Subjectivity is ultimately an aspect of objectivity. My subjective experience is an objective fact. It's an objective fact I'm having experiences. Now if my interpretation of an external event is incorrect then its an objective fact that I misinterpreted something. Conscious experience is part of reality as much as any other phenomena happening in the world.
@ellugerdelacruz2555
2 жыл бұрын
Both are also steps in The Scientific Process. You start with what is Subjective (unknown) before testing, defining, and eventually making it Objective (known). Such is the way of the world.
@tspier2
2 жыл бұрын
It's also important to recognize that the tree falling results in vibrations of air pressure, much like any type of vocalized speech, which results in what we understand, after it reaches our ear drums, in a "sound." The "sound" itself, however, might differ from one group of people to another, which is why we have e.g. stark differences in onomatopoetic language. As a result, the tree falling certainly results objectively in those vibrations of air pressure, though the actual "sound" that it produces would be subjective--and not realized without someone around to hear it.
@thegroove2000
2 жыл бұрын
Cant fault that analysis. I agree.
@skfahadfardin2011
2 жыл бұрын
Is it what?
@isamatula
2 жыл бұрын
Summary: 1. Objective in a sense that Yes it did make a sound because falling results in vibrations of air pressure. (Kind of a scientific fact?) 2. What kind of sound it made could not be confirmed as no one is around to hear it so whatever anyone says is subjective unless confirmed.
@lirich0
4 ай бұрын
Not necessarily. Kant would argue even these vibrations come from our sense interface with the world rather than a direct perception of reality.
@Pfhorrest
3 жыл бұрын
Super late comment here, but: I think it's very useful to break down this dichotomy into two different dichotomies, and that a *lot* of philosophical problems arise from conflating those two different dichotomies together. On the one hand, there's the dichotomy of objective-as-in-universal vs subjective-as-in-relative, which is about whether there is one single correct answer to a given question such that disagreeing with it means you're incorrect, or there's no correct or incorrect answers at all and just different opinions all equally not-right-or-wrong. On the other hand, there's the dichotomy of objective-as-in-transcendent vs subjective-as-in-phenomenal, which is about whether there can be properties that are completely divorced from any impact they have on anybody's experience of the world, or all properties of all things are nothing above or beyond the differences that they make in someone's experiences. These two dichotomies don't have to line up! The common ontology employed by the physical sciences is objective-as-in-universal but subjective-as-in-phenomenal: there is, on that account, nothing more to reality than the way that it appears, nothing beyond empirical observation, but there is *one single unified* reality that has to be consistent with *all* observations. If you apply the same combination of principles to morality instead of reality, you get something like the axiology used in utilitarianism: goodness consists of something to do with people's experiences (them being pleasurable rather than painful), but there's *one single unified* good that has to be consistent with *all* such experiences, i.e. goodness lies in *everyone's* experience being pleasurable-not-painful, so whatever a good state of affairs is, it's got to somehow or another manage that.
@AwBlanky
Жыл бұрын
So what if someone says "I love this painting" The object in question is the "i" who lives the painting, and in a sense, that person will love that painting whether or not a subject is there to see it. Is it then objective that this person loves the painting or subjective? If they said "this painting is beautiful" it would be subjective, the object becomes the painting, and whether or not it's beautiful depends solely on the subject perceiving it.
@robmusorpheus5640
Жыл бұрын
@@AwBlanky If one individual loves a painting, and another observes that person's loving of the painting, both individual positions are subjective. [ed: a person's claim that they love a thing is just a subjective individual claim - they might be wrong, lying, or mistaken] The painting itself is the objective thing. What we think of it, is a subjective construct, and involuntary. Physical reality, is... still there... no matter what we believe. What we think of it, is always imperfect and subjective. I can imagine a chair which is the most comfortable chair possible for my needs, but, that chair does not exist. If I try to build it I will fail to make it perfect. I, am a product of the evolving causation of the universe. What I think, is too. We cannot choose to like or dislike things. We react to stimulus, and how we react is based on what we have been crafted to be by our biology/environment relationship. Ed2: yes stuff exists when we aren't looking at it or thinking about it. That stuff is our foundational substance as entities. That stuff shaped our emergent selves, without our consent. Culture, Society, more, are conditions for the experience of individuality to be considered a plausible thing.
@robmusorpheus5640
Жыл бұрын
When a lot of people believe a thing, it becomes a cultural and societal norm. Believing a thing does not make it true, or real. What might really screw some people up, is the idea that an individual CANNOT simply choose what it is that they believe to be true. ie: Choose to believe you can sprout wings and fly to the shops. Go on. Do it. Choose that belief. If you succeed, you will be confused and aghast that the wings will not sprout, and the shops are a long walk away. Your beliefs will change based on what happens to you. Beliefs are caused, not freely chosen. People's attitudes are caused, not chosen. Make a note of that next time you meet someone who believes a truly absurd thing: it is probably not their fault. They did not choose their belief, so they are not to blame for it happening to them. Belief itself is a product of the dialectical interaction between an individual and their environmental conditions. The socio-economic environmental conditions which have crafted us, are from centuries of hierarchical domination which demands individual responsibility for all, so that those with the most wealth and power are respected, and those with the least are not. If we wish to change the people, and their beliefs, we must change their conditions. "Choice" is merely the subjective experience of reacting to influences we do not control or even approve of.
@robmusorpheus5640
Жыл бұрын
@@AwBlanky The perception of beauty is subjective, the painting is an object which is not. It exists no matter what we think of it, nor what the intentions of the artist were. Once, a lot of people in Holland thought tulips were a great investment, but after a while, reality asserted itself, and crushed a false belief. A belief bubble, popped. Much of our society is the same. Objectively, the justice system is absurd, but subjectively, it seems punitive punishment is necessary to prevent crime. Objectively, punitive punishment does not work to prevent crime, but the same resources could be spent to improve the conditions of the people to prevent desperate actions. Rich or poor, crime happens, but because of a culture based on individual competition... when we evolved to be cooperative creatures. Most people I speak with think half of their own people are idiots, and not to be considered relevant to a benevolent social process. I've not yet met an idiot who was not made so by the environment inflicted upon them. Our nature may only manifest itself as an observable thing, within the context of an environment. This macro-culture of individualism, creates hate for those who had no choices, forced into hardship, and acclaim for those who also had no choices, forced into callous opulence. It's all a bit absurd, really. No one chooses who their parents are, or how much those people own, before birth... but ... apparently... subjectivity still confuses people who claim to be acting with free will and agency. Anyone who has been angry and made a bad decision knows their own emotions act to change their reasoning skill. If I view a painting whilst angry, I may find it uninteresting, but in another emotional state, I may find it enticing. I would not have chosen my conclusion freely, ever... because I am human just like you. *Have drunk too much, ought stop ranting now. Apologies.
