How to distinguish an objective opinion from a subjective one. Subjective opinion - intellectual weakness in a wrapper IMHO

Opinion (Slavic mniti - I suppose) is a private interpretation of data by an individual in the form of a set of judgments that are not limited to the idea of ​​the presence or refutation of something, but expressing the hidden or explicit attitude and assessment of the subject to the object at a given moment in time, the nature and completeness of perception and feeling something. That is, one can understand that an opinion can change over time due to various reasons, including changes in the object of opinion itself - its qualities, properties, and so on, or because of other opinions, judgments, facts. And also an opinion is obviously subjective judgments, which are subject to the properties and signs of subjectivity that I mentioned in the previous paragraph, even if the opinion is based on facts, it has the character of a value judgment-argument, that is, it still expresses the attitude of the subject.

From the above, it can be understood that the default opinion is subjective and inherits the properties of the subjective, for example, not necessarily stating the truth, different degrees of distortion by the perception of the essence of the object, and so on. That is, already using the concept of "opinion" does not require clarification that it is subjective. It is important not to confuse a judgment and an opinion in itself, since the former can be empirical in nature, that is, verifiable by experience, and an opinion is not capable of this by virtue of the fact that it expresses an attitude. To some extent, opinions are judgments that reflect qualia, but only to some extent, not completely. But whether there is an objective opinion and what form and content it has to fulfill the conditions of objectivity, one should understand in more detail.

The object itself is not capable of making any judgments at all, if it is not a subject at the same time, that is, it can already be argued right away that the unconscious object does not put forward value judgments - opinions, and therefore does not create an objective opinion. This means that the concept literally reflecting “objective opinion” does not exist, but the connotation is interesting here, and not the literal meaning, so we can continue our research.

If we consider an objective opinion as an opinion about a certain object, then the subject forming any opinion does this about the object, so this form of objective opinion is false. When trying to consider an objective opinion as an opinion (of the subject) directed at a certain object, in order to protect the objectivity of this opinion, it is necessary to turn to the objectivity itself, which I spoke about in the first paragraph of this chapter.

Objectivity is the perception of an object in the form in which it exists regardless of the subject of its perception, that is, the impartiality and independence of judgments from the personality of the individual, including his opinion. And in this case, an objective opinion cannot exist either, since objectivity presupposes the absence of any relationship, hidden or explicit, of the individual-subject to the reflected object. Moreover, in this case, an objective opinion tries to replace scientific knowledge as a systematized set of data about an object obtained in the course of cognitive procedures in order to bring these data as close as possible to ascertaining the essence of a cognitive object. Even ordinary, non-scientific knowledge is based on common sense and experience, including empirical, and does not imply distortion by attitude or evaluation.

Based on all of the above, I come to the conclusion that in itself "objective opinion" does not exist in the form of a priori formulated, and attempts to replace other concepts, for example, knowledge, have neither elegance nor expediency. An opinion can be, or rather become, objective, if in its subjective assessments, expression of attitude, private perception - formation of an opinion, an individual interprets the data in such a way that his subjective opinion satisfies the conditions of objectivity.

That is, an objective opinion is the same subjective opinion, including all its features, but coinciding in its assessments, relationships and individual interpretation with objective reality in its conditional completeness. The boundaries and criteria for the conditional completeness of perception, understanding and description of objective reality are the subject of a separate discussion. If we understand by objective opinion only the desire of the individual-subject to accurately and correctly reflect and state the essence of reality, then this already ceases to be an opinion in general and, therefore, it will not matter whether this “not opinion” is objective or subjective.

I will summarize what was said in the paragraph and move on to the conclusions of the chapter, so:

• Briefly, an opinion is an individual evaluative attitude of the subject to something;
• Subjective opinion - subjectivity is an integral quality of the opinion itself, that is, when using the concept of opinion, its subjectivity is understood without further clarification;
• An objective opinion is the same subjective opinion, but in the expression of an attitude, assessment, and the like by an individual, it coincides with objective reality.

