Difference Between Objective and Subjective
Subjective vs Objective
In stories, newspapers, and the spoken word, people all over the world are trying to convince you to think as they do. They are bombarding you with facts and figures, opinions and projections. It is up to you to create order within this chaos and find the patterns that will help you to understand what is true, what could be true, and what is outright false. In order to do all this, you need to have a firm grip on what is objective and what is subjective.
Definition of Objective and Subjective
Objective – is a statement that is completely unbiased. It is not touched by the speaker’s previous experiences or tastes. It is verifiable by looking up facts or performing mathematical calculations.
Subjective – is a statement that has been colored by the character of the speaker or writer. It often has a basis in reality, but reflects the perspective through with the speaker views reality. It cannot be verified using concrete facts and figures.
When to Be Objective and Subjective
Objective – it is important to be objective when you are making any kind of a rational decision. It might involve purchasing something or deciding which job offer to take. You should also be objective when you are reading, especially news sources. Being objective when you are meeting and having discussions with new people helps you to keep your concentration focused on your goal, rather than on any emotions your meeting might trigger.
Subjective – can be used when nothing tangible is at stake. When you are watching a movie or reading a book for pleasure, being subjective and getting caught up in the world of the characters makes your experience more enjoyable. If you are discussing any type of art, you have to keep in mind that everyone’s opinions on a particular piece are subjective.
Easy Ways to Remember Objective and Subjective
Objective – sounds like the word object. You should be objective whenever you are discussing an object, something concrete that you can hold or touch. The facts that make up your objective statement should also be concrete, solid objects.
Subjective – is just the opposite. You can’t point to subjective subjects. They are all in your head and your past experiences. Subjective opinions are ephemeral and subject to any number of factors that can range from facts to emotions.
Examples of Objective and Subjective
Objective – scientific facts are objective as are mathematical proofs; essentially anything that can be backed up with solid data.
Subjective – opinions, interpretations, and any type of marketing presentation are all subjective.
Summary:
1.Objective and subjective statements are used by speakers to get their points across.
2.Objective statements are facts that can be verified by third parties while subjective statements may or may not be entirely true as they are colored by the opinions of the speaker.
3.Objective statements are most commonly found in the hard sciences, whereas subjective statements are generally used to describe the arts.
(39 votes, average: 4.62 out of 5)
Loading ...
Email This Post
: If you like this article or our site. Please spread the word. Share it with your friends/family.
If you would like to contribute and share your expertise, please visit our partner site difference between., which is fully open for user contribution.
Thanks for this objective article.
GOOD POST YO MAAN !!!
Very Helpful info
This does NOT really distinguish the two terms “Objective and “Subjective”. So far it looks like one can walk away with this as scientific data: No science then it is not objective. This is completely NOT so! Objective data can come from science but it is not required to come from our senses. Objective statements are true or false independant of any observer. This is a common mistake — to require verification — to those who love science. Jupiter would still be the largest planet in our immediate solar system if no humans ever studied astronomy; we just would not be aware of of it. Putting emphasis on human awareness is irrelevant to anything objective. So to the person who thinks: “well how do we know when something is objective [if we do not use our senses]?” The answer is sometimes you won’t know right then and there! Sometimes you might know immediately. Remember anything objective is independant in its own right. You not being aware of that objective thing does not change something from being objective. The view that we must be aware of something for it to exist and be objective is closer to a psychological view. No academic philosopher [who speacializes in analytical philosophy or a philosopher who is termed as a rationalist] would support that common view taught to millions of people by psychologist, parents, counselors, Oprah, Jerry Springer, Dr Phil, etc.
Being objective is putting the round peg in a round hole and a square peg in a square. It is not really being absolute but being bound and being faithful to accepted rules or guidelines.
Two Chinese would appreciate tea differently. One would say something sweet or the other, bitter. Then if one of them was instead a Japanese, it would be a much more interesting discussion. Much more interesting and maybe even scenic if the other’s a Westerner.
But if they were not to appreciate it but to illustrate the tea’s molecular structure or to simply measure the amount of ingredients, there would be nothing to argue about.
Think its a very good explanation of Subjective and objective for someone doesn’t have that much knowledge about it. Thanks for posting.
Roy…wow…just wow…trying to sound smart…
sigh.
ANYWAYS, good job on the article. Concise, helpful, and comprehensive.
Thanks.
