Objectively & Subjectively “Real”

The distinction between subjective and objective notions of “real” revolves around the perspective from which reality is experienced or understood.
Subjective reality is based on personal experiences, feelings, perceptions, and thoughts.
Objective reality, on the other hand, seeks a universal understanding that is independent of individual thoughts, feelings, or perceptions.
This duality highlights the complexity of defining what is “real.”
Most philosophers believe subjective and objective views can coexist.
Our subjective experiences are real to us, even if there’s an underlying objective reality.
Objective reality attempts to construct a universal, empirically verifiable understanding that transcends individual differences.

Table of Contents: _{^{(Click any link below to navigate to that section.)}}

Elaborate on subjective and objective notions of “real”.

Consider the following for context:

Subjective: This chair is real. It functions as a place for humans to sit.
Objective: “Chairs” are not real. The term simply refers to arrangements of atoms.
Subjective: My pain is real. To deny pain is nonsensical.
Objective: What you perceive as pain is only a configuration of neurons firing in a particular way.

The distinction between subjective and objective notions of “real” revolves around the perspective from which reality is experienced or understood. Your examples highlight a crucial dialogue between experiential, individual perception (subjective reality) and external, empirical observation (objective reality). Let’s elaborate on these notions, incorporating the given context:

Subjective Reality

Subjective reality is based on personal experiences, feelings, perceptions, and thoughts. It’s inherently individual and varies from person to person. This concept acknowledges that our understanding and interpretation of the world are filtered through our senses, emotions, and cognitive processes, making reality a personal experience.

Regarding the chair: From a subjective standpoint, the chair’s reality is based on its utility and the sensory experiences it provides (e.g., sight, touch). It is real in the sense that it serves a purpose for humans, offering a place to sit. This utility-based perception of reality is deeply rooted in human experiences and needs.
Regarding pain: Subjectively, pain is an undeniable reality. It’s felt directly and has immediate consequences on one’s state of being and behavior. To the individual experiencing it, pain is as real as anything can be, defined by its sensory and emotional impact rather than its physical origins.

Objective Reality

Objective reality, on the other hand, seeks a universal understanding that is independent of individual thoughts, feelings, or perceptions. It relies on empirical evidence and logical reasoning to define what is real, often resorting to the physical and measurable aspects of existence.

Regarding the chair: Objectively, a chair is understood not in terms of its utility but as an arrangement of atoms and molecules. This perspective emphasizes the physical composition and the underlying scientific principles that allow the chair to exist as a tangible object. The concept of a “chair” becomes an abstract categorization of certain arrangements of matter, devoid of the human-centric purpose.
Regarding pain: From an objective perspective, pain is a result of specific physiological processes, such as neurons firing and chemical signals being transmitted within the body. This view seeks to understand pain in terms of its mechanisms, aiming for a description that is true regardless of individual experience. It reduces the subjective experience of pain to observable biological phenomena.

Bridging the Gap

The dialogue between subjective and objective realities invites a more nuanced understanding of “real.” The subjective reality emphasizes the importance of human experience, perception, and purpose, offering a reality that is immediate and personal. In contrast, objective reality attempts to construct a universal, empirically verifiable understanding that transcends individual differences.

This duality highlights the complexity of defining what is “real.” It suggests that reality encompasses both the tangible, measurable aspects of existence and the personal, experiential dimensions. Each perspective offers valuable insights into the nature of existence, suggesting that a comprehensive understanding of reality might require integrating both subjective and objective viewpoints.

The examples you provided highlight the interesting contrast between subjective and objective views of reality.

Subjectivity emphasizes our own experiences and interpretations. In the case of the chair, you experience it as a solid object you can sit on. Your pain feels real and undeniable. These are valid experiences that shape your perception of the world.
Objectivity strives for a mind-independent view of reality. Scientifically, a chair is indeed an arrangement of atoms following physical laws. Pain, as unpleasant as it feels, is a result of biological processes in your nervous system.

Here’s a deeper look at why these two views seem to contradict each other:

Subjectivity is personal. Your experience of pain is unique to you. No one else can feel your pain exactly the way you do.
Objectivity is universal. Scientifically, pain is a well-understood physiological phenomenon. There’s a common ground in how pain works, even if the experience itself is subjective.

So, are these two views incompatible?

Not necessarily. Most philosophers believe they can coexist. Our subjective experiences are real to us, even if there’s an underlying objective reality. The chair you sit on is both a collection of atoms and a functional piece of furniture.