There is no particular expediency to use the concept of subjective opinion in speech, since it is already subjective, just as there is no expediency to use the concept of objective opinion, since it reflects the coincidence of an opinion with a statement of objective reality, but does not cease to be an opinion - a subjective attitude. That is, when speaking about the statement of objective reality, it is more expedient to resort to the concepts of fact, knowledge and the like, and not to indicate the coincidence with, for example, the fact of someone's opinion, since this is a coincidence, and not the internal quality of the opinion itself - subjective. Accordingly, in addition to emphasizing the epithet "objective" coincidence with the fact, knowledge or similar statements of objective reality, it is advisable to confine ourselves to the concept of opinion without the epithet subjective, which it is, and even more so, one should not understand the "objectivity" of an opinion as its independent quality, because this is only a coincidence with true objectivity. And if this coincidence is intentional and / or known, then it is more rational to offer a judgment, hypothesis, fact, knowledge, and others than an opinion. In fact, the appeal in perception, and the opinion based on it, to the categories of object and subject does not give a sufficient characterization of truth, since objectivity and subjectivity here (by some) mistakenly replace positive and negative awareness. Positive awareness (Latin positivus - coinciding, positive) is the perception and comprehension expressed in the act of consciousness and attitude as coinciding with reality to one degree or another; and negative awareness (Latin negativus - reverse, negative) is the same act and its product, but with a distortion of reality, that is, imaginary, artificiality. So, if we apply to opinion the concept characterizing the proximity of opinion to reality, then it is better to use “positive” and “positive”, and not some kind of “objective opinion”, which is practically an oxymoron.

Interesting, however,thoughts visit the head
when you don't think about anything...

Subjective opinion (IMHO) is by far the most fashionable trend in human self-expression. If you want to be modern and advanced - your subjective opinion should always be on you. After all, then, for any occasion and occasion, you can demonstrate yourself in it - all the fullness and richness of your inner world. Recently, we have been observing how IMHO fills the information space, displacing the culture of thought and public expression, the desire for accurate and reliable knowledge, respect for the interlocutor, and an adequate perception of the world. It is possible to explain the reasons for the growth of "opinion" popularity and the transformation of IMHO into a phenomenon of mass order, understanding the psychological state of modern society and man.

Fashion trend "Subjective opinion"

SUBJECTIVE OPINION - CLAIM WITH EXIT

Opinion is a manifestation of consciousness in the form of a judgment expressingsubjective attitude or assessment. Subjective opinion comes frominterests and needs personality, her value systems. It is important to remember this when we hear or read the judgments of certain people. In his subjective opinion - IMHO - a person expresses what heimagines, that is, "it seems", "it seems", "sees". For him, right now. Expressing his IMHO, a person demonstrates, first of all, his own internal states.

It is absolutely not excluded that what is being said contains a "share of truth", objective knowledge. And so it happens when a person has knowledge about the subject, when he is competent in what he pronounces, his judgment is reasoned. Otherwise, we are dealing with "taste" express, with " bump" vision - not claiming to be right and objective subjective opinion. Opinion is a natural form of realization of consciousness driven by unconscious motives. And in the worldview it takes its necessary place. Today, we are seeing how taste, personal, situational perception - a subjective opinion, IMHO - claims the status of a universal, fundamental, true way of characterizing the reality of what is happening.

We can separate the grains of knowledge from the chaff of the imaginary, the mental reaction from the real state of affairs, the imaginary from the knower, only by understanding the internal mechanisms that the unconscious unwinds in a person. System-vector psychology is an accurate tool for such understanding (repeatedly confirmed, verified and can be considered objective). Systemic psychoanalysis allows you to objectively (and not through yourself) evaluate the mental manifestations of a person, having in mind a holistic - eight-dimensional matrix of the psyche structure.
.

Mechanism of subjective opinion

Subjective opinion is formulated spontaneously, situationally and is a way of expressing human condition as a response to some external factor. At the same time, it can be noted that the external stimulus has a secondary role - the basis for the formation of a subjective opinion is the internal state of a person. Therefore, regardless of the situation, the nature and form of expression of a subjective opinion can remain unchanged. We can observe this very picturesquely on the Internet: a socially or sexually frustrated person for any reason, in an article on any topic, to any image will express his state of dissatisfaction, that is, a subjective opinion: do not comment, but criticize, for example, or literally pour over dirt. Why? Because it is - his subjective opinion.

By the way, I remembered one parable from the network. There she is:

A man came to Socrates and asked:
"Do you know what they told me about your friend?"
- Wait, - Socrates stopped him, - first sift what you are going to say through three sieves.
- Three sieves?
- The first is the sieve of truth. Are you sure what you say is true?
- Not. I just heard...
- Very well. So you don't know if it's true or not. Then we sift through the second sieve - the sieve of kindness. Do you want to say something nice about my friend?
- Not! Against!
“So,” continued Socrates, “you are going to say something bad about him, but you are not even sure that this is true. Let's try the third sieve - the sieve of benefit. Do I really need to hear what you want to say?
- No, it's not necessary.
- So, - Socrates concluded, - in what you want to say, there is neither kindness, nor truth, nor necessity. Why then speak?
.