Hi again Jonathan,
I hope I did not come across condescending or trying to be the highest IQ in the universe. It is not about being smart but informed. Smart and intelligent or psycho babble words: either to make some one superior or to put someone down (like to tease them). So let’s not use “psychology words” to stroke an ego or demoralize a person. My purpose was to give a proper understanding of the terms which belong to the academic field of philosophy — not any other subject. Thus, I gave an answer you would get if you were to ask an expert in that field. So many people do not respect the field of Philosophy and make stuff up. These people then teach the wrong information to others who could care less about philosophy. As if philosophy is so easy a caveman can do it! (The BS that everyone is a philosopher was probably not started by a legit philosopher.) I know of no other subject that gets disrespected and dumped on as philosophy gets disrespected and dumped on. My answer addressed what I have seen as the most common mistakes people who care less about philosophy make: 1) all knowledge in the universe MUST be science based (i.e. “if it is not a form of science I will not acknowledge it nor will I try to understand it — anything outside of science is garbage”); 2) if we are not aware of anything objective then objective knowledge is impossible; 3) everything is subjective because we all are diferent and experience things differently according to the individual.
4) we must side with what the majority of people think or feel about objectivity and morals (thus the majority rules because of the infamous “we all can’t be wrong” theory.
Objectivity should be free from bias, free from personal opinion or personal belief; objectivty should be honest, truthful, accurate, and specifically detailed without catering to some high authority. In other words, we don’t need the police or some politician or a court judge to MAKE choices for us.
Objective knowledge should be open to all people and if done correctly, people should be given all relevant information in specific detail as to distinguish thigs so unlike things are not confused or substituted as equal. If this is done, all people or most of the people (if they are honest and truthful) should agree with the FACTS of the matter and reach the same exact conclusion. Many people WILL NOT do so because of psychological reasons: many people will not be unbiased they FEEL as certain way; they act as if they are above you and are rulers or Gods –only their feelings matter . Other people like to kiss up to authority and be TOLD what they must do; if you are not an authority in these people’s eyes you are worthless; they would rather be wrong then listen (compare this to Jews and Jesus Christ). Independant thinking is a way to gain objective knowledge. What I mean is a person with no vested interest should call it as he sees it. This is close to impossible when you have so many individuals thinking all things are subjective because some psychologists or some high ranked person in society tells the public — especially children — all things are matters of opinion or under authority: “So either make things up or listen to those people with their foot on your neck — or else . . . .” I suggest no ordianry accountant has this power to influence the public. I suggest no ordianry biologist, chemist, engineer, etc has this power to influence the public. There are only a handful of academic subjects that teach the BULLSHIDO way –that life is what we make it and think about it. Objective knowledge should be all of the relevant facts about a subject without anything else — cut the fat. Wanna be authorities and Kiss ups are raised to do completely the opposite.
My brain hurts. I think some people think too much. I’m 64 and I probably have been thinking for 61 of those years. Right now I just want to stack cans of peas on a shelf.
>>1) all knowledge in the universe MUST be science based (i.e. “if it is not a form of science I will not acknowledge it nor will I try to understand it — anything outside of science is garbage”)<<
Do many people actually hold this view? There are innumerable statements of fact that are not particularly associated with "science", nor require it, but that are clearly objective: "I have one head." "The sky is often blue." "Bill Clinton is a male." "I am about to post this reply on the internet." "This statement is in the present tense."…etc.
I must apologize for many typos in the post prior. Here I will make sense of the errors I made.
ERROR:
4) we must side with what the majority of people think or feel about objectivity and morals (thus the majority rules because of the infamous “we all can’t be wrong” theory.
Read more: Difference Between Objective and Subjective | Difference Between http://www.differencebetween.net/language/difference-between-objective-and-subjective/#comment-23054#ixzz0seZVlwPD
I must appologize for introducing an open parentheses and not closing the parentheses. Here I correct it:
(thus the majority rules because of the infamous “we all can’t be wrong” theory).
ERROR:
Many people WILL NOT do so because of psychological reasons: many people will not be unbiased they FEEL as certain way
Read more: Difference Between Objective and Subjective | Difference Between http://www.differencebetween.net/language/difference-between-objective-and-subjective/#comment-23054#ixzz0seUj1F2J
This should read:
Many people WILL NOT do so because of psychological reasons: many people will not be unbiased because they feel a certain way; they act as if they are above you and are rulers or Gods — only their feelings matter.