@AwBlanky
Жыл бұрын
@robmusorpheus5640 haha, I asked a weird question and got a beautiful answer. Thanks for clearing it up. I've always believed myself that, as you said, there are no idiots that haven't been conditioned that way by society and culture. So, if I understand correctly, our perception and our belief will always be subjective? So, for example, subjectively, money has a value beyond its physical properties. However, objectively, it can not provide such values, seeing as it solely depends on whether or not the recipient of such money agrees that it has value. But in itself it's not valuable?
@rhyca4804
4 жыл бұрын
I would explain it this way: It depends on how you define “sound”. If you define it as the result of a brain’s interpretation of certain physical stimuli, then no, it does not make a sound; however, you can also define it as the physical stimuli themselves that the brain interprets. No answer is incorrect, consider that the question does not inherently imply that we must use the scientific understanding of the phenomenon of sound.
@okyoky405
2 жыл бұрын
if there is another person hearing the falling tree and he telling you about the sound. does the sound still subjective?
@yashasvi2
Жыл бұрын
scientific definitions are not subjective.
@historicmplsrentals4956
3 жыл бұрын
This made my brain completely explode.
@Alwayshavefaith
2 жыл бұрын
Lol
@jordanfickler2184
2 жыл бұрын
Welcome to philosophy
@laurenasn7323
5 жыл бұрын
I remebered myself when I used to leave my dolls in the room and look at them behind the door so that they can speak comfortably
@meirfivenight3442
4 жыл бұрын
sign of genius
@radhai1055
3 жыл бұрын
So sweet ,such a creahve experience
@xo-fk4qy
3 жыл бұрын
aw
@smirk6154
3 жыл бұрын
I used to tear paper and make figures and play with it (although I had toys but they couldn't the split I was hoping lmao)
@thegroove2000
3 жыл бұрын
Society is fucked because of too much subjectivity. Too many embroiled in their nonsense fuelled by their wants needs and desires greed ego etc, Not enough objectivity. Looking beyond oneself.
@edvinchandra1277
7 жыл бұрын
thanks helped a lot ...best explanation I got so far.
@CarneadesOfCyrene
7 жыл бұрын
Thanks!
@TwZLTanTrUmZ
3 жыл бұрын
Yes the online definitions were not cutting it, love the enthusiasm when defining!
@minamedhat3443
4 жыл бұрын
Finally, I won’t mix those two words again. Thank you for this great clear Video.
@avdamramadhan7239
6 жыл бұрын
even the definition of subjective is subjective, also the definition of definiton is subjective
@CarneadesOfCyrene
6 жыл бұрын
Those sound like some good reasons to be a skeptic. :) And a bit like The Rule Following Paradox. kzitem.info/news/bejne/yaicr59qnoGmgW0
@Pencil0fDoom
4 жыл бұрын
Avdam Ramadhan the word “example” is an example of itself. So is the word “word”. How many of these exist in English and what is the category called?
@phalen444
4 жыл бұрын
@@Pencil0fDoom I think they're called self elaborated terms. That might just be layman though.
@skepticusmaximus184
3 жыл бұрын
@@Pencil0fDoom I'd call it conceptually recursive; when a word refers to a concept that applies to itself. Conversely there would also be a category called conceptually exclusive, whereby the word refers to a concept of which it is not only NOT an example, but from which it is explicitly excluded. An example that comes to mind is *phonetic*. On the other hand, I do like inventing my own conceptual categories and creating the nomenclature to describe it. Perhaps there's already some semantic formality for these, in other languages (German perhaps?) if not English.
@rick1646
3 жыл бұрын
So we can say everything is subjective ??
@DavidKolbSantosh
5 жыл бұрын
The vibrations moving through air are no more sound than are the grooves on a vinyl record...it is just encoded information. Sound is an experience.
@rist98
3 жыл бұрын
So, if my ears are ringing, is this a sound? Id say it aint. Its just a sensory error. Nobody else can hear it. I think sound is just an air pressure modulation. Hence the terms ultra- and infrasound. We cant perceive neither ultrasound nor infrasound. Yet these forms of sound still perfectly exist. And the vinyl groove is just an analog representation of the sound that has been encoded into it. Aka, its not a sound, its just an analog way of encoding it. A representation of it. Until you play it, to create the air pressure modulations with the speaker, no sound exists.
@DavidKolbSantosh
3 жыл бұрын
@@rist98 The ringing in your ears is from nerves. The nerves which carry information that we experience as sound. Those nerves are somehow now agitated due to some sort of physiological cause. That agitation is experienced as sound in the same way as the transmission by those nerves from a perturbation from an outside source. Variation of pressure that propagates through matter as a wave is what we experience as sound once it activates our ear drum and then is converted to a nerve signal. Pattern of vibration traveling through matter, be it air or water etc. is also a analog signal carrying information. The physical signal matter it's self is not the information, no more than the lines on paper that we call letters making up words are the meaning conveyed by those letters. Science uses the word sound in phrases like ultra- and infrasound, but that's just a convention of language and terms, just like a subatomic particle is not really a particle like a piece of dust is.
@TheMightyN
3 жыл бұрын
How can sound be interpreted as an experience? Maybe to some living organisms that come across that as fact, but sound is nothing more than a natural phenomenon, for some there is no experience sometimes can be visually or mentally constructed.
@DavidKolbSantosh
3 жыл бұрын
@@TheMightyN any event in consciousness is an experience! We experience sound do we not??? In the objective world prior to you experiencing it it is only waves of vibrations through a medium!
@TheMightyN
3 жыл бұрын
@@DavidKolbSantosh Not always with our physics boundaries where we experience sound is limited via frequencies or is inaccessible. Take sound design or music for example, these fields can experiment with sounds, but the outcome of you perception of what something sounds is somewhat non-existent. It is all up to interpretation.
@The_Stoic_
6 жыл бұрын
I have spent some time recently considering whether reality is objective or subjective. With the aid of science, quantum mechanics specifically, philosophy and any other reasonable input I have shaped my minimal understanding on the matter. The way I see it is as follows, a falling tree will create sound waves and those sound waves will be turned into sound, so to speak, when "collected" by an ear. The sound waves are objective, once they are "collected" by an ear they are then vulnerable to the perception of that ear and the perception of the sound wave by the ear is dependent on the conditioning the ear was subjected to and the biological structure of the ear, thus to say that the perception of the sound wave will be of subjective nature. Given what I have said, I can, uncertainly, say that perhaps there is an actual objective reality that is vulnerable to our ability to perceive it. I appreciate your views and thank you for the opportunity to discuss such matters. Have a great day! :)
@armytc86
4 жыл бұрын
Objectivity is self evident and stands alone on it's own power.
