Sunday, 14 November 2010

The subjective vs. objective struggle built-in, in social structures.

It donned to me. The subjective vs. objective contradiction surpasses the boundaries of science and extends to the structures of society. Societies are built along the lines of seemingly objective perspectives. Governments, agencies, corporations demand to submit and surrender our subjective nature, to their ways of seeing and interpreting of what is objective. An all pervading, arbitrary, dominating directive alien to the notion of objective. An objective which its primary and foremost goal is monetary. Maximise profits and minimise losses.

The objective loses its meaning. The objective that serves the purpose of a government, an agency, a corporation is elevated to the objective of the whole, the sum of the individuals in a society, and demands to be their objective. For all individuals to submit their subjective to the objective which is self-serving to the needs of the government, agency, corporation. It is beyond even the objective that science today promotes. Whereas science uses its methods to make sure for what will be accepted as objective, it satisfies criteria that are acceptable by logic, the objective promoted by governments, the criteria used are biased towards serving their needs. And further they have the affront to use their brand of objective as the objective offered by science.

What defines the objective in the mentality of individuals that run governments, agencies, corporations? They are so overwhelmed in their tasks, so deeply involved in their brand of objective, that they loose track of reality, their reality is so squeezed, the boundaries narrowed, they are unable to see the bigger picture. Their mind present to their consciousness, this limited view of reality, as a whole. The part becomes their whole world. They see the part as a whole and they attribute that part as a whole, and not what really is, just a part.

And to that view they require our obedience, our blind submission. Does that have further implications to the monetising urge that pervades and overwhelms society norms? That everything humans do, every human action as having the goal to maximise profits? That every thought, every ability human possess to be directed towards, to be used for, a servant to accumulating economic value? For every act to be measured in dollars, pounds, euros, namely in currency? According to that view, it won't be long, monetising forces will stick a price tag to planet earth? To the air we breathe, the space we use, the thoughts we think, the lives we live?

It goes deeper than that. It goes as far as what we think is objective. It is rooted down to when we ourselves try to elevate our subjective view to an objective one. Regard our subjective views as being objective. Our ways of seeing the world as the only ways to see the world. That goes down to submitting to the notion that the world is filled with imperfect views (in the theory of minds, that particular paragraph with the monkeys), that goes even further about solipsism and our infallible selves. We ignore that in the same way that we require from other individuals to let us make sense out of the world by ourselves, at the same time we deny others the right to make sense of the world in their own way. Our subjective sense of the world becomes overriding in our contact and behavior that we do not allow, simply deny, other individuals their subjectiveness.

And this is the very same tendency in individuals responsible for putting forward the guidelines that mark the decisions made for large social groups and their actions more serious as it involves of imposing their will in a lot more individuals than in one to one cases. Geared? Chaotic? A minute change in the parameters that has an enormous effect in the outcome state? The variables that determine the outcome state? And sensitive dependence to the initial conditions?

We require to stick to our subjective views, to defend our subjectivity since this is the only way to make sense of the world, this is the way we acquire meaning of the world. If we relinquish that right there will be a discrepancy in our actions. We will not be able to function in a way that is meaningful to us. Our functions will be compromised. Our functions are compromised. We will not be doing a service to ourselves as well as to other individuals. To individuals close to us as well as individuals that our actions has an influence on them. They are connected. We owe to ourselves, to our consciousness, to make meaning of the world and to use that meaning to guide our problem solving/decision making part of our consciousness.

Without it our lives will be meaningless, the societies we built meaningless, our existence meaningless. We should not relish our subjectivity to anyone for anything, we should not aim to subdue anyone's subjectivity to ours, we should not aim towards submitting the subjectivity of others to ours. We should not expect others to submit to our subjectivity in whatever way, may that be force, language, persuasion.

There is no common sense. There is nothing common, in whatever way it can be expressed or interpreted, in the way we view the world. Each individual views the world, in a deeply private and personal standpoint and any attempt to use or enforce such averaged out notions, to such deeply felt issues is suspicious and alien to human nature.

We should listen before we talk.

No comments:

Post a Comment