Difference between revisions of "Talk:Objectivity"
(New page: I think that empirical data is not the issue. You can be subjective, simply by selecting which empirical data you choose to consult or present. To me objectivity is the attempt (albeit fla...) |
|||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
I think that empirical data is not the issue. You can be subjective, simply by selecting which empirical data you choose to consult or present. To me objectivity is the attempt (albeit flawed) to examine an event or an object from all those different perspectives which appear to represent a coherent and conventionally accepted standpoint, and are relevant to the topic under consideration. We might view this as 'triangulation', to ensure that our viewpoint is not biased, one-sided etc. | I think that empirical data is not the issue. You can be subjective, simply by selecting which empirical data you choose to consult or present. To me objectivity is the attempt (albeit flawed) to examine an event or an object from all those different perspectives which appear to represent a coherent and conventionally accepted standpoint, and are relevant to the topic under consideration. We might view this as 'triangulation', to ensure that our viewpoint is not biased, one-sided etc. | ||
--[[User:Felix|Felix]] 08:52, 17 April 2007 (EDT) | --[[User:Felix|Felix]] 08:52, 17 April 2007 (EDT) | ||
| + | |||
| + | The best way to be objective is to proportion different subjective viewpoints based on their validity after critical examination that disregards human constructs such as emotion. For example, this Wiki isn't objective in the slightest, because it proportions almost no opinion to anyone who is: Not a fundamental Christian; not a republican; not against Pro-Choice; etc. | ||
Latest revision as of 20:58, November 11, 2011
I think that empirical data is not the issue. You can be subjective, simply by selecting which empirical data you choose to consult or present. To me objectivity is the attempt (albeit flawed) to examine an event or an object from all those different perspectives which appear to represent a coherent and conventionally accepted standpoint, and are relevant to the topic under consideration. We might view this as 'triangulation', to ensure that our viewpoint is not biased, one-sided etc. --Felix 08:52, 17 April 2007 (EDT)
The best way to be objective is to proportion different subjective viewpoints based on their validity after critical examination that disregards human constructs such as emotion. For example, this Wiki isn't objective in the slightest, because it proportions almost no opinion to anyone who is: Not a fundamental Christian; not a republican; not against Pro-Choice; etc.