Objective Versus Subjective: An Obsolete Philosophical Notion, For Ten Centuries Already; Kant As A Racist Dog.


Good abstract of traditional muddled philosophical thinking, circa eighteen century… Or what’s wrong about philosophy.

Friend Stephen Jones suggests that: “In philosophy, objectivity is the concept of truth independent from individual subjectivity (bias caused by one’s perception, emotions, or imagination). A proposition is considered to have objective truth when its truth conditions are met without bias caused by a sentient subject. ” I am always leery when I see the caveat: “
caveat: “In philosophy…” Because philosophy is the love of wisdom, It should not have its own patois. Wisdom is universal, not a special body of knowledge such as orogenesis (creation of mountains).In philosophy…” Because philosophy is is the love of wisdom, It should not have its own patois. Wisdom is universal, not a special body of knowledge such as orogenesis.

An objective claim is supposedly a statement about a factual matter-one that can be proved true or false. A subjective claim, on the other hand, is not a factual matter; it is an expression of belief, opinion, or personal preference.

The main idiot here, who pushed this ludicrous conceptology is a Prussian academic called Kant, a servile dog serving and advising his racist masters, much admired because he enabled slave masters, Nazis, and other exploitative criminals and fascists, and the mentalities which served them.

No strength, no objectivity, says Friedrich…

In truth, of course objectivity is all too often in the eye of the beholder. Claiming there is a sharp distinction between the subjective and the objective, so sharp, it is plain to see, is a grave error.

Indeed, as our understanding of the world has progressed, we grasp the objective through enormously subtle theories, not just our senses. Those theories are subjectively built. Even when they look “true” in the sense that they predict what is observed, that does not mean they are really true in a deeper sense to come. For example Classical Mechanics is “true”… As applied to rockets… But becomes seriously wrong when applied to satellites… And Relativity, which then needs to be used, and the equations of which are mostly “true”… Are not necessarily all understood (in particular mass vs energy)… And according to yours truly contains an error about FTL communications.

So we capture objectivity in our more exquisite sciences, from theories made by “subjects”. Moreover, even the most direct “evidence” is processed by senses… of the subject.

In conclusion, the distinction between “subject” and “object”, in the abstract, is not worth studying: scholastics philosophers, who had the meaning of subjective and objective around, wasted centuries on these stupidities… while the likes of Abelard and Buridan did create useful Middle Age philosophy, and logic, which built the road to modern science. However, in the philosophy of Quantum Mechanics the distinction between objective and subjective becomes deep, and highly practical, as teleportation, observation, error correction and the like are crucial to Quantum Computers….

It is sad to see so many philosophy departments prisoners of the notion that there is a chiasm between objective and subjective… As if they had learned nothing from history… History being one of the closest things to objectivity there is.

ⁱᵃⁿ@sluffflux said:
I taught English in China for a few years and I always played my classes The Truman Show because it seemed to disturb them so much

The “Truman Show” is a movie depicting a fake world where the hero has been manipulated by media plutocrats who have total control on his environment, into believing that the fake world he sees is all there is. Just like any dictatorship of the “Proletariat” would have to be to persevere… The ability to distinguish Objectivity versus subjecting subjectivity is the most practical thing, nowadays.

Patrice Ayme

***

Note On Racist Philosopher Kant: Kant Categorical Imperative as the Principle of Humanity: “Act in such a way that you treat humanity,
whether in your own person or in the person of another, always at the same time as an end and never
simply as a means.

But interestingly, although Kant made clear that slavery was not permissible from the point of view of the Categorical Imperative, and contract logic, he did not just not repudiated slavery, but strongly advised some deciders in the West Indies to keep imposing it. We have the letters. Like Hitler, Kant did one thing in public, another in private.

What gives?

Define humanity carefully, objectively!
Kant was tremendously influential in developing a theory of race that was used to justify
slavery, and, later, apartheid, be it in the USA, South Africa, and the British Empire (hence Kant’s aura).
According to Kant’s account of race, human racial differentiation originates in four “seeds” that were
present in our ancestors and have developed differently as a result of climactic and other influences. This
is no different from what we find in other creatures, e.g.,
…”in birds of the same species which can nevertheless live in different climates, there are seeds for
the development of a new layer of feathers. These feathers appear when such birds live in cod
climates, but they are held back when they live in temperate climates
.”
The same phenomenon occurs in humans with the result that different races have developed in response
to the different environmental demands. It is important, however, that once development has occurred, it
cannot be undone, and “resists further transformation” because the dominant seed has “stifled the other
seeds
.” The differences, however, are not merely physical, but include psychological dispositions. So,
for example, the native American, having had to endure the extreme cold, suffers from a “half extinguished life power” . And the “Negro“, because he has benefited from the rich land of Africa, is “strong, fleshy, and agile. However, because he is so amply supplied by his motherland, he is also lazy, indolent, and dawdling.”