What is subjective opinion?

WEAPONS AGAINST INTELLIGENCE - SUBJECTIVE OPINION

Antiquity thinkers, separating subjective opinion from true knowledge, noted that opinion, due to its subjectivity and irrationality, distorts the truth. It is akin to delusion, or is such. This is forgotten today as the spokesmen for IMHO, and those who perceive it. Often we think, “Oh! If a person (no matter who) said so, it means that it really is so, people will not chat / write in vain. We save the mental effort that is necessary to be critical of someone else's subjective opinion, we trust other people's words. We ourselves rarely “suffer” from self-criticism.

"Where knowledge ends, opinion begins." Often, subjective opinion turns out to be nothing more than a form of representation of intellectual weakness.

Lack of understanding of one's own mistakes and rationalizations leads to self-righteousness and, consequently, an increase in self-confidence and awareness of one's superiority. Often less or completely incompetent people, speaking with a subjective "opinion" on a particular issue, probably consider themselves professionals, specialists who know and therefore have the right to make verdicts. Despite the fact that they lack deep knowledge and real understanding of the subject. However, it is enough to say: “I think so! This is my opinion!!” - in order to remove all doubts about the fairness and objectivity of what was said - both in oneself and among the recipients IMHO.
.

Subjective opinion? - freedom to my IMHO!

Subjective opinion expresses sensual attitude to something, and therefore the judgment in which it is expressed often does not have sufficient grounds, its impossible to substantiate or verify. It comes from stereotypes(based on personal or social experience), beliefs, uncritical attitudes. Opinion, including subjective opinion, is associated with a certain worldview and psychological attitude.

WHAT MOVES A SUBJECTIVE OPINION BEARER?

The very first action that will help evaluate the real content and objectivity of an opinion isunderstanding of intentthat made the person speak up. What motivates the one who is here in front of you now to show that he has an opinion? Why does he say/write this? What internal states push him to do this? What mental processes, unconscious to him, govern his words and behavior? What does it tell them?

Subjective opinion is a point of view. One of the possible. By itself, this point can be completely empty, subjective opinion - worthless. By the way, this often happens. Someone (or maybe no one?) Thinks that THIS is HIS opinion, "I think so", "I think so". And he believes that it is precisely this truth that is the very truth - absolute and indisputable, obtained by independent mental work - the comprehension that illuminated him. On what basis? Are these his thoughts and words that he speaks or writes? Maybe borrowed, and now he gives them - strangers - as his own, arrogantly appropriating? Can what has been said in general claim any kind of objectivity and be knowledge?
.

Subjective opinion - point of view

ERA IMHO

We live in a special time in a special society. System-vector psychology calls the current period "the skin phase of the development of society" (the value system of the skin measure is dominant in the public mind). In particular, this time is characterized by the growth of individualism. The level of development of culture is such that each person is proclaimed as something unique, highly valuable. A person has the right to everything (that is not limited by law). In the value system of modern skin society - freedom, independence. The first is freedom of speech. High technological development has given the world the Internet, which today, especially in Russia, is the main arena where the IMHO parade celebrates itself. In Runet, everyone can say anything, because this is an absolute self-valuable subjective opinion; many users note that the network has turned into a big garbage dump, where there is a lot of unreliable and false information and dirt is pouring at every step.

In Russia, with its special mentality, the "holiday" of individualism looks especially depressing and sad. This situation is perfectly represented by the words of Yuri Burlan: "IMHO, broken from the chain."

Unchained... Everyone, no matter who he is, can feel like the navel of the earth, having to tell the whole world something important and fateful. At the same time, do not care about the world itself. What's the deal with him. I am an individual! Me and my IMHO - that's what really matters in this life.

MY SUBJECTIVE OPINION VS THE SUBJECTIVE OPINION OF OTHERS

Do we want to be consumers of someone's opinions, a dustbin where everything is added that someone is not too lazy to express, or do we prefer to have an objective view of the world? - everyone decides for himself. Of course, there is reason to think about what kind of judgment I myself am a manufacturer. Do I want to multiply my own emptiness of thoughts, scream with the meaninglessness of words and expose myself with my own frustrations, vainly covering up such a “rich inner world” with my IMHO? - the choice is for everyone.
.