@thecarlitosshow7687
3 жыл бұрын
Only Subjectivity and Relativism want all the Power for themselves to absolutely define truth and moral values.
@melvin292
3 жыл бұрын
Well then, does a chair in a room stand alone on it's own power if there is no eye to see it?
@thecarlitosshow7687
3 жыл бұрын
@@melvin292 yeah! Facts exist independent of anyone’s say so
@SleepingChimes
2 жыл бұрын
@@thecarlitosshow7687 but you’re saying so :) i think objectivity and subjectivity’s relationship is a compatible paradox
@thecarlitosshow7687
2 жыл бұрын
@@SleepingChimesmy point was that Reality doesn’t depend on us. It would still exist without anyones say so.
@sushantgolay1347
5 жыл бұрын
Yeah yeah, just make it simple. Objective is what exist(no matter we exist or not) Subjective is our opinion.
@ethanmotwani1889
5 жыл бұрын
I feel stupid now for not looking at the comments first
@y2commenter246
5 жыл бұрын
@@ethanmotwani1889 Same, ha ha.
@joeysimoneau
5 жыл бұрын
Idk man. I enjoy deepening and reviewing my understanding sometimes. I had somebody tell me that I didn't know the difference between the two, so I'm here to make sure that he was inaccurate.
@sushantgolay1347
5 жыл бұрын
@@joeysimoneau Same with me too bro
@nickmorris2250
5 жыл бұрын
So if someone comes up with an idea and writes it down in a book and then dies he doesn't exist anymore but the things he wrote down still exist, are they objective or subjective? If what he wrote down was a moral system, can this be objective morality?
@ApostateltsopA
Жыл бұрын
I would add that the word objective has two definitions that get mistaken for each other in dialog. Objective: Mind independent, is that which exists independent of minds. Gravity, mass, blunt force trauma, sound waves propagating in gaseous media. These exist, if anything does, independent of minds. Objective: Stance independent. This is a subset of the subjective, it requires minds, but there is still a truth value independent of opinion. The rules of chess, the value of money, poetry, art and mathematics.
@user-ch7vu3sd4t
10 ай бұрын
Group consensus is subjectively objective but requires agreement. A large group might have a set of standard/criteria to base decisions off of, but it’s unique to that group.
@fundef
27 күн бұрын
I think of the "stance independent" version as intersubjectivity or "social construct", it's a middle ground between Objective and individual Subjective experiences
@ApostateltsopA
27 күн бұрын
@@fundef I would say that is the measurable one. All measurements are social constructs.
@hunkarun
2 жыл бұрын
Objective is quantitative whilst subjective is qualitative. Sound is objective as it's measurable, whilst music preference is subjective.
@alexplotkin3368
4 жыл бұрын
Another fantastic video. I'm reading a long philosophy book by Bertrand Russell. Your videos are helping me with this and grasping philosophy ideas in general.
@oswellplieades8495
5 жыл бұрын
The pacing in this video is comparable to the speed of light
@voyd8217
5 жыл бұрын
How did I get to this part of KZitem
@centralprocessingunit2564
4 жыл бұрын
HAHAHAHAHA
@jennawade9283
4 жыл бұрын
Exactly what I just thought. Bc they only let us kno what the higher ups wants us to kno. But my soul is telling me this all is a big coverup from our souls or something. I had to get right where I am n help my children b good nice peoplewho is gonna make the worst mistakes ever in life. N they will all kinds
@Flannelsurfer
4 жыл бұрын
Using sound was a bad example in my opinion, because scientifically-speaking if there is no ear drum to receive (hear) the sound vibration, it in fact won’t make “a sound.” Much like a radio transmitter broadcasting music: The waves are ever-present in the air, but without someone receiving them on a radio they produce no sound. In this case the “perception” of the sound makes the phenomenon an object reality.
@Kevin___aw
2 ай бұрын
Emotionally, we are thrilled to announce that the confirmation of your Sales Incentive payment has been processed.
@sss1ck
6 жыл бұрын
I’m trying to understand...but as far as the question goes..Yes it does make a sound...doesn’t matter if ur there to hear it or not. All things involved around that tree doesn’t care if ur there to hear it or not, it’ll make a sound regardless. Were not so special to change the reality of a sound the tree makes when it falls if we’re there or not. So yes it makes a sound if no one is there to hear it. If u sent up a tape recorder, I bet u will capture that sound....sorry I blacked out typing this.
@WhyteLis21
5 жыл бұрын
Or you can just make your own falling tree sound as it hit the ground. 😂
@thegoalgetterguru
8 жыл бұрын
Subjective is objective! We just categorize our personal experience as subjective due to practical semantic reasons, forgetting that we as "subjects" is constituted by the same fundamental material as everything else in the physical universe and therefore are objects to. We are experiencing objects that are experiencing other objects. Death to Cartesian dualism!
@CarneadesOfCyrene
8 жыл бұрын
So, what you are saying is that there are no such things as philosophical zombies? kzitem.info/news/bejne/uIaKno2Bp35mnoY That qualia don't really exist? kzitem.info/news/bejne/u6uglq6On3yXjYI That Mary learned nothing new? kzitem.info/news/bejne/zq99rmSXnYGmdII
@spiritflyingsolo
7 жыл бұрын
For anyone that has heard the crashing of a tree in the forest that sound would be objective and for those that never have it would be subjective. A falling tree will always make a sound, however, the sound will always be different. There will be contributing factors surrounding the sound. Yet, giving the description of the sound will vary between people.
@stlbcboy
7 жыл бұрын
A tree will certainly make vibration, but their will be no ear to turn it into sound. So the answer is no, no one is around to hear it.
@leba40404
7 жыл бұрын
Sounds (sound waves) are vibrations. Vibration that can travel through air, liquids, and solids. An ear is an apparatus for hearing a sound produced by vibration. An ear does not "turn it into sound," an ear hears a sound produced by something.
@stlbcboy
7 жыл бұрын
When a vibration is interpreted, or heard, then it becomes sound at least that is the linguistic way of going about it. The idea is that you need an agent to interpret the vibration, what is vibration without someone to claim it is there or to interpret it. An ear does not hear a sound, sound is the linguistic expression we use to say something has a sensational vibration (i.e. any vibration we want to claim is making an impression). An hear doesn't hear a sound, nor is sound produced, to be absolutely correct. A vibration occurs then it is interpreted, because we interpret vibration therefore we call it sound (sound being an expression of vibrational interpretation).
@leba40404
7 жыл бұрын
So, if vibration is not interpreted by ears and not heard, then there is no sound? Are you saying sound is when your ear interprets and identifies a certain vibration...then that vibration is called sound?
