What is the difference between objective and subjective? I seem to have a basic understanding of what they mean, yet when compared to one another i get all mixed up. I am beginning to understand it more and more, though i haven't had that "click" yet.
I was discussing this with a friend, and he somewhat disagreed.What is the difference between objective and subjective? I seem to have a basic understanding of what they mean, yet when compared to one another i get all mixed up. I am beginning to understand it more and more, though i haven't had that "click" yet. I was discussing this with a friend, and he somewhat disagreed. Objective comes from seeing things as an object. As such the object is taken wholly for whatever it is, and anything outside the object is disregarded, and then seeing how it relates to the subject at hand (unless completely perceiving, in which case there is no current subject). Thus an "objective jury". Subjective, means seeing everything only in relation to the current subject. As such any objects are not looked at wholly, rather only in relation to perceived relevance to the subject at hand (as if through lenses). When there is no object, everything is related to the subject. Thus the witness must be "subjected to questioning" A lawyer may object to antics of a subjective question from the opposing barrister. Subjective as it is not "open" enough to see the truth. "Object" , mostly being an opposite of subject, is to remind the court of balance. My friend that disagreed and said that the words may not neccesarily have the same roots, or evolve for the same reasons. I care right now about this because Katherine Briggs defines one difference between extraveret and introvert is that extraverts are objective, and introverts are subjective. Thus, an INTP as an introverted thinker uses logic-judgements subjectively, whereas the ENTJ as an extroverted thinker uses logic-judgements objectively. So, i was tossing this around and then read the a quote from Joalnde Jacobi's book "The Psycology of CG Jung" (English Edition 1973), page 18. "..." means i'm skipping, they do not appear in the book (or at least in this quote).
EXTRAVERSION and INTROVERSION...One or the other of these orientations is the reaction habitus that determines the way we respond to the objects of the outer and inner world, the nature of our subjective experience, and even the compensatory actions of our subconcious.... Extraversion is charactarized by a positive relation to the object, introversion by a negative one. In his adjustment and reaction pattern, the extravert orients himself predominantly by the outward, collective norms, the spirit of his times, etc. The attitudes of the introvert, on the other hand, are determined mainly by subjective factors. Often he is poorly adjusted to his environment. The extravert 'thinks, feels, and acts in relation to the object'; he displaces his interest from subject to object and orients himself to the world outside himself. For the introvert the subject is the basis of orientation, while the object plays at most a secondary, indirect role. His first move in every situation that confronts him is to recoil, 'as if with an unvoiced no', and only then does his real reaction set in.Would someone please help me fully understand and appreciate these terms?