Subjective opinion: mine and wrong

System-vector psychology allows not only to understand the meanings behind each word, but also what the speaker knows, no matter what rationalizations he covers up his intellectual weakness. What is hidden under the wrapper of subjective opinion becomes obvious at first sight.

.
The article is written based on the materials of the training on system-vector psychology by Yuri Burlan

.
Other publications:

Humanity. O. presupposes liberation from the "observer" who bears about the world and always proceeds from a certain point of view.
Absolute O. is unattainable in any field, including science. Nevertheless objective knowledge - one of the most fundamental values ​​of science. O. is historical: opinions that seemed objective in one case may turn out to be subjective in another. For example, astronomers for more than two thousand years considered the geocentric picture of the world to be completely objective; it took several centuries and the efforts of prominent scientists and philosophers (N. Copernicus, J. Bruno, G. Galileo, etc.) to show that the heliocentric picture is more objective.
Although it constantly strives for O., both subjective and faith in it are essentially intertwined and often mutually support each other. Knowledge is always reinforced by the subject's intellectual sense, and assumptions do not become part of science until something makes them believe. Subjective belief stands not only behind separate statements, but also behind integral concepts or theories. This is especially evident during the transition from the old theory to the new one, which is in many respects analogous to the “act of conversion” to a new faith and is not feasible step by step on the basis of logic and neutral experience. As science shows, such a transition either occurs immediately, although not necessarily in one step, or does not occur at all during the life of the contemporaries of the new theory. “The Copernican doctrine acquired only a few adherents for almost a whole century after the death of Copernicus. Newton's work did not receive general recognition, especially in the countries of continental Europe, for more than 50 years after the appearance of the Elements. Priestley never accepted the oxygen theory of combustion, just as Lord Kelvin did not accept the electromagnetic theory, etc.” (T. Kuhn). M. Planck noted that "the new scientific paves the way to triumph not by convincing opponents and forcing them to see in a new light, but rather because its opponents die sooner or later and a generation grows up that is used to it."
A certain belief underlies not only a separate theory, but also science itself as a whole. This system sets the prerequisites for scientific theorizing and determines what distinguishes scientific from ideological, utopian or artistic thinking. The set of mental premises of science is blurred, a significant part of them is implicit knowledge. This primarily explains that it is difficult to distinguish science in any unambiguous way from what is not science, and to define it by an exhaustive list of rules.
Prerequisites, based on implicit, vague beliefs, and in this sense, the thinking of an entire historical era is also subjective. The totality of these beliefs determines the thinking of the era, its intellectual. The style of thinking is almost not recognized by the era in which it dominates, and is subjected to a certain understanding and criticism only in subsequent eras. The transition from the style of thinking of one epoch to the style of thinking of another (and, therefore, from one general type of orthodoxy to another) is a spontaneous historical process that occupies a rather long period.
Concrete sciences differ in their characteristic types. O. K. Levi-Strauss writes, in particular, about O. (physical) anthropology, that it not only requires the researcher to abstract from his beliefs, preferences and prejudices (such O. is characteristic of all social sciences) , but also implies more: “it is about rising not only above the level of values ​​inherent in a society or a group of observers, but also above the methods of thinking of the observer ... An anthropologist not only suppresses his feelings: he forms new thinking, promotes the introduction of new concepts time and space, oppositions and contradictions as alien to traditional thinking as those encountered today in certain branches of the natural sciences. Anthropology's relentless search for objectivity occurs only at a level where phenomena do not go beyond the human and remain comprehensible - intellectually and emotionally - for individual consciousness. “This is extremely important,” emphasizes Levi-Strauss, “because it allows us to distinguish O., which aspires to, from O., which represents for other social sciences and is undoubtedly no less strict than its type, although it is also located in other plane. Anthropology in this respect is closer to the humanities, which strive to remain at the level of meanings (meanings).
Depending on which of the uses of the language is meant, one can speak of the O. of description, the O. of evaluation, and the O. of artistic images (in the latter, expressive and oretic are most clearly expressed).
O. description can be characterized as the degree of its approximation to the truth; became an intermediate step on the way to such an O.. The O. of an evaluation is determined by its effectiveness, which is analogous to the truth of descriptive statements and indicates to what extent it contributes to the success of the intended activity. Efficiency is established in the course of substantiating estimates (and, above all, their purposeful justification), due to which the O. of an estimate is sometimes, although not quite rightly, identified with its validity.
K. Marx defended the idea that group subjectivity coincides with O. if it is the subjectivity of an advanced class, i.e. a class whose aspirations are directed along the line of action of the laws of history. For example, bourgeois social theories are subjective, since their super-task is the preservation of capitalist society, which is contrary to the laws of history; proletarian revolutionary theories are objective, because they put forward goals that correspond to these laws. According to Marx, what is objectively positive is what is required by the laws of history. In particular, if, by virtue of such laws, a revolutionary transition from capitalism to communism is inevitable, then everything that meets the interests of the proletarian revolution and the tasks of building a communist society will be objectively good.