@stlbcboy
7 жыл бұрын
I am saying that the act of hearing is called sound, which in fact is the interpretation of vibration. For instance when you say that you hear a sound, this is just the normal way of saying my eardrum interpreted a vibration, we just don't talk like that. Again, sound is just a word we use to describe the event of this vibrational sense-data-rendering. The question you should ask yourself: What is vibration without the eardrum? Schrodinger's cat is a great example on the subjective nature of things, if you were looking for a method of defending that you need an ear for a sound (to speak generally). To go a step further, if the act of sound is the interpretation of a vibration, then there is no one around to hear the sound. If the act of a tree falling makes a vibration (which it probably does) then you could say so; however it is in a superposition state between no vibration and vibration, which is where an agent changes the outcome once we interpret it. YA SCIENCE!!!!
@jeremiahcastro9700
4 жыл бұрын
I'd like to look at the opening question of whether or not the tree made a sound from a different angle: *I spoke and no one was around to hear me. Did I make a sound?* I believe that putting myself in place of the tree proves that the tree indeed does make a sound when it falls though no one was around to hear it.
@queenelizabethii3149
4 жыл бұрын
How would you apply "I think, therefore, I am" to this?
@jeremiahcastro9700
4 жыл бұрын
@@queenelizabethii3149 *Great question!* Do I believe a hearer needs to be present for a sound to be made? No I don't. My proof? I can make sounds without others being present: therefore sounds can still be made without me or others hearing them.
@Luka-el9qq
4 жыл бұрын
I dont think you can debunk a theory about something being subjective or objective at the end of it its only the angle that your looking at. You gave same exaple as person in this video only referring your self as an " object" insted of the tree.
@Luka-el9qq
4 жыл бұрын
Its a kind of question that can be compared to a schrödingers cat example, kind of paradoxal isn't it?
@Pencil0fDoom
4 жыл бұрын
Jeremy Castro you are conflating “subject” and “object” and thereby ruining the entire point of this functional model. You just plugged the battery into itself and blew up your own ass pocket. You crammed the mic into the amps voice coil and deafened the audience with a screeching feedback loop. If you derive joy from intentionally engaging in this kind of chaotic destruction, you’re probably an insufferable, nihilistic, contrarian prick with rage issues from unresolved trauma. If you do this kind of thing unintentionally, because of a lack of a grasp of these constituent concepts or because you’re being “creative” or you’re an “empath”... you may just be kind of dumb.
@thevisi0naryy
6 жыл бұрын
People who say “everything is subjective” are borderline pretentious. You can stand in front of a wall and argue wether or not it is really there until the cows come home. The bottom line is that if you walk into it you will hit your head, and you will look like a fool. You have the right to perceive this anyway you want, but the result of this is going to be nearly the same for everyone. Here is my (subjective) opinion. Any philosophy that does not have a real world application is of little value, and should not be touted as being more than it is.
@keythegeek3497
6 жыл бұрын
What if what you call a wall I think it is something else lol
@CarneadesOfCyrene
6 жыл бұрын
+thevisi0nary One might make a distinction between actions and beliefs. I can believe that I am dreaming and therefore the wall does not exist, but that does not give me the ability to walk through it, nor does it mean that I will not walk around it. I understand the frustration with philosophy that does not seem to have any real application to life. The problem is that so much of philosophy builds on itself that it is hard to get rid of one wihtout getting rid of another. For example, most people would claim that ethics has real world applications. That the answer to the quesiton "should gay people be allowed to be married?" or "Should we assasinate a dictator?" are important quesitons. The problem is, depending on your view on philosophy of religion, or epistemology, you might give a different answer. In the end, people that protest gay marriage in the street do so because of a very basic disagreement about metaphisics, the nature of reality. Based on what you believe about these things, will affect your actions. To bring it back to the videosomeone that believes that morality is subjective and someone that believes that morality is objective are going to act very differently. Which of these folks is right is going to depend on a lot of other factors which may not seem applicable right now, but still do influence folks' choices.
@CarneadesOfCyrene
6 жыл бұрын
+Keyonte And then of course there are concerns in philosophy of language which might seem obscure, but what are we if we can't communicate?
@keythegeek3497
6 жыл бұрын
Our perception is limited in my opinion where as some people think it is enough.
@keythegeek3497
6 жыл бұрын
As I hinted in my previous comment, universal understanding is a big enough barrier by itself, and language is nothing more than our imperfect solution to this problem.
@jeffjones6951
6 жыл бұрын
Error @ 1:15. METAPHYSICAL = of or relating to things THOUGHT to exist but cannot be observed (measured). This is SUBjective!!!
@joeysimoneau
5 жыл бұрын
Thank you for pointing this out. I think he meant to say "Physical". But I thought the same thing upon watching the video.
@Convexhull210
5 жыл бұрын
Wrong
@charitiemartino9872
4 жыл бұрын
He might have meant metaphysical to be our “rational thoughts,” which illustrate a priori knowledge, in contrast to our “empirical thoughts,” which only come from our experiences (which are always subjective).
@leone41ll
4 жыл бұрын
@@charitiemartino9872 i get what you are trying to explain but "Empirical thoughts" sounds like an oxymoron. Perhaps there is be a better word to explain it.
@TheMightyN
3 жыл бұрын
The lessons of this video are informative. However, based on it's explanation this could be lost in translation because the narrator fails to provide any clarity or simpler examples. In short, this video could only be recommended to a knowledgeable audience and nobody outside of it.
@guttydozen
3 жыл бұрын
So basically if a tree (or what we define as a tree) falls in the forest it will make a sound (or the thing that will happen which we humans define as sound)
@funnyclipchallenge4078
3 жыл бұрын
Thank you very much i was doing some excercise on my anxiety and i couldnt grasp the theory of objective thinking , after wathcing this i do understand how this work
@sipsofhell9018
2 жыл бұрын
0:35 yes it absolutely made a sound cause there are mushroom spores relying on that sound to propagate
@CarneadesOfCyrene
2 жыл бұрын
The mushroom spores rely on the vibrations in the air to propagate, but do they have the consciousness to identify the difference between inaudible vibrations and a "sound"?
@okyoky405
2 жыл бұрын
I will make a thesis that objectivity comes with knowledge and truth. And the subjectivity of ignorance and desire. Most people will say that beauty is subjective, but after examining it, there is a mathematical and symmetrical in beauty that makes it comfortable for everyone to see, the subjective part of beauty is a preference to choose or because there is no choice.