[In other words, person A thinks he is superior to the other human being for no legit reason at all; and as a result person A overrides any thing further the other human says or thinks. Thus person A thinks he is in charge and eventually stops further discussion.]
In my view this stops the discussion because the other human being is not beating him senseless for being a bully and disrespectful. Objectively, no one is higher than another in all respects of life. There is bound to be somethings I am better at than you for example. Then of course there are things you will do better than me. We should see each others as equal human beings. But many people refuse to be fair, moral, and treat others as their equal. Then these people claim there is no objectivity. That is because theses people puposely prevent any objectivity.
Can people purposely prevent objectivity? YES! Can objectivity exist to truthful and honest humans with nothing to gain? YES!
Objectively I did make some errors in the previous posting. All who read it should conclude the exact same things if they adhere to facts of grammar and are truthful and honest. No science is required to discover all objective knowledge because somethings are pure semantics.
Roy,
How odd all i wanted was to clarify the diff between objective and subjective. After just a couple lines of your post i thought you were an arrogant ass but in the end I thought your ideas were quite informative, clear, and concise keep it up.
..yah maybe the text doesn’t really elaborate the difference between the 2….need 2 search more…but it helps
heyo. ok so objective sounds to be the more appealing of the two, but I dont know if it is all what it’s said to be. Meaning, the proof of God is not fact, but a belief. Would one not say that is subjective? I don’t believe science can prove everything. I don’t even know why I’m writing this right now because really I just was wondering about the difference between an object and a subject in regards to english, or grammer. Anyway, lately I have been thinking of becoming an english teacher bc most all, if not all, of my english teachers have made such a major impact in my life (and I was a quiet B student, if I was lucky). It’s hard to understand that bc I seem to be more math oriented, but on the emotion side of me, I appreciated my english teachers. That and history. I’m just a little uneasy about reading Roy’s responses bc I agree with the honesty of the objective, but the emotion of the subjective shouldn’t be disregarded either. I also agree with Terrance, and I enjoyed Eds reply, funny. My writing is a bit jumbled, but maybe someone will read it and make a little objective and subjective sense out of it and then they can explain what the object and subject of a sentence is, lol. until next time, live long and prosper (never was much of a star trek buff, just sounds cool..)
Nice guys!!! keep it up,, A healthy subjective debate might have an objective conclusion.. Roy,, u r gr8 mate!! i guess ur objective thinking yielded a subjective response!! guess u were carried away by the emotions because someone called u smart.. a debate on a difference between science and philosophy will open another can of worms so we rather keep it at bay.. Does objective thinking also mean accepting other people’s opinions even if they are different than yours but more practical?
Hi all again,
I I have tried to be clear as possible without trying to sound superior or anything. I would like to know what troubles people who do not understand what I stated “objective” means. Diane, you stated it does not clear up the difference between the two. In what situation would you have doubts? Anyone have any confusing examples between the two? I ask this in order to better describe the distinctions. I can own up to my definition not being clear for now to people who may not be familiar with philosophy. I would like to improve the term definition to give no doubt to anyone who understands english. So I need to know specifically where people go wrong or getting lost.
Perhaps, the confusion is the people we are around and the way they speak. For example, some group of people in the USA might use the term objective in a newer context: something that is always true no matter what circumstances and never changing, for example. This seems plausible why many think there is no such thing as objectivity. Things do change when the relevant circumstances change. Objectivity as I described it has been used in philosophy longer than any of the newer definitions. I think the definition I gave is the original one because philosophers used it most.
In what context do you hear or read the terms objective and subjective?
Again, I do not want people to confuse their ability to know with there being an objective answer. There is either a God (let’s say the christian one for now) or there isn’t. This is a logical law: the law of the excluded middle. It is impossible for there to be a circumstance where God exist and doesn’t exist in the same place and same context. So Objectively God can exist without you being able to prove it. Yes God can be a fact without your knowledge. Like wise the proposition God does not exist might be objectively true as well. You just might not know which one it is. This bothers people who always want SCIENCE to do everything. This is asking for too much. Science is not GOD. Don’t expect it to solve all problems. Science can’t answer many things today so it should be similar to the God example.