History, however, is a succession of unique and singular phenomena; there is no direct repetition of the same thing in it, and therefore there are no laws in it. The absence of laws of historical development deprives the idea that an assessment from a subjective one can turn into an objective and true one. Estimates, unlike descriptions, do not have a truth value; they can only be effective or ineffective. Efficiency, unlike truth, is always subjective, although its subjectivity can be different - from individual predilection or whim to the subjectivity of an entire culture.
In the cultural sciences, three different types of O can be distinguished. ( cm. CLASSIFICATION OF SCIENCES). The theory of the social sciences (economics, sociology, demography, and others) does not imply an understanding of the objects under study on the basis of the experience experienced by the individual; it requires the use of comparative categories and excludes "I", "here", "now" ("present"), etc. O. of the humanities (history, anthropology, linguistics, etc.), on the contrary, is based on a system of absolute categories and on the basis of absolute assessments. And finally, the theory of normative sciences (ethics, aesthetics, art criticism, etc.), which also presupposes a system of absolute categories, is compatible with the formulation of explicit assessments, and in particular, explicit norms.
In epistemology 17-18 centuries. dominated that O., validity and thus scientificity necessarily presuppose, and statements that do not allow qualification in terms of truth and falsehood can be neither objective, nor justified, nor scientific. Such a conviction was caused primarily by the fact that science meant only; social and humanitarian sciences were considered only pre-sciences, significantly lagging behind in their development from the sciences.
The reduction of O. and validity to the truth was based on the conviction that only truth, which depends only on the structure of the world and therefore does not have gradations and degrees, is eternal and unchanging, can be a reliable basis for knowledge and action. Where there is no truth, there is no O., and everything is subjective, unstable and unreliable. All forms of reflection of reality were characterized in terms of truth: it was not only about the "truths of science", but also about the "truths of morality" and even about the "truths of poetry". The good turned out to be, as a result, special cases of truth, its “practical” varieties. O.'s reduction to truth also resulted in the reduction of all uses of language to description: it can only be true and, therefore, reliable. All other uses of language - evaluation, promise, declaration (of the world with the help of words), expressive, orative, warning, etc. - were seen as descriptions in disguise or declared to be random to the language because they seemed subjective and unreliable.
AT . 19th century The positivists united various non-descriptive statements under the general heading of "assessments" and demanded the decisive exclusion of all kinds of "assessments" from the language of science. At the same time, representatives of the philosophy of life, which stood in opposition to positivism, emphasized the importance of "assessments" for the entire process of human life and their irremovability from the language of social philosophy and all social sciences. This one about “assessments” continues by inertia even now. However, it is obvious that if the social and human sciences do not contain any recommendations regarding human activity, the existence of such sciences will become doubtful. Economics, political science, linguistics, etc., restructured on the model of physics, in which there are no subjective and therefore unreliable "assessments", are useless.
Not only descriptions, but also assessments, norms, etc. may or may not be justified. The real one, concerning the social and human sciences, which always contain explicit or implicit evaluative statements (in particular, dual, descriptive-evaluative statements), is to develop reliable criteria for the validity and, therefore, O. of such statements and explore the possibilities of excluding unfounded ratings. Evaluation is always subjective, which is why they are farther from the ideal of O. than the sciences of nature. At the same time, without this kind of subjectivation, and thus a departure from O., it is impossible for a person to transform the world.
In the natural sciences, there are also different types of O. In particular, physical O., which excludes teleological (target) explanations, clearly differs from biological O., which is usually compatible with such explanations; The principle of cosmology, which presupposes the "present" and the "arrow of time," is different from the principle of those natural sciences whose laws do not distinguish the past from the future.
The problem of O. artistic images remains almost unexplored. Argumentation (and above all) objectifies the supported position, eliminates the personal, subjective moments associated with it. However, in a work of art, nothing needs to be specifically substantiated, let alone proved; on the contrary, one must give up the desire to build chains of reasoning and identify the consequences of accepted premises. And at the same time, it can be not only subjective, but also objective. “... The essence of a work of art,” writes K.G. Jung, - does not consist in its burden with purely personal characteristics - the more it is burdened with them, the less it can be about art - but in the fact that it speaks on behalf of the spirit of humanity, the heart of humanity and addresses them. The purely personal is for art a limitation, even a vice. "Art" that is exclusively or at least primarily personal deserves to be regarded as ". Regarding Z. Freud's idea that everyone is an infantile-autoerotically limited personality, Jung notes that this may be valid in relation to the artist as a person, but not applicable to him as a creator: “for the creator is neither autoerotic, nor heteroerotic, nor or else erotic, but in the highest degree objective, essential, superpersonal, perhaps even inhuman or superhuman, because in his capacity as an artist he is his own, and not a man.