@weobeyjesus4565
7 жыл бұрын
Objective: Not distorted by emotion or personal bias. (A Fact) Subjective: Of, relating to, or emanating from a persons emotions, prejudices. (An Opinion)
@lizicadumitru9683
7 жыл бұрын
LEAFY GUITAR SOLOS methinks a rock then can only ever be objective eh?
@ABC-td7zm
6 жыл бұрын
WE OBEY JESUS Better than video your answer
@RandomPerson-mq3pl
Жыл бұрын
Thank you for this video, i thought you explained everything well and i finally know what objective and subjective mean.
@CarneadesOfCyrene
Жыл бұрын
Thanks! Glad it helped.
@nathanafoa6579
2 жыл бұрын
Absolute truth comes from a divine observer who is Objective, while human senses, feelings and experiences are Subjective. We are subjective beings living in a Universe made by an Objective observer who exists outside of space and time. We trust our own senses but never believes in an Objective being who spoke to us through chosen people, partly because we seem to praise ourselves for being highly advanced, and ignoring the fact that this Objective observer who knows each and everyone of us, has a higher knowledge and wisdom that we as human beings couldn't even fathom. This Universe we live in is so finely tuned that we seem to try to ignore the obvious answer.
@MrMimemule
6 жыл бұрын
Our lack of information due to limitations to technology results in us making that necessary leap of "faith" based on our "subjective" understanding of science (eg. calculations/hypotheses) which is a subjective method for us to understand the world around us. However, even without our subjective understandings, it is a fact that 1+ 1 always = 2, and these conclusions lead us to objective facts which can be concluded without the need for faith and observation. If we had a similar model to explain everything else that occurs, subjectivity will be extinct, the only trace left being the "subjective" methods used by our limited human minds in perceiving objective occurrences. This is why we strive towards progress in technology. In the end, only mechanical apparatuses can provide a truly objective conclusion as they do not hold personal biases and perspectives (think of speedometers in a car, thermometers, etc). As a scientist, I too understand the heartbreaking limitations of the human mind, that it is inevitable we perceive this world through words and feelings, but it is the pleasure of having an opinion that makes life meaningful. It is my belief that subjectivity is the outcome of our failure as humans to be able to perceive the world without biases, but it is also a blessing for us that we might enjoy life and find meaning through our subjective means. tldr; subjectivity is the product of an emotional and humanistic mind, objectivity exists and we try our best to interpret the objective reality through our highly limited subjective means. Words may describe a painting well, but nothing beats observing the painting as it is (even then many subjective processes still takes place in our minds, leaving us far from understanding the full objective properties of the painting).
@WhyteLis21
5 жыл бұрын
We have been given the ability to think individually therefore, subjectively it exist. That's just my opinion. 😊
@robertwilsoniii2048
6 жыл бұрын
I think it’s actually wrong to focus on the *sound* of a falling tree because I do believe sound is a subjective experience, in a somewhat less subjective sense the physical reactions of the falling tree seems to be objective with respect to being not dead. Of course, it seems like all things objective are contingent on being alive to know them in the first place (which is subjective). But I think with fanangling it is possible to recognize that anything objective can still be, actually, objective with respect to life or some living agent, or even some inanimate machine around to take in data. Thus all objective things are in a sense subjective, but this subjectivity is 1) spread to multiple agents, not *just you,* and 2) we say that nothing is not subjective, and in doing so define ‘locally objective’ to have the same meaning as full objectivity but limited only to the domain with respect to at least 1 agent. This is sort of bootstrapping, but I think it’s more honest than to say there is no objectivity in the spirit of its ordinary use. After all, I always present this thought experiment to a full blown skeptic: “if everything is subjective, then it shouldn’t matter if I point a gun at you and pull the trigger. Because if I shoot you, then shooting you is subjective, and the results of getting shot, perhaps in the face, should not objectively entail any particular result.” I personally find this to be quite a convincing argument.
@internetconspiracytheory9120
6 жыл бұрын
Robert Wilson III did not read
@xPr0DiiGyxLORDsh
Жыл бұрын
Dude, I just came across your page. Thank you for your hard work on putting all this info out.
@havenbastion
2 жыл бұрын
The closest we can get to objective is knowledge - justified belief. There are two varieties of subjective, arbitrary and contingent.
@frankiejo6988
6 жыл бұрын
Sound is vibration that move through a medium such as air which can be heard when they reach the ear of a person or animal. Sound, being vibration is objective. How we interpret that sound is objective. If no one is in the forest when a tree falls, it does make a sound however it takes an observer to hear that sound. Anything open to interpretation in subjective. Science is objective because science doesn’t give a rat’s ass if you “believe” in science. Religion is subjective because “belief” can be interpreted in any number of ways.
@CarneadesOfCyrene
6 жыл бұрын
I'm not sure that science is objective. Theories cannot be tested outside of a paradigm. The paradigm that you pick is dependent on who you are. If something results in a contradiction, we are underdetermined as to how we should act, so only our subjective bias can determine whether to discard our background theories or our hypothesis: kzitem.info/news/bejne/xKVux5h_h4J0oag
@nodozhit
3 жыл бұрын
Of course the tree that fell in the forest, while no one was around, made a sound. That's a tried and true characteristic of observing the nature of everything. The subjective idea of the philosophical question is the word 'sound' because the word's meaning can be changed to fit into a different narrative. For instance, 'sound' can be defined as a noun or as an action verb, and it is a constant variable in physics and philosophy.
@dominicdonovan3194
Жыл бұрын
When lightening strikes, And no one is around, thunder still booms? Objectively, yes.
@leocities
Жыл бұрын
I think the most flawed point of these definitions are the simple things as "MATH", "REASON" and such. Are they subjective? Based on most of these definitions... yes. They always try to bind "objective" with "concrete", and "subjective" with "abstract", which are different "dimensions", at least in my understanding. It's amazing how "rational" people tend to be not-so self-conscious. They create definitions and supposedly rational theories and guess what they leave out of them... reason itself. Take Freud for example. Nowhere reason can be found in his model of the mind. It's all subjectiveness and feelings. Is it a blind spot? Why isn't it for me then? What am I missing... or what's everyone missing?
@chrisconklin2981
6 жыл бұрын
When a tree falls in the forest it makes air waves. The question is are air waves objectively sound? No, they are just air waves, it is the air waves that vibrates your ear drum and ultimately your brain interprets that as sound. Yes, the world exists independent of our brains. However, if all human brains disappeared would human "Love" still exist? No. Would the number "6" exist? No. Our concept of physics would disappear but the physical relations (not Forms) upon which physics was conceived would still exist. By trying trying to differential between objective and subjective you, Aristotle, Plato, and Descartes are falling into the same dualism trap.
@peerzadadawar
6 жыл бұрын
Thanks! Finally got the doubts cleared!