Whites, however, have diverged least from the original form and the “noble blond form” characterized by its “tender white skin, reddish hair, and pale blue eyes” that inhabited the northern regions of Germany, is the strongest. This form itself does not constitute a race, but only a lineage within the white race. However, “This stock would have gotten on well enough to persist as a race if the further development of this deviation had not been so frequently interrupted by interbreeding with alien stocks.

The Nazis would take into account these judicious, “objective”, observations to create the superior Aryan race… In baby factories, by encouraging their superior Aryan soldiers to impregnate as many battlefield brides as they could find or be offered to.

(Another glorious, much admired philosopher in the Anglo-Saxon realm is John Locke… who was pro-monarchy as long as it was not absolute, and pro-slavery, as long as it was not this, that and the other thing. Locke owned stock in slave trading companies and was secretary of the Lords Proprietors of the Carolinas, where slavery was constitutionally permitted… Another objective philosopher in love with having subjects to objectify…).

***

P/S: Much, all too much, of what is called “objective” is obtained… subjectively.

This explains why so many of yesteryear’s theories which were viewed as objectively true turned out to be completely false. It does not mean that, certain facts cannot be determined, or that planes cannot fly. To find out what is objective, indeed, one needs experiments… But, in advanced science, said experiments are interpreted through partially subjective theories.
They always have, and always will.
To help convince you of this, just check in detail superconductivity theory and superconductivity experiments, as they stand in the last 100 years, to this day. They guide each other, and all together, form a kind of cult, with the BCS theory at its center. The general principle of that cult is that electrons pair up and make bosons… And bosons love being together. It has sort-of demonstrated in a special case (and Nobel prizes were distributed). In practice the Holy Grail there is to make a room temperature and pressure superconductor. Nobody knows if it can be done, and if not, why not. In 2021, a room temp superconductor was finally designed (after breaking lots of diamond anvils…)

Tags: , ,

7 Responses to “Objective Versus Subjective: An Obsolete Philosophical Notion, For Ten Centuries Already; Kant As A Racist Dog.”

  1. MH Says:

    Stephen Jones really, Patrice Ayme seems intent on confusing himself and offering that as proof. The argument is fact versus suspicion for the most part.
    Objective and observable tend to profess fact where investigation requires subjective consideration or suspicion of the observable to discover that which is not readily observable without the aid of devices or processes of exposing unobservable features, qualities, or components of various things, persons, or phenomena of nature.
    In the philosophical realm, objectivity is most usefully employed as a method of augmented learning, where expressed opinions are either withheld or modified to demonstrate inconclusive opinion with respect to an observation and related suspicions of specific investigation of said features and components. There in, objectivity is inconclusive until it is declared opinion on and proven factual.
    The facts of repeatable experiment to demonstrate factual aspects of an observation are relevant to an outcome of distinct observable change. This is considered fact in science because it eliminates documented suspicions about the unobservable features of those things that are difficult to explain without experimental investigation.

    Like

    • Patrice Ayme Says:

      My point is that much, all too much, of what is called “objective” is obtained… subjectively. This explains why so many of yesteryear’s theories which were viewed as objectively true turned out to be completely false. It does not mean that, certain facts cannot be determined, or that planes cannot fly. To find out what is objective, indeed, one needs experiments… But, in advanced science, said experiments are interpreted through partially subjective theories.
      They always have, and always will.

      To help convince you of this, just check in detail superconductivity theory and superconductivity experiments, as they stand in the last 100 years, to this day. They guide each other, and all together, form a kind of cult, with the BCS theory at its center. The general principle of that cult is that electrons pair up and make bosons. It has sort-of been demonstrated in a special case (and Nobels were distributed). In practice the Holy Grail there is to make a room temperature and pressure superconductor. Nobody knows if it can be done, and if not, why not. In 2021, a room temp superconductor was finally designed (after breaking lots of diamond anvils…)

      Like

  2. LB Says:

    Patrice Ayme yeah! Hitler’s back! Nietzche was who the Nazis looked to for inspiration, not Kant.

    Like

  3. Stephen Jones Says:

    It’s NOT MUDDLED THINKING Patrice Ayme !!!
    GEESH
    it’s the freaking definition of OBJECTIVE TRUTH.

    Like

    • Patrice Ayme Says:

      It’s klar, as the Nazis used to say (Goodwin blahblah): objectivity, says Stephen, is determined by “truth conditions” without “bias from sentient subject” involved. Existence coming from non-existence. Sentience denied: objectivity can rise, Stephen insists. No wonder some believe a dog is ruling heavens, barking after sentience, and its dreadful bias. No mud, no muddling, just knowing “truth conditions”, no sentience needed. Alleluia! Let me run to the closest fanum I can find, pray on my knees, bang my forehead on the ground, and dirty my beautiful hair…

      Like

  4. Vanessa Centemeri Says:

    Vanessa Centemeri
    Reality of the Allegory Cave is always confronting. Thank you for shining light and moving the shadows.

    Like

What do you think? Please join the debate! The simplest questions are often the deepest!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: