There Is No Objectivity Essay Example

Introduction

Objectivity and subjectivity come out as essential aspects of arriving at conclusions. Objectivity accounts for that which is without bias, and thus, free from emotions, desires, and imaginations while subjectivity acknowledges the fact that human actions are subject to these biases (Koradecka et al., 2010). It is important to note that any activity performed by human beings is subject to their personal beliefs and emotions even when rationality is applied (Badhwar, 2014). This is supported in the context of social interactions and even and the objectivity of truth. Religion has been criticized for being too subjective although science proves to have similar faults. An example of an absence of objectivity in science is seen where scientific researchers are influenced by their perceptions and emotions towards the research topic (Stefanidou & Skordoulis, 2014). That said, ideas also serve the interests of involved parties, and as a result, they lack objectivity. Rodi (2018) opines that there is no objectivity when taking into account the Pollution Rule which points out that the slight presence of subjectivity qualifies the total result as subjective. In the end, it is necessary for the majority to consider that objectivity only exists as an illusion and considering its portion cannot be measured, it does not exist.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

Human Beings Are The Proponents of Action

Objectivity is an essential argument in everyday life. If anything, objectivity comes out as the tendency of not being influenced by personal perceptions, experiences, imaginations, emotions, and other factors: It is a state of being unbiased when engaging in an action (Koradecka, 2010). The phrase 'human beings being the proponents of action' points towards the fact that in most if not all cases, human beings are directly involved in the actions that affect their daily lives. This is held in researches, innovations, as well as other, decision-making that may let's say lead to climate change. Noticeably, human beings are subject to personal opinions, and the fact that they act means that they are subjective to it (Badhwar, 2014). Aristotle stated that "The end of labor is to gain leisure" (Mas & Pallais, 2017). Nothing can be further from the truth. This phrase reveals that there is no objectivity because as human beings work towards fulfilling the personal gain of leisure, the actions they partake in are subjective to their personal opinions and emotions (Mas & Pallais, 2017). It is important to note that in all forms, human beings are critical elements for action to be fulfilled. Admittedly, human beings being the proponent of action reveal that they can only work on what satisfies an inner desire (Koradecka, 2010). It is this love for the self that led Plato to describe love as a severe mental disease (Padovani, Richardson & Tsou, 2015). If anything, human beings only take part in activities if they work to satisfy their love hence ruling out objectivity which would constitute a complete unbiased.

Influence of Rationality on Objectivity

Rationality in human beings presents a threat to objectivity. Perhaps the most similar aspect that differentiates human beings from animals is the quality of rationality. Through rationality, human beings can reason through concepts and ideas and decide whether an action should be taken or avoided. Whether the action serves the greater good or that of a few individuals is subject to personal and societal factors (Badhwar, 2014). Simply put, rationality is seen where an individual(s) puts various ideas on the table and follows the correct procedures of reasoning in an attempt to find the best option. Rationality alone reveals that it is impossible to alienate human beings, and therefore, their subjectivity when taking part in an activity (Badhwar, 2014). This implies that there is no objectivity.

While objectivity is meant to ensure an absence of the influence of personal biases, rationality implies that certain aspects such as beliefs and personal experiences affect how the subject will view the challenge at hand. Take an example of a health policy argument that is supported by a doctor and opposed by a government representative: It would be illogical to assume that emotions, beliefs, and values possessed by each party will not play a part in the debate (Rodi, 2018). This presents an excellent example that while rationality is poised as an asset of the human species, it impedes achieving objectivity.

Role of Social Interactions

Social interactions form a vital feature of human development. In the end, the objectivity or subjectivity of an action is determined by the social context in place. The social interactions are what facilitate let's say journalism or any business. With human beings being the fulcrum of social interactions, there would be no objectivity because biases will be prominent (Koradecka, 2010). Taking the case of politics, it is an excellent example that there is an absence of objectivity. Politics which involves the processes of gaining power in the society involve an interplay of self-perceptions and opinions (Koradecka, 2010). In the end, this aspect of social interactions shows that there is no objectivity in all forms.

Research is considered one of the major avenues where objectivity is required and recognized as an integral quality. However, research can only happen at the behest of social interactions where the researcher seeks to find both secondary and primary data (Padovani et al., 2015). Stefanidou & Skordoulis (2014) postulate that when gathering data such as in interviews and open-ended questionnaires, there would be no objectivity because answers and feedback would be affected by how the researcher and respondents perceive the research topic and questions. Social interaction can only exist with the interplay of opinions, biases, emotions, and other aspects which only seek to deviate as much as possible from objectivity (Koradecka, 2010). Considering it is impossible for social interactions to exist without personal biases, there is no objectivity.