@CarneadesOfCyrene
6 жыл бұрын
I'm glad to help.
@OneEyedJohnny
Жыл бұрын
I objectively think that a tree falling makes a sound. A person can only subjectively hear it differently than I do. So objectively good and evil exist. Subjectively it’s on the person to feel what they define as good or evil. So do I think objectively or subjectively. Or can there be an understanding of both.
@assalane
8 жыл бұрын
Good, beauty, morality depend entirely on subjects, so subjective. Truth, it depends on the context. True proposition about reality depend on reality, so objective in that case.
@CarneadesOfCyrene
8 жыл бұрын
Interesting opinions. Some even think truth about propositions is in some way subjective, (kzitem.info/news/bejne/1mZ7tXprb6Sge34)(kzitem.info/news/bejne/sK-clqp-qZZ6eag).
@timeandattention3945
4 жыл бұрын
If good is subjective then morality is subjective as well i.e moral relativity
@TheRealRealOK
4 жыл бұрын
assalane Umm, should I believe what you’re saying? You literally made a universal claim. Those kinds of claims are objective, not subjective. You refuted your own claim. Truth, beauty, and morality are objective.
@ibrahimal-rouqaishi5280
4 жыл бұрын
@@TheRealRealOK well you made the same mistake by claiming that universal claims are objective.
@egirI
4 жыл бұрын
O K beauty and morality do not seem to be objective because they don’t have standards upon which we can decipher whether they are objective
@ruzifancy
4 жыл бұрын
Subjectivity is everything including this text!
@edwardreed67
2 жыл бұрын
If a tree falls in the forest and no one is around to hear it, does it make a sound? Maybe, but I'm more concerned about the poor unaware squirrel sitting underneath it.
@papadakusb6264
2 жыл бұрын
Even if no one's around something "hears" it.
@CarneadesOfCyrene
2 жыл бұрын
What hears it? If no one is around there is no consciousness to separate out the difference between a vibration that cannot be perceived by a consciousness and one that can.
@oaktree2406
5 жыл бұрын
I remember in middle school the teacher asked this in class about the tree making the sound. I raised my hand.
@Bomber411
5 жыл бұрын
🏅👏
@abdulraouf4109
4 жыл бұрын
Truth is objective Beauty is subjective
@chewacan
4 жыл бұрын
I can't think of anything not symbolized (alphabet). So what we call reality or objective is based on a symbol agreement of meaning that works in favor of survival. It got us this far.
@stormisechamp5249
2 жыл бұрын
Scientific objectivity is a property of various aspects of science. It expresses the idea that scientific claims, methods, results-and scientists themselves must not be subjective. A cognitive bias is a systematic pattern of deviation from norm or rationality in judgment. Individuals create their own "subjective reality" from their perception of the input. An individual's construction of reality, not the objective input, may dictate their behavior in the world. Thus, cognitive biases may sometimes lead to perceptual distortion, inaccurate judgment, illogical interpretation, or what is broadly called irrationality. Objectivity is often considered to be an ideal for scientific inquiry, a good reason for valuing scientific knowledge, and the basis of making sense of science in society. There is no objectivity when: People believe the Left is always bad or People believe the Right is always bad. People believe Atheists are always bad or People believe believers are always bad. Objective means making an unbiased, balanced observation based on facts which can be verified. Subjectivity people can create an infinite number of opinions. Opinions give birth to philosophies. All philosophies are different to make a generalization. The most objective example in history is the scripture where Jesus Christ and their apostles and their prophets mention the Light and the Darkness. The Light and the Darkness are connected to the fruit that Adam and Eve ate. All related to the Light and the Darkness ends in Heaven or Hell after the end of times Tornados and earthquakes are dangerous and scientific objectivity prove tornados and earthquakes are dangerous. Jesus Christ is the protection of what is in the Light and in the Darkness. Human beings can not solve in the Light and in the Darkness, in the exact same Human beings can not solve tornados and earthquakes. The Light and in the Darkness exist like the stars. Spiritual approaches to healing and physical well-being are cool and good (I think there can be real results but each case is separate). I am not a cult leader so if non-Christians and Christians want to study spiritual approaches to healing and physical well-being, cool and good because I am not a cult leader. The Light and the Darkness exist like the stars, they are only in the palm of the hand of God. Cult leaders can not change the stars. Jesus Christ is the only exception. I wanted to know what exists but I am not interested in the cult story. Cognitive bias is childish (subjectivity) Heaven and Hell are not affected by personal beliefs or motivations. The stars are still there regardless of personal beliefs or motivations, the same as the Light and the Darkness are still there regardless of personal beliefs or motivations but they are only in the palm of the hand of God. The protection of God still works for me because it only depends on God (the protection of God is overly overwhelming).
@kevingest5452
5 жыл бұрын
I would say the tree makes no sound without ears to hear it. While I am aware that sound is vibration, the word sound itself functions to distinguish Audible vibrations from the rest of the spectrum of vibration. Without ears to sense or not sense the vibration, there would be no way to set the parameters for which vibrations are sounds and which are just vibrations and the word, “sound” itself would never have been conceived.
@brandonlai8029
5 жыл бұрын
It still makes sound, just that no one is there...
@thekaden4809
4 жыл бұрын
He means sound must have someone be observing it
@Orthodoxy.Memorize.Scripture
6 жыл бұрын
Truth is absolute and universal. Truth is not subjective (personal preference, opinion). Everytime a person who believes truth is subjective claims in absolute terms that truth isn't objective, they act inconsistent to their subjectivism. Even when people claim truth is subjective are making an absolute claim and applying it universally to all as if it's subjective for all. Again, undermining the idea that truth is subjective. Truth is objective, and we can live consistently in it. While we cannot live consistently with the idea of truth being subjective. The reason for this is that truth is not subjective, and people are confusing opinion with truth.
@TheRealRealOK
4 жыл бұрын
The Battle For Ideas Yes.
@deepak.statusking3108
4 жыл бұрын
Good
@alobo9937
11 ай бұрын
Geeeeze. I needed this... subjectively.
@brady1351
5 жыл бұрын
I just moved schools and we have an assignment with a bunch of stuff about language and my old teacher never taught us anything and I’m sitting here in my room watching tutorials
@CarneadesOfCyrene
5 жыл бұрын
I am glad to help. :)
@brady1351
5 жыл бұрын
You got me through the assignment check! Thanks!
@l0g1cseer47
2 жыл бұрын
A more defined modern restatement of the objective vs subjective .. something is objective when everyone can conceive a shared perceptual idea with its source occurrence to a correct alignment of realizable chains reaction consequentially creating one or multiple situations with or without other collateral side effects with its relatable force of momentum it initially manifested itself. Subjective is an idea or reaction from emotional disposition of biases, fallacies and misconceived interpretations to be displayed or expressed in a situation or condition.. Here, we must pay much attention to the subjective case since it is affected by condition which are externally manipulable.