The subjective is the emotional side which I never suggested to disregard it. We all use it. However use it wisely! People who exaggerate their emotions often do irrational things. The people who beleive all things are subjective are prone to this. However, notice if all things are subjective we can ignore some of these ideas because they don’t apply in all cases or even most cases. Objective things are true regardless of who we are and what we are going through; thus true for all. Subjective is like being given advice. Objective is like law we must obey. This anaology is not perfect but should hint at the differences. Advice we are not obligated to follow; laws we are obligated to follow even if we are ignorant of the law. I have heard many subjective lovers utter: “All things we think, read or say are subjective because those thoughts or words come from an individual who has personal beliefs, opinions, desires, and thoughts different from everyone else.” Now stop and think. If the previous statement is always true it would be Objective! why? Because it covers all people all the time and is always true forever. Objective covers more ground [most ground or ALL ground], whereas subjective may describe more details about SOME of those same grounds.
The *object of the sentence is answered by asking the question, What? The subject of a sentence, I have discovered on my own, can be found by asking the question, Who?
An OBJECT RECIEVES the action of the verb and the SUBJECT’S DO the action.
Example: Daniel gave it to us.
Who gave?
Daniel
*Gave what?
it
(Gave to whom?
us)
Therefore, ‘Daniel’ is the subject, ‘it’ is the (direct) object and ‘us’ is the indirect object.
By rule of thumb, the sequence of these there are consistent most every time.
i.e.) SUBJECT->VERB->OBJECT, refer to the example, ‘Daniel gave it…’
Please use your own english knowledge to double check this stuff and make a conclusion for yourself. Also if anyone sees any errors in my teaching or examples please dont hesitate to tell me so. Thank you
P.S. I know all of this is a bit of the subject of our Objectivity vs. Subjectivity, but I needed to try and explain it for myself. Until next time ladies and gents…. enjoy happily
Hi Again all,
To Drew,
Since you posted twice I will address you directly. You must have had english grammar in mind when you read the title of the web site. This was a mistake in context. I take it that english might be a second language for you. Your second post refers to a topic in english grammar called “pronoun case”. In that topic, you will learn when to use a pronoun and what instances pronouns can be correctly used in a sentence. There are three cases of pronouns. From reading your post, I infered you did not know the name of the grammar topic is technically called “pronoun case”. You will need to know the grammatical technical terms if you want to teach english grammar. Notice it is spelled grammar and not grammer. Apart from a typo, you are correct about the “objective case “of a verb: the object receives the action of the verb and this the pronoun case when the term WHOM is used over WHO in a sentence. (who vs whom is still largely debated in many instances till this day.) The so called subjective case is actually called the “nominative case”; this term describes when the object is the subject of the verb in a sentence: for example, “the desk was kicked by Jim”. (This is called a passive voice sentence which is awkward in most examples to use in writing. The active voice is more reader friendly and prefered: “Jim kicked the desk” is easier to read.) Your explanations are good, but I am not comfortable about your example because you use a vague pronoun “IT”. You are correct but your example should have been much simpler. If you substitute “IT” for “the cat” your example would still be correct but easier to read: Daniel gave the cat to us. It should be used sparingly because it is hard for the reader at times to refer back to what noun “IT” stands for throughout the sentence. Try to be clear, specific and concise as much as possible in your writing; try to stand clear of avoid awkard constructions, vague pronouns and vauge references. Now that is the grammar side of Drew’s post.
What I typed can be refered to as objective knowledge (objectivity) because it is universally true to all who use english grammar. I did not make up the rules of grammar in the english language and my feelings or opinion have no say in the results. In comparison, a subjective knowledge (subjectivity) claim about the use of english grammar would be that you used “who” in a sentence where you should have used “whom” and then you made a justification for you breaking the rules. In that example, your opinion or choice had an effect on the sentence and it still might be accepted by a majority of people who read your writing. Popularity doesn’t mean it is technically correct though! Subjective often means you the person hold your thought as true, whereas objective often means all people with the proper knowledge should or must arrive at the same answer. For example, multiplying 5 times 5 equals 25 to all who understand multiplication — it is irrefutable.
So in closing, ultimately there is probability to the subjective thought: it is 1 percent to 97 percent; the objective thought is absolute certainty and no chance of error.
Thanks Roy for the helpful corrections. I guess if I want to teach english I will need to know how to spell GRAMMAR (LOL). And yes, for a public school educated student of Friendswood Texas, I’m sorry to say, english was and is my first language to speak. Now I’m tackling another side of me and learning spanish, which is what prompted most of the grammar confusion.
Thanks again,
Drew M
some people really make things hard. too much elaboration will lead us to confusion. concise, direct and simplicity will help much instead.