Objectivity Renders Subjectivity Meaningless

I think that most people conceptualize objectivity and subjectivity as separate and opposing paradigms of reality. Ironically, I can't know what the experience is concerning the definition about what is objective nor what is subjective according to each person's views. Indeed, each TRUE definition for any word first discovered and coined by some unknown person usually is certainly unknowable, however we have probable suggestions logged in dictionaries that generally work as long as we don't get into debates upon the semantics. Each definition gives what is supposed to be a sufficient account of the reality that is supposed to be explained by the concept. Using words, I will try to explain this. So, here goes nothin'

At the very least subjectivity would have to be a component of an objective universe, that is, subjectivity necessarily derives from objectivity. The whole conception of "the problem of subjectivity occurring in an objective universe" is actually a misinformed perception of logical constructs. The two ideas could never exist as opposing forces because subjectivity at a certain level is contradictory such that when it is adjusted to adhere to logical constraints it actually BECOMES objectivity. Consciousness seems to fool our perceptions about subjectivity in that we recognize there are other "perspectives" from which reality is viewed so much so that we literally believe what we are seeing. Objectivity destroys subjectivity and renders it meaningless.

For example: If a person, or rather, a being that is so said to be "conscious" should recognize the concept of a pen it should be said that 1. a pen is by definition unknowable, rather a probable account of the reality anticipated and understood by what a pen is/can potentially be by the entity that so coined the term. 2. a pen needn't reflect the actual reality of the pen simply because the reality is knowable, hence to serve its purpose, that is the account of reality that is the definition, it must justifiably account for a sufficient amount of the recognizable traits in what would be considered to be a pen in the first occurrence.

Reality concerning the pen usually happens in this manner. The thing that so scribes and carries the characteristics of what is a pen is labeled a ''pen''. The reality is that there is much more to the pen that we don't yet realize and will never actually be capable of understanding. The pen exists in reality as an unknowable truth yet we aim to describe it as best as we can in our limited conceptualizations. Furthermore, each person views, tastes, touches, etc. and understands the pen independently. However, independence isn't sufficient for multiple accounts of the reality of the pen. The pen still is based in reality and it shall ALWAYS be viewed through a skewed glass.

We can never be certain what a "pen" actually is nor can we be realize what other people actually perceive to be a "pen". Yet, we can construct a model of a pen based on probability which suggests that a "pen" is likely this or that such that we agree on certain qualifications and expectations of what it means to be a "pen". This model, which is a functional model, allows people a "good enough" interpretation of what a "pen" is to follow concepts that include the pen as a property of reality. "Good enough" is a bar that is adjustable and will rise and fall with the progression of humanity. Our conceptualization of the "pen" will be adjusted according to what we come to understand about reality. Our entire understanding of the pen is provisional.

Eventually, we will minimize the uncertainty that surrounds the nature of things, that is, we will gain a better understanding of what a "pen" is. So long as these processes are based in an objective universe then they can by implication be understood according to the laws associated with science. Basically, what is subjective to you is really a lost thought brought into the center of your understanding. This "lost thought" can eventually be reclaimed by outside interpretations and logged in scientific inquiry. It is possible to understand at a fundamental level what you experience to a degree according to science such that subjectivity is rendered meaningless.