The Fallacy of Objectivity

While trying to salvage a losing argument, a friend threw ad-hominems at me challenging my “objectivity”.  Before I could respond, he went away fuming after having pronounced himself as objective, balanced, and the rest of such adjectives and thrown me into the pits of “subjective, biased” views.

Interesting how objectivity works so well in the hands of those who judge.

No Objectivity in physical existence

Copenhagen interpretation of Quantum physics discussed the complementarity of wave and particle. Schrodinger’s Wave Collapse experiments had challenged the very understanding of our nature.  The myth of objectivity was being torn apart from the very basis of this existence.

What was a wave, underlying this existence, collapsed into a particle on observation by an observer.  The objective reality of conscious wave could only find its physical reality in a subjective observation. [Read Eternal Illusion and How Observer Creates His Own Reality for a deeper discussion – also check out Dr. Deepak Chopra’s special comment on the significance of that article]

The very basis of this physical existence, therefore, is predicated on subjectivity.  Objectivity has no place even in our being at the physical level.  The only realm of objectivity available to us is in our dissolution.  When I am no more, I am an objective state, not available for either observation or judgment.  For, at that level there is no observation left.

When the very basis of our reality is subjective, it is quite interesting that so many hanker for objectivity in their observations.  Specifically when this act of observation is what introduces the seed of subjectivity in this existence!

Objectivity is for the pretentious, lying and delusional

The ideal of objectivity is always promoted by those who have a strange sense of megalomania.  It is like the ideas of justice and fairness.  As if these are eternal and universal fundamentals.  The very act of dispensing justice is tainted by the judge.  Just as the act of “objective articulation” is inherently colored by the mind of the one who asserts so.

All these things can be artificially pegged to some rules of a book which can be interpreted by people who have created a hierarchy for themselves based on certain steps and pronounce the prerequisites of these ideals having being met.  But the fact is that these interpretations by the few and the elite have shown us the very folly that idea of justice, fairness and objectivity carry.

For such ideals to even be administered, they need to be backed by the weight of artificial superiority.  Of those that judge.

If there are no elites in a population of equals, there is no one who can define justice or objectivity.  These great ideals are but the prisoners and slaves of elite superiority by a few over many.

That is why in any debate when one has to underscore his objectivity, one necessarily has to point to his social superiority or construct one via ad-hominems.  Without this moral jugglery, there is no way these ideals can be enforced.

You see, there is no justice or objectivity among equals.

That is why the friend had to construct his own halo and trash mine for his elite status in his eye to stand vindicated.

Will never… EVER feign objectivity!

Just as he ran away, I was sharing my utter disgust for objectivity, which obviously never made its way to the friend.

Objectivity is beset with another crime.  A graver one.

It attempts to seat the exclusive, the criminal, the devil with the inclusive, the saintly and the divine – in its attempt to balance scales.

To give equal weight to a Hitler and a Jewish prisoner of his, is not objectivity or balance in arguments.  It is wretched treachery.

Argument of “two sides” to the story is for those weak and delusional people who cannot take a stand.  When everything is subjective, how do you undertake any action?

Not by evading subjectivity.  But by embracing it and working to detach itself from your own locker full of memories that bring the onus of your past on the present.  It is bad enough that one has to make a judgment at every moment for an action to occur.  It is worse that one is a slave of his past memories and cues (read Karma, the Stimulus-Reaction Memory structures and Nirvana from this bondage) to complicate the level of subjective mess.

When you restrict the subjectivity to your presence in on the moment of the action – devoid of past influences, then that is the best possible way to be.  Not all, however, are at that level though.

So, what can we all do?

Throw out edicts, commandments, and ideals.  Yes, throw them out.  They further complicate the already bad situation.

Be aware to every situation and look at the context of the situation and look for what enhances life and well-being of people.  Not their self-interest necessarily, but well-being.

And, when there are many people, in thousands, then take a call by evaluating which action will benefit the most.  Specifically the underprivileged.  Longer term trumps shorter term as well.

Action that would seem to deliver well-being to most, not all, in the longer term – should be an evaluation that needs to happen every moment.  In that state of evaluating your actions in every moment, there is a sense of humility in that person but confidence in performance of his action.

When something affects many, those who are not factored in for impact will always protest and challenge.  That is obvious.  But there is no action for everyone.  You can either be idealist or do what works.  What works.  That is what the fight in every situation is for.  Even more so in public service.

And, fetish for objectivity is by far the greatest roadblock on that road!

Featured Image by Free-Photos from Pixabay