Philosophy: Encyclopedic Dictionary. - M.: Gardariki. Edited by A.A. Ivina. 2004 .

OBJECTIVITY

1) character, liberation from everything subjective, from subjective influences; , neutrality. Objectivity is also called the ability to observe and state something "strictly objectively." But man does not have this ability. On the contrary, in any cognition and statements of any kind, all the factors related to the bodily, mental and spiritual being of the individual interact, including the subconscious forces operating in him and transcendental experiences. Therefore, true objectivity is achieved only very approximately and remains the ideal for scientific work; 2) spiritual to do not for personal gain, but in a higher order. A prerequisite for objectivity is the ability to impartially and without prejudice to delve into the content of the case, the order of things and dedication to the cause.

Philosophical Encyclopedic Dictionary. 2010 .

Antonyms:

See what "OBJECTIVITY" is in other dictionaries:

Impartiality, impartiality, impartiality, impartiality, impartiality, fairness; open-mindedness, independence, impartiality, honesty. Ant. prejudice, partiality, partiality, prejudice, ... ... Synonym dictionary

- (from the word object). The properties of an object in themselves, regardless of how they appear to the observer. Dictionary of foreign words included in the Russian language. Chudinov A.N., 1910. OBJECTIVITY from the word object. Objectivity, visibility. ... ... Dictionary of foreign words of the Russian language

objectivity- 1. Valid; the existence of objects, phenomena and processes, their properties and relations, the whole world as a whole, independent of the will and consciousness of the subject; belonging to the so-called objective reality. 2. The content of knowledge relevant ... ... Great Psychological Encyclopedia

Many people ask themselves, “What is the difference between a subjective opinion and an objective one?” This is very important to understand, because in everyday life we ​​often come across these concepts. Let's take them in order.

What does "subjective opinion" mean?

Subjective opinion is based on our emotional judgments, life experiences and point of view. For example, each of us has our own understanding of beauty, aesthetics, harmony, fashion, etc. Such an opinion will necessarily be true for the one who puts it forward. In subjectivity, a person expresses his own, as he "seems" or "appears." But in fact, this is not always true. Voicing his thoughts, a person, first of all, shows his inner state. It is important to remember that the opinion of other people, even prominent ones, should not be the only correct one for you. We can say that the subjective opinion is biased, so it is very important to learn to look at the situation from different angles, cope with emotions and put yourself in the place of others.

What does "objective opinion" mean?

An objective opinion does not depend on our condition. It is always based on proven and proven circumstances, when we do not look for excuses, but accept the situation as it is. For example, the laws of physics are objective and work regardless of our knowledge about them. The same can be said about many other things. When we try to evaluate a certain situation, pushing into the background our mood, prejudices and opinion, the opinion becomes as accurate as possible. This is difficult because we often become prisoners of our own emotional state. If you find it difficult, try to master the technique of stalking, which allows you to track down your feelings and emotions in order to constantly and completely control yourself.

Subjective and objective opinions differ significantly, but the problem with most people is that they consider their subjective opinion to be objective. We all need to learn to see situations deeper and look at them from different angles.

Objectivity and, first of all, the objectivity of information as a quality of the information fields surrounding us, is extremely important both in everyday life and for professional self-realization.

