The 7 Differences Between Objectivism And Subjectivism
Objectivism and subjectivism are two cognitive currents presented as contrary, which differ mainly in the importance given to the object and the subject and in the knowledge of reality.
In this article we will see what the differences are between objectivism and subjectivism and we will see the characteristics and proposals of these philosophical currents.
Definition of concepts: objectivism and subjectivism
Both objectivism and subjectivism They are philosophical positions or currents that propose the way of knowing or describing reality
In reference to objectivism, it began in the 20th century with the publications of the works “El manantial” in 1943 and “Atlas Shrugged” in 1957 written by philosopher Ayn Rand It proposes that the object influences or determines the subject, we see how the object is discovered without influence from the subject, without taking into account the emotions, beliefs, opinions of the person who knows the reality. What we see is what it is, it is reality.
The interpretation made by the subject, the intrinsic knowledge of the individual, is not necessary, but reality already exists independently. In this way, reality would be the same for different subjects. An example of this position is scientific knowledge, which presents data and laws where the person has no influence.
For its part, Subjectivism began in the 5th century BC as a philosophical approach promoted by the sophists It is stated that reality, the truth depends on the interpretation of each person, so the knowledge and truth of each person will depend on themselves, influenced by their beliefs, experiences, emotions… In this case, the subject acts on the object. In this way, each person’s truth will vary, there is no single truth.
Differences between objectivism and subjectivism
Now that we know the terms better and we know what each one refers to, it will be easier to understand what their main differences are. At first glance we realize that the approaches presented to us by each current are contrary to each other.
Below we will present the main differences that exist between the two terms, assessing the importance given to the subject and the object; the origin of each current; how knowledge and reality are presented; What influence does society have? how to differentiate between good and bad; or the perception they have of the individual.
1. Importance to the subject or object
As we have seen in the definition, the importance that each current gives to the subject and the object is different. Objectivism highlights the influence of the object on the subject and therefore gives more importance to the object to external reality, without influence from the person who observes it.
On the other hand, subjectivism presents us with the influence of the subject exerted on the object, it gives greater importance to the subject, without it it is not possible to know reality.
In this way, reality, according to objectivism, would be what we see when we look at a landscape, the description of the characteristics of the elements. On the contrary, subjectivism affirms that reality would be the person’s interpretation of the landscape, that he feels, that reminds him, that generates in him what he is seeing.
2. Obtaining knowledge
Objectivism states that knowledge is obtained from the outside, through observation and perception, and is reached through reasoning and the logical interpretation of information. True knowledge is everything that we can test, obtaining the same result in different consultations and by different subjects.
Instead, Subjectivism will deny the need to verify knowledge or replicate the obtaining of this knowledge , since it will vary depending on who does the interpretation and when and where we do it. The particular influence that each person has on the discovery of knowledge makes it impossible for it to coincide with the knowledge of another subject. Likewise, over time, the subject’s experiences, beliefs or emotions may vary; Therefore, one’s knowledge of it may also be modified.
Objectivism presents reality as one and invariable, without influence of the subject who knows it We must approach reality without trying to change it or cause an effect on it, since this is the only way to achieve true reality. Reality exists external to us, it is the same for everyone and for this reason we have to value it neutrally, without taking into account our opinion.
Contrary, Subjectivism will affirm that reality depends on the subject and that it does not exist without the interpretation and influence that the subject exerts on the outside It is impossible to know reality if it is not through the person, in this way, we cannot separate reality and subject, we cannot achieve reality without taking into account the variables of each individual.
We could consider that objectivism believes in the existence of a single reality, known by everyone in the same way and independent of each person’s mind. On the other hand, subjectivism would propose different realities, according to the interpretation and influence of each subject. Each person will live their own reality.
4. Social influence
The subjectivist current considers the social and cultural influence on the knowledge of reality In the same way that the opinion and experience of the subject influences, so will society and established culture. Reality will not be valued equally in different social groups, since their experiences and way of interpreting it will be different.
On the contrary, objectivism does not believe in the influence of culture or social group, reality is what it is and there is only one true reality, independent of the subject’s place of origin.
You may be interested: “Moral relativism: definition and philosophical principles”
5. Origin of the two currents
As we have seen, It was the philosopher Alisa Zinovievna Rosenbaum, known by the pseudonym Ayn Rand, who first proposed objectivism in his novels “El manantial” (1943) and “Atlas Shrugged” (1957). The method he used to describe the term was not conventional, since he presented it in novel format, through the beliefs and explanations given by his characters. Later, in 1962, the author herself described objectivism in the article “Introducing objectivism” published in the Los Angeles Times.
As for subjectivism, it began much earlier in the 5th century BC, raised in the philosophical thesis of the sophists , like Protagoras and Gorgias, who were thinkers of classical Greece in charge of transmitting wisdom. Later, other thinkers appeared, well-known philosophers, who have also proposed knowledge through subjectivism, such as David Hume in the 18th century and Friedrich Nietzsche in the 19th and 20th centuries.
6. Difference between good and bad
Objectivism conceives people as rational beings , who use reason to know reality. Thus, the distinction between what is good and what is bad depends on the rational perception of the facts; the subject will act as he or she believes appropriate, with the goal of achieving his own well-being without taking into account the happiness of others. the rest. This conception of valuing only our own well-being and interest is known as moral egoism.
Instead, In subjectivism we consider the influence of ethics or what is considered socially good or bad We see how the individual’s morality intervenes, valuing what is right and wrong, what is good or bad, depending on our opinion, our feelings, that different events generate in us. That is, taking into account the human part of the subject. The type of morality that he proposes is called moral subjectivism, which gives importance to the opinions and beliefs of each person.
7. The individual
Objectivism states that the individual should look for himself and not for others , the main goal of life is the pursuit and satisfaction of one’s own interest. The happiness of others does not depend on him, each person is responsible for achieving their goals and being happy.
On the other hand, subjectivism believes that the individual must act according to his thoughts, beliefs, attitudes, values, that is, not taking into account his own interest, but rather taking into account his opinion.
