Why are things subjective and not objective?

-evolution and variation -separate consciousness -difference in opinions and culture (we have different values and meaning in each of our lives) -we are limited by both circumstantial events and our own human perception and experience Should I even have to argue for these things? Am I not a different person than you? Do you feel that your eyes and all of your senses, memory and certainty are always correct and the same as everyone elses? How could you actually think that is the case universally? It is obvious that cultures are different and that we have different views and find different things meaningful. This is evidence of highly different subjective views. How can one deny this? Other people, especially those of other countries, may have very different views than you on any subject. Would one not say that we live out our lives usually interacting with others but at the very least our environment? There are times when we think and dream, but our day to day life is interacting with the environment. We all have different environments (I am living somewhere completely different than the reader most likely). And even when people have similar environments, you only have your perception of it., and they have theirs. It is proven that we are made up of DNA and that is a code written in all of us, it is what gives us our specific body. From this we develop a specific mind that only has this DNA. We are all unique down to a technical level, our finger prints for example. There are also similarities but at the deepest levels we are all different. This is part of variation and evolution. Our genes get developed overtime to create new, better, unique humans. Our genes mutate as we many different people mate. This creates tons of little variations from gene to gene. We are all different on a chemical level, producing a unique mind that thinks things outside that of every other mind. Our specific life experience allows us to form a consciousness that is wholly original. These are all ways we are different from each other and individuals. We all have different views, minds, experiences and desires, making what we think of as right and desirable subjective things. This is why things are not objective. This is why we cant always agree, and this is why we cant always be right. This is why when you are on the internet trying to tell someone that there is a moral objectivity that every individual should conform to, they completely deny you and wont let up in the slightest. Both parties have their own personal experience and perspectives, so they end up having different views and they both happen to feel so certain about their view. This should conclude why things are subjective, if one disagrees I honestly feel they should rethink their views. I know anyone could say this, but when you deny such scientific evidence then you are just being ignorant and undermining the whole system of knowledge. What is subjective? Almost everything. On the most basic level everything is subjective in the sense that it is relative to us. However, we can see some very specific constants in our universe that make sense when applied in basically every situation. Scientific research allows for this. These things can be considered objective because they work outside of our perception and consciousness. Even if I die, you others will live, your scientific processes will go on without me. These things are experienced and true whether we experience them or not. (One could argue solipsism, but that gets us nowhere). When humans say that science is objective they are wrong sometimes, but it usually allows them to move

further and further, until we are here, in 2012 and we know that the universe is expanding, that there is a fourth dimension, that gravity warps space-time, etc.. Science is not perfect right now, not in the least, but it has gotten pretty exact when it comes to the measurement of the forces in the third dimension. We have been able to apply these constants and have them always work (weight of Hydrogen and the average weight of every neutron, proton and electron). These are things that can be taken as objective even though I havent weighed or measured them myself. There is the possibility someday there will be an outlier, but that day has yet to come and we are only progressing with this data; might as well use the scientific data that constantly produces positive conclusions. This can be considered objective, but it is because it is outside our selves. Things like morals and law are within us, and dependent on our own lives and views. Even if 95% of people think killing is bad, that doesnt make killing technically bad. It makes it not so wise to do amoung all those that dislike it, but not technically wrong (killing a person because if they lived many would die). Here is a circumstance where many would say killing is right, and there would still be many to say the opposite. However, one can see why someone would do this out of good conscious and how it would better society. This guy is murdering people and ruining lives, if you kill him you save any life that would have otherwise been taken away, so why would this be bad? There are good reasons for why it can be considered bad, but in the end it will be considered good by many people. This instantly makes killing a morally good option in some cases by some peoples standards. So even if 95% of people said killing is bad, do you think if given this example first off, that they would say it was bad? Many still would, but I think we can speculate safely that much more than 5% would say that killing is fine in this case. These arent exact statistics and we cant know properly until there are exact statistics, but I feel these types of things are talked about enough and general enough that we can deduce what most people will say when asked certain things. For example how many people are going to agree that we should rip off the faces of children? Not many at all. How many would agree that abortion is needed? Many, even though it is controversial (the other side really doesnt have any argument to deny the usefulness of abortion in cases like rape). The fact that it is so controversial only shows how subjective morals are. If one somehow thinks morals are objective, they should not think of them as objective in the sense that the majority rules. An objective morality would be a morality that is beyond our realm of creating and would cover every circumstance. I deny an objective model that is supposedly higher than what we can achieve, since we cannot achieve it or even know it right now. I feel since this understanding of morality is so unrealistic that I am not going to apply it to life at all. Another model of objectivity is that there always is a best decision, we just cant be sure of it. I agree with this more so. I feel if we could somehow weigh and know everything about a situation that we may be able to determine the best solution, however, we cant know this. We would have to know the future; we would have to know which choices brought out the best results. There is chance and things out of our control, so we cannot always do what is best. If we could see every option for our future we could see the best choice though. But even this is objective model is impossible, as we cannot know the future at this point. All we can do is try our best to pick the best possible options in life.

Has everyone been convinced? Does everyone understand that things are subjective? Does everyone not listen to Einstein, Nietzsche, Sartre, Heidegger, and many more? We are taught these views but it seems like there are still so many people that feel they are just views. These are not just views. These are observations that have been proven to be right. Even with Kant being flawed people still agree with him. Instead of deciding what is right for themselves they just think this philosopher is right, even when he can be obviously wrong (selfish intentions = bad, no matter what; lying= bad, no matter what). Why not just understand that your belief isnt always correct, or right in every way. I see all these philosophical beliefs like solipsism, existentialism, empiricism, etc. Why align with only one and create reasons as to why its right? You dont have to agree with everything from one of them, find out what is reasonable, most logical to you, and if that means there are bits and pieces from many different fields of thought, that means you have your own unique view. Embrace that uniqueness, understand it and use it.