Unfortunately, often the subjectivity of judgments, which are disguised as the objective opinion of some specialist, does not allow us to correctly understand the problem and make an adequate and objective decision. Let's figure out what objectivity is, is it possible to distinguish it from a subjective opinion and how to correctly present information in professional activities and in everyday life.

What it is

What is objectivity and why do you need to be able to recognize it? In philosophy, there has long been a scientific dispute about the objective and the subjective, as well as about truth and truth. As a result of centuries of disputes, philosophers have found a point to separate these concepts.

They established that the objectivity of truth is its immutable quality. Then, apparently, the expression appeared: "Everyone has his own truth, and the truth is one for all." Based on this, it can be deduced that:

• Objectivity as a quality, not related to personal judgments and interests, is not based on preferences, exists in itself and does not depend on evaluation. It is based on constant values, objective facts, conclusions supported by the results of scientific research, etc. This is a quality that cannot be challenged or changed at will. It is based on scientific or other practical knowledge about the object.
• The opposite of this quality is subjectivity. In this capacity, everything is connected with opinion, judgment, evaluation, personal criteria and desires. Subjectivity is always repelled from the subject. Subjective information is information created or modified by the subject.

For example, when we talk about such qualities as practicality, beauty, taste, and others, we inevitably give a personal assessment or use personal subjective experience, which means that our reasoning is subjective. When we talk about exact values ​​(time, weight, and the like) or about scientific facts, this is an objective opinion, since we take indisputable data or facts as a basis.

“Hot water” and “water boiling point 100 degrees Celsius” are both subjective and objective forms of presenting information about the same water quality.

Interestingly, from the point of view of the semantic analysis of the Russian language, subjectivity is almost always expressed by an adjective, while the use of verbs in speech enhances the perception of information as objective.

Why is it important to be able to transform information into an objective opinion? First of all, because in this form people better perceive what you want to tell them. Subjective opinion is likely to be questioned, not heeded, or it will become a source of controversy. Objective opinions will be taken seriously. At the same time, you can use this skill both in the professional field and in everyday life.

Let's say you want to convince the leader of the correctness of the path you have chosen to resolve an issue. If your objective opinion is based on scientific data and conclusions made previously and not challenged by anyone, you will most likely be able to defend your point of view. If you present the same information, but only as your own judgment, the result may be the opposite.

This strategy can also be used with children. Children are more likely to trust information in a scientific or precise form. Put an experiment together with them and, believe me, the result of the experiment will be the best confirmation of objective truth for them than a dozen books they read.

Of course, there are areas where there is not and cannot be an objective opinion. Art - painting, music, theater - is always perceived subjectively, i.e. evaluated by each individual based on his preferences. Subjective judgment is also possible in those scientific fields where there is no consensus yet, there is still no way to draw final and objective conclusions, since there are no accurate scientific data.

Take, for example, the reasoning of astronomers about the structure of the universe. It is technologically impossible to measure its dimensions, to obtain information about the physical processes occurring in it. Information about the universe is fragmented, not allowing to see the whole picture.

With such a set of facts, it is impossible to get an objective opinion about this object. Most researchers in this field so far only make assumptions and each create their own model of the Universe, assuming which of the physical laws known to us can operate in it.

But even the discoveries already made were not always immediately accepted by the scientific community. History knows cases when the discoveries made by scientists were considered only a subjective opinion for a long time. In such cases, only time could turn a scientific hypothesis into an objective truth.

Reality. Objective or subjective

Another important question that philosophers and psychologists ask is: is reality an objective or subjective category?

From the point of view of philosophy, reality as a set of facts, objects, actions, of course, is objective, but only at each specific moment in time. Since reality is extremely changeable and is almost always evaluated by the subject, this determines its subjectivity.

In psychology, objective reality and subjective reality have become stable concepts. When working with an individual, it is important to understand what is the attitude of the individual towards each of them, how she evaluates them, who, in her opinion, influences their formation.

Children often take for objective reality the opinion of parents or adults who have authority. Therefore, it is important to teach the child to form his position and to distinguish subjective opinion from objective facts.

Show your child that having a subjective opinion is very important. Ask how he relates to some natural phenomenon. Go to an exhibition or a concert with him, discuss a book or a movie. Talk about what you think and how you feel. Ask him to describe his thoughts and feelings.

Open the world of objective knowledge and science to your child. Tell us about how scientists explore reality and make discoveries and how objective knowledge helps us in life. Author: Ruslana Kaplanova