Here’s an analogy: A delicious cake exists objectively as a particular arrangement of molecules. But the experience of tasting that cake – the sweetness, the texture – is subjective and personal. Both aspects contribute to the reality of the cake.

The question of “real” can get complex, but understanding both subjective and objective perspectives can help us navigate the world.

Provide examples of other debates over what is “real” that could be resolved if the qualifiers “objective” and “subjective” were attached.

Applying the qualifiers “objective” and “subjective” can significantly clarify debates over the nature of reality by acknowledging the differences between universally verifiable truths and individual experiences or perceptions. This distinction allows for a more nuanced conversation about what constitutes reality in various contexts. Here are several examples of debates where these qualifiers could provide clarity:

1. Beauty and Aesthetics

Subjective: Beauty is often said to be “in the eye of the beholder,” suggesting that what is considered beautiful depends on individual preferences, cultural backgrounds, and personal experiences. This subjective reality recognizes the personal and varied nature of aesthetic appreciation.
Objective: Objectively, one might argue that certain patterns, symmetries, or proportions (such as the Golden Ratio) are universally appealing or have been evolutionarily ingrained in humans to perceive as beautiful. By identifying and analyzing these patterns, we could attempt to establish a more objective basis for beauty.

2. Morality and Ethics

Subjective: Subjectively, moral and ethical beliefs are often rooted in cultural norms, religious teachings, and personal convictions. This perspective acknowledges that what is considered “right” or “wrong” can vary significantly across different societies and individuals.
Objective: From an objective standpoint, some argue that there are universal moral truths or ethical principles that apply across all human societies. Philosophers like Immanuel Kant have attempted to establish objective foundations for morality, such as the Categorical Imperative, which suggests actions are morally right if they can be universally applied.

3. Mental Health

Subjective: The subjective experience of mental health conditions is deeply personal and can be influenced by an individual’s background, personality, and life circumstances. Symptoms and their impacts can vary widely, making the personal reality of living with such conditions unique to each person.
Objective: Objectively, mental health disorders can be categorized and diagnosed based on specific criteria, symptoms, and behaviors as outlined in manuals such as the DSM (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders). This approach seeks to create a standardized, universally applicable understanding of these conditions.

4. Value of Art

Subjective: The value of a piece of art is often seen as subjective, influenced by personal taste, emotional response, and individual interpretation. This perspective allows for a diverse range of opinions and emotional connections to art.
Objective: Objectively, the value of art can be assessed based on historical significance, technical skill, innovation, and influence on subsequent art. Experts often attempt to establish objective criteria for evaluating art, even though such evaluations can still be influenced by cultural and temporal contexts.

5. Existence of God or Deities

Subjective: Faith and spirituality are deeply personal, and beliefs about the existence of God or gods are often based on individual experiences, upbringing, and personal revelations. This subjectivity allows for a wide range of religious beliefs and spiritual practices.
Objective: Attempts to objectively prove or disprove the existence of a deity often involve philosophical arguments, such as the cosmological, ontological, or teleological arguments. These discussions seek to establish a logical basis for the existence (or non-existence) of a higher power, independent of personal belief.

In each of these debates, applying “objective” and “subjective” qualifiers helps to distinguish between universal truths and individual perspectives, allowing for a more comprehensive and empathetic understanding of the nature of reality. This distinction does not necessarily resolve all disputes but provides a framework for more productive discussions that respect both empirical evidence and personal experiences.

Here are some more examples of debates over “real” that can be clarified by using the qualifiers “objective” and “subjective”:

Beauty:
- Subjective: “This painting is the most beautiful thing I’ve ever seen!”
- Objective: Beauty preferences are influenced by culture, personal experience, and even biology. What one person finds stunning, another might find dull. However, objectively, we can analyze the use of color, composition, and historical context of a piece of art.
Colors:
- Subjective: “The sky is definitely blue today.”
- Objective: The sky appears blue because our eyes perceive a specific range of wavelengths of light reflected from the atmosphere. The inherent property of the sky itself isn’t “blue” but the way light interacts with our eyes creates that perception.
Taste:
- Subjective: “This chocolate tastes amazing!”
- Objective: Taste is detected through taste receptors on our tongue. Different people have varying sensitivities to these receptors, leading to subjective experiences of taste. However, the chocolate itself has a specific chemical makeup that can be objectively analyzed.
Sounds:
- Subjective: “That music is so calming.”
- Objective: Sound is a pressure wave traveling through a medium. We perceive different frequencies and amplitudes of these waves as distinct sounds. While the physical properties of the sound wave are objective, the emotional response to that sound is subjective.

