Objectivism in philosophy is that idea that we can have complete
knowledge of the world
relativism is the idea that all knowledge is relative to a perspective or individual
In that all-or-nothing view if objectivism or objectivity meant being able to perceive the world in the one and only true way, then clearly that is impossible. The very definition of what is the one and true way is entirely subjective, or relativist, because we can never perceive everything and nor is there a set rule on how anything must be sensed and evaluated.
I am out of my depth here as far as being able to use all the correct philosophical terms and references!
BUT apparantly objectivism DOESN'T mean that
Quote:
|
Objectivism, or metaphysical objectivism, is the view that there is a reality or realm of objects and facts existing wholly independent of the mind. Stronger versions of this claim might hold that there is only one correct description of this reality; they may or may not hold that we have any knowledge of it.
|
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Objectivity_(philosophy)
The first part seems a very reasonable supposition. That there is a reality whether we have percieved it or not, seems pretty certain. It's the second part that's silly.
If we agree that objectivism is wrong - do we still agree that it is possible to have some objectivity about things?
Maths is objective after all.
Can anyone shed some light on this concept? Does some philosopher explain this fully?