What to think of "subject(ive)" and "object(ive)"?

Lewian wrote: I prophesy disaster wrote: As I see it, "subjective" refers to a point of view of an individual, whereas "objective" is independent of any point of view. This doesn't mean that objectivity doesn't exist, unless you are a proponent of solipsism, which I'm not. An example from Quantum Mechanics would be that the Many Worlds Interpretation is an objective notion of reality, whereas a subjective perspective of the many worlds is the Copenhagen Interpretation. I use this example to illustrate that the difference between subjective and objective is not about the difference between opinion and fact. It should be noted that one can remove one's perspective from facts about the world, so that people can make objective statements even though they may seem to be solipsistically locked into a subjective perspective. But what do you make of the dilemma that there is simply no way for human beings to go beyond their point of view, at least not if that includes a societal perspective? The point is not that objectivity does not exist, but rather that humans can't achieve it. Unless you say that "objectivity" only refers to the nature of a statement, namely statements that refer to a reality that is supposed to be independent of any point of view, even if there isn't any chance of verifying such statements independently of any point of view.

David_D wrote: Actually, marxism makes me think that the philosophical concept of subjective, if defined as "relating to an object as it exists in the mind,  as opposed to the thing as it exists in reality (the thing in itself) ", is quite problematic because does all the human acting and much of its  result have to be considered as a part of the "subjective" or "objective" reality.

David_D wrote: Actually, I don't find the notion of objectivity to be particularly good, as it surely has some traditions, while I think all knowledge  is based on some specific values and product of some specific choices, so it's not impartial.

Lewian wrote: I prophesy disaster wrote:    I acknowledge that solipsism is ultimately correct, but it is also ultimately unhelpful. How can one make sense of the world if one believes that the world doesn't exist? Therefore, one can assert that an objective reality does exist and that it can be examined by the senses, by scientific instruments, and by mathematics. In particular, mathematics can reveal the intrinsic orderliness of reality beyond the limitations of empiricism and manifest the objective nature of reality. To say that you don't have objective access to the world is not the same as saying/believing that the world doesn't exist. I for sure believe that the world exists. The only thing I say is that it is ultimately inaccessible how our perceptions are related to how it "really" is. I'm also fine saying that for many tasks we just experience that it works well to treat the world as if it were just like we perceive it (or scientific theories etc.). And maybe it is. We can't know. But we don't need this knowledge to live.

I worked in several bar bands ( cover bands) in South Jersey over the last 20 years that were totally unprofessional and amateur sounding. Somebody always says.."Music is subjective and that's your opinion"

It's not my opinion. It's a fact. A person may say..."It is your opinion that those bands sucked" I say..."No its just a fact that they do" A person will say..."Compared to what?" I say...,"Compared to all the professional bands I worked with in the 70s and 80s " therefore there is a difference between an opinion and a fact and you don't get it"

It just grinds on and on . It's a redundancy. People have a tendency to bring this sh*t up to me when I'm out in public. For whatever reason? It's a South Jersey mentality? It's Vineland or Millville New Jersey mentality?

I could just say "Okay have it your way" That would equal wanting to hire and pay a plumber to not fix the problem you're having with your pipes. You don't want a plumber who fixes the problem ...you want a plumber you can't fix the problem. You don't want a doctor that finds something wrong ...you want a doctor who says your fine when clearly you are not. You don't want a drummer with a good meter ..you want a drummer who can't keep time and fluctuates all over the place. You don't want guitar players and keyboard players who play the right chords...no you want guitar players and keyboard players who play the wrong chords..because music is subjective and its just your opinion that they're playing all the wrong notes...OK then..have it your way

Edited by Jacob Schoolcraft - August 31 2023 at 22:06

Apart from the more general topic of subjectivity and objectivity, in music there is an irreducible amount of "magic", i.e., subjective factors that you can't explain. Certain melodies, voices, rhythms, sounds resonate with some people and not with others. One can speculate about explanations (experiences as a child and whatever) but ultimately we will never know. And this is "very* important. Of course you can talk about professionalism, how well people know to play their instruments, novelty, measurable complexity and the like, but that's only a small part of what makes music appealing.

Lewian wrote: Apart from the more general topic of subjectivity and objectivity, in music there is an irreducible amount of "magic", i.e., subjective factors that you can't explain. Certain melodies, voices, rhythms, sounds resonate with some people and not with others. One can speculate about explanations (experiences as a child and whatever) but ultimately we will never know. And this is "very* important. Of course you can talk about professionalism, how well people know to play their instruments, novelty, measurable complexity and the like, but that's only a small part of what makes music appealing.

Obviously some of the most simplistic music is the most beautiful and affective. ..but a guitar player that doesn't care about dynamics or the least bit of technique and is sloppy and has no finesse...certainly doesn't belong in a band like YES or King Crimson.

If they do in fact sound choppy and do things like cheat on their chords they shouldn't be in a Genesis tribute band or even a Top 40 cover band. Sadly they sometimes are in a Top 40 cover band and are an embarrassment to good musicians who work very hard to be the opposite of that and quite an entertainment source for drunks 🥴