By separating the subjective experience from the objective properties of the thing being experienced, these debates become less about what’s “real” and more about how we interpret and interact with the world around us.

Would it be confusing to say “God is real” in response to someone having a subjective experience they attribute to a God?

Saying “God is real” based on a subjective experience attributed to a divine entity highlights the intricate relationship between subjective and objective claims of reality. This statement can indeed be confusing without clarification of the context (subjective vs. objective reality) in which “real” is being used, due to the different interpretations and expectations surrounding the concept of reality. Here’s why:

Subjective Reality

In the realm of subjective reality, the statement “God is real” reflects a personal truth based on individual experiences, feelings, and convictions. For someone who has had profound personal experiences that they interpret as interactions with or signs from a divine presence, the reality of God’s existence is as tangible and undeniable as any physical object or emotional experience. This subjective reality is deeply personal and can significantly influence an individual’s worldview, values, and behavior.

Objective Reality

From an objective standpoint, the assertion “God is real” requires empirical evidence or universally accepted proof, which is challenging in the context of spiritual beliefs. Objective reality is concerned with facts that can be observed, measured, and agreed upon by a collective, regardless of personal beliefs or experiences. In the case of divine existence, objective proof is inherently difficult to obtain, making the statement “God is real” contentious or unsatisfactory for those who prioritize empirical evidence over personal experience.

Potential Confusion

The confusion arises because the word “real” can be interpreted in multiple ways:

For believers, who have had personal experiences that they attribute to God, the statement resonates with their subjective reality. For them, no further evidence is needed to affirm God’s existence.
For skeptics or individuals who prioritize empirical evidence, the same statement might seem unfounded or not convincingly proven, as it lacks the objective verification they require for something to be considered “real.”

Clarifying the Context

To mitigate confusion, it’s beneficial to specify the context in which the statement is made. For example:

Subjectively real: “To me, God is real because of my personal experiences and the profound impact they’ve had on my life.”
Objectively real: “I believe there is objective evidence that supports the existence of God, which makes God real beyond my personal experiences.”

By distinguishing between subjective and objective realities, the discourse around the existence of God—or any similarly abstract or deeply personal concept—becomes more nuanced and respectful of diverse perspectives. This approach acknowledges the validity of personal experiences while recognizing the challenges inherent in proving such realities in an objective manner.

It can be confusing to say “God is real” based solely on subjective experience, for a few reasons:

Varying Experiences: People have vastly different experiences they attribute to God. What feels like a divine connection to one person might be interpreted as inspiration, intuition, or even fear by another.
Lack of Objectivity: There’s no scientific way to measure or verify the existence of God. Subjective experiences can’t definitively prove something exists outside of our own minds.

Here’s how using “subjective” and “objective” can help clarify the statement:

Subjective: “God is real to me because of my personal experiences.” This statement emphasizes the personal nature of the belief.
Objective: “There is objective evidence that proves God exists.” This statement is much harder to support, as there’s generally no agreed-upon objective evidence for God.

Alternative ways to express the idea:

“I believe in God.” – This is a clear statement of faith.
“I have a deep connection to a higher power.” – This acknowledges the subjective nature of the experience.
“The concept of God brings meaning to my life.” – This focuses on the personal impact of the belief.

Ultimately, the best way to phrase “God is real” depends on the context and your goal. If you’re talking to someone who shares your faith, the simple statement might be sufficient. But if you’re having a broader conversation, using qualifiers like “subjective” or rephrasing the statement can help avoid confusion.

Create a 7-item quiz on the discussion above.

Quiz: Understanding Subjective and Objective Realities

1. What does subjective reality primarily rely on?

A. Empirical evidence
B. Individual experiences and perceptions
C. Universal truths
D. Mathematical proofs

2. Which of the following best describes an objective perspective on beauty?

A. It varies significantly from one person to another.
B. It is based on cultural norms and personal preferences.
C. It can be universally agreed upon based on patterns like the Golden Ratio.
D. It is determined by the emotional response it evokes in each individual.

3. In the context of morality and ethics, what is an example of an objective approach?

A. Basing judgments on personal convictions
B. Defining right and wrong through societal norms
C. Applying universal moral truths across different societies
D. Considering actions moral if they provide personal satisfaction

4. How does subjective reality view the value of art?

A. Through historical significance and technical skill
B. Based on its ability to evoke an emotional response
C. By its influence on subsequent art forms
D. Through a standardized evaluation system

5. What aspect makes the statement “God is real” subjective?

A. It is based on personal spiritual experiences.
B. It can be empirically proven.
C. It is universally accepted.
D. It relies on philosophical arguments.