Objectivity In Truth

The objectivity of truth stands to be a significant debate when expounding that there is no objectivity. In most cases, the truth is prescribed as that which is accepted as valid regardless of whether it serves the interest of one party or another. These aspects present objective truth as necessary in this argument. While the truth should be free of bias, it is necessary to point out that it may be arrived at from various angles. Take the example of builders who count bricks as one, two and so on: This is the application of symbolic logic that many people will consider objective (Padovani et al., 2015). The builders will state that there is either a full or no brick. However, what happens if the brick misses a part of the corner? The fact is that the wholeness that is characterized by one brick will have been robbed away (Padovani et al., 2015). In this regard, this ascertains the fact that there is no objective of truth, and thus, no objectivity.

Noticeably, the objectivity of truth applies in other theoretical concepts. Take the case of the argument on Immanuel Kant's categorical imperative. In all ways, categorical imperative argues that there is objectivity where decision-making is not influenced by emotions, desires, and other subjective factors; in all ways, it is essential to note such personal qualities that make an individual's personality (Rodi, 2018). With people being instrumental in achieving the truth even in the context of the categorical imperative, one should not expect them to be 100% objective. With that being said, there is no objectivity in truth.

The Absence of Objectivity In Science

Science came out as an adversary of religion. As religion was blamed for relying on perceptions and preying on what humans could not explain and lacking objectivity thereof, science came out as more factual and objective in explaining phenomena (Padovani et al., 2015). (Stefanidou & Skordoulis (2014) state that science involves using systematic steps to explain phenomena: A necessity of scientific success is questioning. Even so, questioning in science comes out as a liability because many would seek to question what they view as threatening their chance to survive (Padovani et al., 2015). For instance, the Nebula Cloud Theory is meant to explain the origin of the earth. The proponents of the theory do not explain the origin of the cloud, and this gives leeway to religious explanations on creation. When looking at science, in this respect, it lacks objectivity because scientists who pioneered the Nebula Cloud Theory may have been motivated by the stiff desire to oppose the creation story. With such emotions in play, objectivity is absent.

In the same way, science comes out as a field that is heavily dependent on symbolic logic. As described in the objective of truth, it is not all cases that symbolic logic can be detrimental. This is not only affected by human perceptions and biases but also natural aspects. Albert Einstein, the renown scientist, admitted that some concepts in the universe were in such perfect harmony that it was impossible to explain the underlying reason for these (Stefanidou & Skordoulis, 2014). This reveals that there is no objectivity considering even the science cannot ascertain the truthfulness of its concepts and ideas in as far as Einstein's comments are concerned.

Objectivity In Religion

Religion has been existent for decades although it is the dominant receiver of criticisms when it comes to lacking objectivity. For objectivity to be present, it is necessary to stress that there must be an absence of personal beliefs, emotions, desires, and other aspects that will distort the independence of the conclusion. Religion, for one, seems to support subjectivity in all ways. Take the recognition of God as an example. The presence of a supernatural being as in Christianity and Islam is not only subjective to human assumptions on explaining what they do not know but also to appease themselves on what they cannot control, such as existential factors (Maccio, 2017). This is a critical consideration whereby since no one has seen God, conversed with him, and no records of archeological evidence, then there is no such being (Maccio, 2017). This shows that there is no objectivity in religion just like in the wider society.

When commenting on religion, Karl Marx described religion as the "Opium of the people" (Maccio, 2017). Karl Marx's words reveal the notable absence of objectivity in religion. If anything, religious fanatics use religious hopes to justify their laziness and willingness to work towards a better future. By justifying living on earth as almost useless because one will have an eternal life after death that has no documented accounts on, religion is influenced by personal fears, desires, prejudice, and other subjective concepts (Maccio, 2017). With religion proving to be prominent among the developing than developed countries, it comes out as a subjective aspect with no real economic or social benefit. Just like science, religion contributes to the broader argument that there is no objectivity.

There is No Objectivity In Ideas

What is an idea? Rodi (2018) states that an idea is a result of mental processes and that may be a representation of an object or general factors. The flow of ideas is facilitated by human beings and instruments such as the media. However, it is necessary to look into where ideas originate. Ideas come from problems, and as human beings attempt to find solutions, they conceive ideas (Stefanidou & Skordoulis, 2014). Rodi (2018) and Stefanidou & Skordoulis (2014) agree that ideas work toward accomplishing the interests of their proponents. This rule out the presence of objectivity considering in t...