@marckemp9955
Жыл бұрын
Sometime I'd like to see several classes offered on the difference between subjectivity and objectivity and then critical thinking skills to instantly determine the difference. Like if I said I was around engine's being taken apart in the 80s and they were really dirty but I didn't know the condition of the engine, whether the carburetor was in working order, whether they made a lot of short trips, whether they left the thermostat in during the summer months.. and these are all reasons oil would get dirty and make sludge. Because for every 100 people who claimed the dirty engine was due to the oil brand there were another 100 that didn't have a dirty engine with that brand. And then there was another 100 who had a dirty engine even with the brand of oil they claimed was better. If an engine sludged it wasn't because of the oil brand. Toyota put out a bad recommendation in the 97-01 vehicles for oil to be changed at 7500 miles. I remember the big 3 made similar recommendations in the 70s and guess what happened in all cases where those recommendations were followed?
@Eta_Carinae__
6 жыл бұрын
These definitions imply a false dichotomy. Something may depend on both an object and a subject.
@UltraCasualPenguin
5 жыл бұрын
"Coffee tastes objectively better than tea."
@danielpiechowicz2898
5 жыл бұрын
Trees falling in the woods make sound waves. Ears and brains make sounds.
@RhiWJ
Жыл бұрын
Is complexity objective, subjective or both? My husband and I are debating music. He knows a bit about music theory and plays an instrument well. I know music theory is a complicated subject and took piano for several years as a kid. He says, because someone can analyse some pieces of music for hours and others for just minutes, then the longer analysis means that the music is objectively more complex. My question was "what if the piece of music took 10mins to write and the writer said it was really easy but the music theory bod talked about it for 4 hours? Or what if the person took years to write a song with a simple 4 chord progression? Said they really struggled. Is it objectively less complex, because the chord progression is simple, common, shorter? Or is it subjectively more complex because they found it hard? Just because the piece is in the key of E flats half cousin twice removed, rather than C or G, sores that make the song objectively more complex? Even if the person had no clue what chords they were playing? It's a 6 of 1, half a dozen on the other it seems and we still have settled on a definitive answer we're both happy with 🤦🏻♀️🤣
@thrdel
4 жыл бұрын
"An object exists independent of our perception of it " ? Is there a way to prove that ? The concept of sound is objective or subjective ? The only way to experience life or reality is trough our subjective perspective . How does one decide when to trust one's senses and when not to ? How do you know if anything exists objectively ? While in a dream state everything is "subjective" yet while experiencing the dream there's no doubt about it being the "objective " reality. As a concept, subjective/objective make perfect sense but other than that.......
@armytc86
4 жыл бұрын
Subjectiveness is the lens people see the world through.
@aerialwilliams8953
3 жыл бұрын
This is an amazing example.
@darlenenix6699
6 жыл бұрын
Measurement, language, math and even all our sensory perceptions are what we call truths. We can only relate to truths. We cannot directly relate to an object without first designating a truth value to the object. We relate to truth and truth relates to actuality. Like so.. SUBJ TRUTH OBJ
@MyITRcom
Жыл бұрын
Just because someone does not perceive the sound caused by the vibrations objectively incurred by the tree falling, does not mean no sound was made. It would be heard by any individual with the proper hearing mechanism that perceives these vibrations, but the vibrations are there independent of the subject.
Subjective truth Vs objective truth // Self evident Vs collective evidence// Faith Vs Belief// Understanding Vs Knowledge
@Potencyfunction
8 ай бұрын
It scratching my brain, the modality in which some people write or talk. They are simply non-educated. They send toxicity and bad vibes, bad energy trhugh their way to talk. That is a great lack of education. They can not generalize, be objective, talk at 3rd person or use passive. They keep commeting and writing at 1 and 2 person singularis, as we are in the 3 grade and we learn to conjugate verbs and to use them in a sentence.
@Elaphe472
3 жыл бұрын
"If a tree falls... and nobody is around, is there the sound of a fallen tree?" "Sound" per-se is a brain/mental experience produced by the neurons, a physiological interpretation of physical surrounding phenomena. So no, there is no 'sound' since there are no brains around. But air molecules hit each other in a chain reacction caused by the change in pression (P=F/a) of the tree hitting the ground. The phenomena is there, but the air molecules reach no ears, no nervous system. Plus if "no one hears the tree fall" the question "does it make a sound?" makes no sense. -- But nice and instructing video.
@roysmith690
6 жыл бұрын
I would like to use the five minute video on Objective vs subjective in my course on report writing for law enforcement and security officers. What is involved in gaining permission to do so?
@CarneadesOfCyrene
6 жыл бұрын
You have my permission to use it, on the condition that Carneades.org is credited with making it. Thanks for asking!
@Pencil0fDoom
4 жыл бұрын
The universe is a colorless, silent place. Because color & sound ONLY EXIST INSIDE YOUR HEAD!!! The tree falling will vibrate some air, but if no sensory organ is near enough to translate those atmospheric pressure waves into nerve signals, no “sound” has been generated. Can subjective experience be quantified and thereby translated into an objective format? How and examples...? BTW In your first definition, the word “metaphysical” should be “physical”, NO?
@1utopiste2
4 жыл бұрын
shall we accept that all terms have an opposite - a duality - if beauty - then there is ugliness, if good there is bad, and if truth there is falsehood. So already we have say that it is not standing on it own but in relation to something else - what is not beauty, or good, or truth - or shall we say that they are two sides of a coin - one can find ugliness in beauty, as beauty in ugliness, bad in good, and good in bad, and truth in falsehood, and falsehood in truth? (similar to the idea of yin and yang - the dancing fishes)
@spunkyspyder11
9 күн бұрын
As we are inherently subjective creatures then we can only perceive a subjective reality.....we can create concepts like objectivity to escape from the limits of our subjectivity. But we can never be objective, that would be like asking an apple to be an orange....
@ujwaladushing5098
2 жыл бұрын
Anyone can please right down definition of objectivity by any Thinker.
@qiaoyinghan7242
4 жыл бұрын
I wonder what’s ur understanding of multiple realities. I’ve stuck in this concept for a few months, could u share ur understanding with me?
@qiaoyinghan7242
4 жыл бұрын
@@shahzadjawaid8296 Thx for ur reply
@rayyanshobowale7110
3 жыл бұрын
Really explanatory! Thank you very much
@CarneadesOfCyrene
3 жыл бұрын
Glad you enjoyed! Thanks for watching.