6. Which of the following scenarios exemplifies the subjective nature of experiencing pain?

A. The identification of pain through neurological tests
B. The personal feeling of pain despite normal diagnostic results
C. Describing pain based on its physiological mechanisms
D. Quantifying pain using a universal pain scale

7. What could help clarify discussions that navigate between subjective and objective claims of reality?

A. Ignoring personal experiences and focusing only on facts
B. Specifying whether a statement is made from a subjective or objective standpoint
C. Assuming all truths are universal
D. Relying solely on personal convictions without seeking common ground

Answers

B. Individual experiences and perceptions
C. It can be universally agreed upon based on patterns like the Golden Ratio.
C. Applying universal moral truths across different societies
B. Based on its ability to evoke an emotional response
A. It is based on personal spiritual experiences.
B. The personal feeling of pain despite normal diagnostic results
B. Specifying whether a statement is made from a subjective or objective standpoint

Quiz: Subjective vs. Objective Reality

Instructions: Determine whether the following statements refer to subjective or objective experiences.

A cloud is a fluffy white thing in the sky.
A cloud is made up of water vapor particles condensed around tiny dust particles.
Spicy food makes my mouth burn!
Capsaicin, a compound in chili peppers, binds to receptors on the tongue, triggering the perception of heat.
This view from the mountaintop is breathtaking!
The Grand Canyon is 277 miles (446 km) long, up to 18 miles (29 km) wide and attains a depth of over a mile (6,093 feet or 1,857 meters).
Feeling a sense of peace after meditating is a powerful experience.

Answer Key:

(A) Subjective
(B) Objective
(A) Subjective
(B) Objective
(A) Subjective
(B) Objective
(A) Subjective

Provide 15 discussion questions relevant to the content above.

How do subjective experiences influence our perception of reality, and can they ever be considered universally valid?
In what ways can objective criteria for beauty impact societal standards and individual self-esteem?
Discuss the role of cultural and societal norms in shaping our subjective understanding of morality. Can there ever be a truly objective moral code?
How do personal experiences and cultural backgrounds influence one’s perception of art’s value, and should art be judged objectively or subjectively?
Reflect on the implications of viewing mental health disorders purely from an objective standpoint. How does this approach affect individuals experiencing these conditions?
Consider the statement “God is real” from both a subjective and objective perspective. How do these viewpoints affect religious dialogue and tolerance?
Explore the difference between experiencing pain subjectively and understanding it objectively. How does this distinction affect medical treatment and empathy?
How do subjective and objective realities coexist in our understanding of the physical world, such as in the concept of a chair being “real”?
Discuss the potential conflicts that arise when subjective experiences contradict objective facts, such as in eyewitness testimonies or memory recollection.
How can acknowledging both subjective and objective aspects of reality improve communication and understanding in debates over controversial topics?
Reflect on the importance of subjective reality in personal identity and emotional well-being. Can objective reality ever fully capture an individual’s essence?
In what ways do subjective and objective views of reality complement each other in the scientific study of the universe?
Discuss the ethical implications of relying too heavily on objective measures in areas traditionally considered subjective, such as education or employee performance.
How does the subjective experience of time differ from its objective measurement, and what does this say about our perception of reality?
Explore the concept of “realness” in the digital age, where virtual experiences and online interactions blur the lines between subjective and objective reality.

Discussion Questions: Subjective vs. Objective Reality

Can something be “real” if it’s only experienced subjectively? Why or why not?
How do our senses influence our perception of objective reality?
Is there any way to bridge the gap between subjective experience and objective reality?
Can our understanding of the objective world change based on new subjective experiences? (e.g., color and light waves)
How does the distinction between subjective and objective impact our communication with others?
In debates about beauty (art, music, etc.), can using the terms subjective and objective help us find common ground?
Is the concept of God inherently subjective or objective? Why or why not?
Should scientific explanations for subjective experiences, like pain, diminish the validity of those experiences?
If a machine could perfectly replicate a human’s subjective experience (e.g., pain), would that change our definition of “real”?
How do cultural differences impact what people consider to be “beautiful” or “pleasing”?
Can something be objectively dangerous even if the experience of that danger is subjective (e.g., a poisonous plant)?
Is the idea of “truth” primarily subjective or objective? Can something be subjectively true?
In discussions about morality, are moral principles subjective or objective? Why or why not?
How can we use the concept of subjective vs. objective reality to better understand mental health and emotions?
Does the concept of a simulated reality challenge our understanding of subjective and objective reality?

Table of Contents: _{^{(Click any link below to navigate to that section.)}}