Is it possible to be objective?

yes
Is it possible to be objective?
No. We ALL have preconceived ideas. We filter everything through our past experiences, and place our own meanings and interpretations upon all events.
Is it possible to be objective?
No connection,


mental clarity ,


intelligence to preform the action,


moral opinion,


ethical outlook and fairness for all concerned without any prejudice for any reason.


Absolutely no outside influence.
Reply:No.





You can not observe a situation without affecting said situation.





We operate with a bias at all times. Many of us may be able to tone down our Bias meters to a 1 out of 10 so we appear to be fairly objective, but in reality the bias simply goes undetected.





Even as I answer this question I know I am biased towards no objective truth and no objective reality...that everything is subjective. Hence I justify my own statement that no one can be truly 100% objective.





If I believed I didn%26#039;t have a bias but I promoted objective truth and objective reality...well I have already disproven my statement by choosing one of many possible outlooks and then picking one, while at the same time claiming it is the only choice and the true choice.
Reply:I do not think so. Everyone%26#039;s remarks, judgments, and thoughts come from his or her particular perspective. There is no way out of this dilemma. To determine whether someone was was being completely impartial, you would need to find a way to be outside the human race judging the reality of a situation and measuring the justice with which a remarker, judge, or thinker apprehended. However, it is impossible to get outside the human race.





Moreover, how do you bridge the gap from perceiver to perceived? That is, how do you know that what you or anyone thinks is out there really is out there? You can%26#039;t. You might be dreaming right now.





Finally, thinking itself is a game of words. That throws away all notions of objectivity. You think in words. Words, however, are not the things themselves. They represent the things. We manipulate the words rather than the things. Therefore, your/my/anyone%26#039;s perception is always at one remove. It can never be found true (or false). Thinking is a semantic game. It has no end or objectivity.
Reply:Of course it is.





Just because we have a subjective consciousness doesn%26#039;t mean that we refer, all the time, to subjective matters.





It%26#039;s a silly post-modernist idea that consciousness is the same as reality, and we all live our own reality with our own truth. This is obviously mistaken, apparent in that to state such a rule is to speak objectively in the first place. The claim itself that all reality is subjective is an objective claim.





The fact is every field of study of man, engages itself in that which is objective. When you speak of laws of physics, classification of chemicals, or living entities; when you speak of mathematical statements, or linguistic structure; when you speak about logic, and morality. Anything that can be spoken of and related to by all, is by definition objective.





The way to be objective about an issue, is to effectively go beyond that which is part of your consciousness and limit yourself to that which can become part of every consciousness (not by popular influence, but by rational necessity). The things that can be part of every consciousness are the objective, and they are only rationally attained. Reason is the means to objectivity. Ideas such as %26quot;the world exists%26quot; or %26quot;2+2=4%26quot; can not only become popular in many consciousnesses, but are rationally undeniable to them. This is because they refer to objective reality. By engaging in them, we are, effectively, being objective.
Reply:Sure - you can look at two trees and see which one is taller -
Reply:When your subjectivity (knowledge and opinions and theories) directly match something in material existence, and you describe that thing, or use that thing, in a manner that confirms your subjectivity and the objective nature of the object--THEN and ONLY THEN can you be objective.





But since there are 15-24 %26quot;valid%26quot; syllogisms, there CAN BE more than one objective point of %26quot;knowledge%26quot; about any subject. You and someone else who disagrees with you can both be right.





%26quot;A horse is a quadraped,%26quot; and %26quot;A running horse has, for a brief moment, no hoofs touching the ground%26quot; are each valid and sound. You are thus both right, if the question is:


%26quot;How many feet does it require for a horse to run?%26quot; Thus, you are both objective.





(A horse can%26#039;t exist with only 3 legs, like a dog or cat. They can%26#039;t balance themselves when standing up.)