, information is reusable and, therefore, it can be effectively used when making similar or other information decisions;
secondly, this information can be used to adjust an already made decision;
thirdly, it can be used to identify the reasons for the ineffectiveness of previously made decisions, clarify methods of decision-making under conditions of uncertainty, and identify risk levels in the event of late receipt of various types of information.
The value of information is the degree of its importance and necessity for making information decisions.
Determining the value of information is a subjective process, and in most cases there are no objective criteria for determining the value of specific types of information when making information decisions.
There is, for example, an approach in which the value of information is determined by the increase in the probability of achieving a goal as a result of receiving this or that information * (39). But the practical application of this approach is complicated by the fact that, as a rule, it is impossible to determine with sufficient accuracy the probability of achieving a specific goal before and after receiving information.
Attempts to connect the concept of the value of information with the concept of a goal seem to be very fruitful, but the existing ways to quantify the value are still not very effective, because they are based on the use of preliminary estimates of a priori probabilities of the goal, knowledge and sequential actions of the consumer. This is complicated by the fact that it is very difficult to formulate in information terms the goal facing the information consumer.
In addition, value is not a purely natural property of information, but is formed as a result of the subject-practical interaction of an object (information) and a subject (user). Any value is determined by practice, understood in the broadest sense of the word, and practice acts as an objective determinant of value.
Value is what a person requires for his practical cognitive activity, and practice contributes to the objectivity of assessments.
Value is objective as a product of the practical relationship (interaction) of an object and a subject; it is objective, since it is formed in the process of socio-historical practice, although its objectivity may not be recognized by the subject. Therefore, assessing value is subjective. This assessment, as an expression of a subjective attitude towards a value, can be true if it is adequate to the value, or false if it does not correspond to the value.
Information as an object of scientific research and study involves highlighting semantic, linguistic, pragmatic and technical aspects.
In the semantic aspect, research is aimed at solving the problem of the accuracy of conveying the meaning of messages using coded signals;