@catherinecruveillier
3 жыл бұрын
I believe that everything is both ... on different planes of consciousness. What about creation? In absolute time-space creation of everything “occurs” (rather “is”) together with observation of everything. Both are true ... and the same. In relative time and space we can consider them as separate but related. In the latter we can ask ourselves “who is creating?” On one plane we are the tree, or the sound, on another the tree or the sound is a separate object. In the relative plane we can also choose the perspective we speak from. In the absolute all perspectives are the same thing and the creator is the observer.
@williamfryer4528
3 жыл бұрын
Objective truths exist free from perception so things like mathematics and statements of fact everything else is subjective including morality and Beauty
@wesleymitchell311
5 жыл бұрын
you tell the thing what it is and that becomes what it is if it chooses not to be offended by your need to cotrol it however if it chooses to it would tell you how wrong you are acording to its opinion subjectiv , objective
@LisaLisa001
10 ай бұрын
If no one was there to hear the tree, then the tree probably chose not to fall, waiting for a witness, needing to be heard.
@danhre
5 жыл бұрын
As I understand it... Subjectively if you didn't hear the tree fall you can't say if it made a sound or not, but objectively by logic, the tree did make a sound .. and tree or an object would know it and you as the subject could only guess/believe... Good?
@johncracker5217
Жыл бұрын
The tree made the air wiggle but with no ears present you can’t say it made a sound.
@revitellect3129
8 жыл бұрын
Very nicely and clearly explained. Thank you. :)
@CarneadesOfCyrene
8 жыл бұрын
No problem, thanks for watching!
@fineasfrog
Жыл бұрын
What if it turns out that the subject and object in some modes of knowing are not separate, not completely independent of each other. Why not explore this as a possibility?
@ALBERTEINSTEIN777
2 жыл бұрын
SUBJECT = OPINION OBJECT = FACT
@j.a.chappiecolon1545
3 жыл бұрын
So is subjective that we made a word that describes things objectively that may also be subjective because we created an idea of that objective sense
@salvadorhpo2030
4 жыл бұрын
The real questions is ... Who saw the tree fall?
@terrencebunce1964
4 жыл бұрын
Star Trek analogy - Subjective is Doctor Leonard McCoy Objective is Science Officer S'chn T'gai Spock. Someone who has both qualities is Capt. James Kirk.
@melvin292
3 жыл бұрын
If there is no ear to hear nor eye to see is a flawed argument as there is always someone to hear and see!
@CarneadesOfCyrene
3 жыл бұрын
Is there? At the opposite end of the galaxy who is there to see of hear two rocks collide?
@sciencehungry
6 жыл бұрын
Off the top of my head , whether Good is subjective or objective depends on what its definition is. Truth id say is objective because it is things that have occurred through, most probably, people whom had intention prior to acting. However only to the extent where truth does not need to be interpreted because thats when it gets subjective. Beauty Id say is subjective because each person has their idea what beautiful us despite humans finding symmetrical faces good looking. However someone with all the right features could be viewed as ugly due to bad character... so subjective? starting to think real objectivity doesnt exist maybe everything is ultimately potential, and we associate meanings and expectations to it. Quantum physics mode kicking in...
@CarneadesOfCyrene
6 жыл бұрын
+Hind Al-Qahtani Interesting response. How would you define good? Do you think truth is more dependent on the world (correspondence) what people think aout the world (coherentism), what is useful (pragmatism) or some combination (pluaralism)? Interesting idea on quantum mechanics that everything is potential and we assign meaning to it. Do you think abstract objects like "redness" or "the number 3" exist or are these just words we use to talk about things in the world? What about holes? I reccomend Lewis and Lewis's paper on Holes because it is amusing and poses some real problems. :)
@rizwansaleheen
5 жыл бұрын
Nicely put, bro. Thanks a lot.
@flameartsalamander6867
4 жыл бұрын
Objective is fact subjective is something that is perceived beauty is subjective truth in some ways can be subjective if everyone had all the information to some thing you would think that that should make it objective but everyone thinks differently so that makes it subjective still, good is subjective because what someone perceives to be good is taught to us for example a headhunter doesn’t believe it’s bad to have shrunken heads but someone outside their culture would The only thing I know that is objective is that when we make others feel good we feel good ourselves that is something that I have observed so I do believe that simply helping each other is objective but the reasons are subjective
@ghania5869
5 жыл бұрын
This video is very helpful. I was very confused on the definition of the term objective criticism but now, I understand it very much.... Thank you so much 😊😊😊
@user-pb4nz9sj5i
3 жыл бұрын
What is it?
@analyticalhabitrails9857
Жыл бұрын
So what does objective criticism mean??
@DeathButt44
3 жыл бұрын
You could go to the tree afterwards and assume it made noise when it fell. It’s called using evidence, experience and reason to make an assumption.
@CarneadesOfCyrene
3 жыл бұрын
The question is not whether the air vibrated when it landed (something you might be able to show with evidence), but rather whether air vibrating can be classified as a sound without an observer to classify it. One way to think of this is to think of the electromagnetic spectrum. If the only beings that existed were ones who could perceive only ultra-violet light, would there be a such thing as green? Certainly there would be wavelengths of light that match what we call green, but without beings to perceive there would be no one to say that green was importantly different from red or yellow (any more than we would think a certain set of ultraviolet frequencies are importantly distinct from another set). Or to put it another way, the air is vibrating constantly, but only once it reaches a certain decibel level do we actually hear it and perceive it as sound. The question is not "is the air vibrating?" but rather "without someone to delineate between air vibrating softly and air vibrating enough for us to hear it, is there a such thing as a sound that is importantly distinct from air vibrating?"
@chriszablocki2460
Жыл бұрын
Very good to know the difference.
@strangebliss1095
3 жыл бұрын
If everything a human being can understand is dependent on us perceiving it how can we ever prove that something is objectively true. By nature we are living in a subjective experience? I dont know its confusing to imagine things outside of our perception of it because even just observing an "objective truth" puts it in our brain and makes it a subjective expression of what that thing is? Am I overthinking this??
@us3rG
14 күн бұрын
The masculine world is objective The feminine/emotional world is chaotic, subjective Masculine is not led by emotions
@dannelellis6340
6 жыл бұрын
So if you got rid of everything with ear drums on the planet but left a stereo on a loop and with a power source that kept it running forever it would stop existing or rather the sound waves wouldnt be there anymore
@GTORT
Жыл бұрын
I literally tried explaining this to my dad yeeeeeeears ago but was too young to be able to put into words. Instead I banged on the table and used silverware to play the drums to demonstrate that everything makes a sound no matter what.
@adryanbrown7541
3 жыл бұрын
Without objective truths subjective views don't exist.
Пікірлер: 638