I think subjectivity is a core concept of human beings. When the idea of subjectivity, or its opposite objectivity, is truly envisioned and internalized, it shapes the perceptions of ourselves and the world around us at a fundamental level. In my subjective opinion, subjectivity changes one’s experiences positively and is a way to achieve peace of mind and happiness. 

The defining difference between subjectivity and objectivity is clear; if there is a true answer to a problem, that is inherently true and could never be otherwise given the definition of the problem, one can make objective claims about what is true or false and better or worse. Mathematics is well-defined, meaning that one can say that 1+1=2 is objectively true. Any other answer is objectively false. To conclude that something is objectively better or worse, a defined goal is required. It is not always objectively better to roll two dice than one, but if the goal is to maximize the expected sum of the dice, it would be objectively better to throw as many as possible. 

Is pasta better than pizza? There is no objective answer to that question because “better” is not defined by a goal. In cases where there cannot be any objective answer, all statements are fundamentally subjective. Hence, I may say that I subjectively think pizza is better than pasta. Pizza may be objectively worse if the problem is to minimize calorie intake, but my goal is not to lose weight. There are other characteristics determining my preferences for pizza, such as the taste of it. All conceivable problems with a defined goal can be decomposed into a set of variables one want to maximize. In theory, there is probably something definable in the experience I get of eating pizza inducing me to prefer it over pasta. That set of variables is complex in many cases, there may be hundreds of subtle reasons that together make me prefer one person over another for instance. Although difficult to define in practice, one can imagine that there is a theoretical objective answer to any problem with a defined goal. Does that mean subjectivity does not fundamentally exist, and is only a result of sloppy definitions? No, because the one thing that never can be objectively answered is the goal of the problem itself. One can not say it is objectively worse to judge the pizza by the taste as opposed to the number of calories, or the other way around, because the goal itself cannot have a goal, and therefore cannot be objectively better or worse. What would be the goal of goals? It seems impossible to me.

This means that every opinion I and anyone else have of another person is subjective in nature. Every person has their own set of subjective goals determining the decisions they make. There are no objective truths about how to pursue life, hence nobody can be objectively better or worse than another. All claims comparing the fundamental “goodness” of people are, and always will be, subjective in nature. 

When this view is internalized and intuitive, one perceives people differently. Whenever somebody does something bad, one should be aware that it is subjectively bad. If so, feelings such as anger, pride, envy, and inferiority are replaced by a curiosity about what goals result in the behaviors of different people. You get a different experience when interacting with people with a view of subjective values and behaviors compared to when judging people as objectively good or bad and superior or inferior to one another. 

This is the fundamental and primary reason for my dislike of government rule and western religions; they claim objectivity regarding people. Christians believe that there are a set of behaviors that are objectively better than others, and the whole idea underlying and justifying standardized legislation by governments is that there exists an objectively morally superior way to behave, meaning that it is right to induce everybody to behave accordingly. As outlined here, I obviously think this is false. When applying the same principle everywhere, it may be inevitable to eventually end up as an anarchist.

If goals are that critical to any problem, what are the determinants of goals? I do not know, maybe the subject of another Friday night. I think the effects of the perspective of subjectivity are positive, it opens questions rather than closing them and causes a harmonic relationship to the environment. To me, the view of subjectivity is subjectively true and better than the view of objectivity.