Is the world objective or subjective

[rakimkoolgrapwutang]

i wrote this in another thread but i thought it needed its own thread cuz its an important topic

Originally Posted by rakimkoolgrapwutang

i dont believe anyone can make an objective claim or statement. its always gonna b subjective and there supposedly 'objective' statement wont b objective.

u can see this in how scientific analysis is made up of strict rules and guidelines. but when u look at quantum physics u see there are no strict rules but theres paradoxes and changing of rules.

scientists just thought that there were strict rules cuz the whole universe was objective.

but if u look at the theory of relativity u can see that measurements of different quantities are relative (and therefore subjective, not objective) to the observer.

and surely if these measurements r different for each observer then theres no objective measurement.

and this is how i see things. i dont believe there is no objective world or universe. every1 has their own subjective universe. laws and observations r only said 2 b objective when a large amount of people agree on them (but not cuz people experience the same objective universe but because the subjective universe each person experiences is similiar to the others).

but just cuz a majority experiences these things doesnt make them right. think of dogs who are colour blind. they believe that its a fact that the world is black and grey.

and humans probably also sees their world in an incomplete way. its basicly seeing the world as a crude metaphor.

so each person experiences their world as a crude subjective metaphor and the only time when something is called objective is when people experience similiar (but not the same) crude subjective metaphors.

thats why i dont believe in science. alhough i admire scientists for being honest and hardworking. but their attempts are a bit naive.

however religious people can be dishonest and make up rules for peronal gain whereas scientists usually do it for pursuit of truth.

and yes sideshow bob & low key lyesmith i know its not some profound original topic. Nietzsche, Schopenhauer and probably a lotta physicists have probably discussed this in far greater depth than i couldve done but i just wanna share it.

also another thing i forgot to mention is that in quantum mechanics a 'thing' doesn exist in a fixed state until it is observed hich also implies the world is a subjective construct.

another thing i wanna expand on is how people are able to agree on these 'objective' constructs.

i'm gonna mention Platonic idealism. this is basicly that each person holds onto a perfect clear precise ideal eg the perfect tree and then he uses this prototype for other trees so he can identify them. so he uses this image of a perfect tree so he can group and identify other trees.

i agree with Plato except i dont think the prototype ideal is a perfect tree. instead i believe its an abstract blurry tree. and we use this imprecise image to identify with other trees.

and this would help humans build this made up 'objective' world. if our prototype ideals were precise we wouldnt be able to build this 'objective' world. this is cuz our subjective worlds would b incompatible. our worlds would b 2 distinct and seperate for us to experience similiar ones.

if however our prototype ideals are imprcise this would make our subjective worlds more compatible with eachother to build an overall objective world.

[Face of the Golden Falcon]

We are tuned into an objective frequency in a field of infinite possiblity (subjective).

When you look at the Quantum World you are viewing that field of infinite possibility but consciously it is not where we reside on a day to day basis.