Definition: Subjectivism

 

The term "subjectivism" refers to a related family of ideologies that address the issue of the certainty that can be accorded to our knowledge, in the field of epistemology, or to the universality of our values, in the fields of ethics and aesthetics.

The epistemological subjectivist would have us believe that what we might take to be knowledge is really no more than a matter of personal opinion.

The ethical subjectivist maintains either that values are also matters of personal opinion, or else that when we speak of values we are doing nothing but uttering emotional ejaculations devoid of meaningful content. On this view, to say "John acted morally" really just means "I have a feeling of approval regarding what John did", that feeling not being grounded in any sort of ethical standard or norm.

The aesthetic subjectivist argues that there are no objective

 

 

standards or norms by which works of art may be judged, and that therefore "non disputandum de gustibus est" (there's no disputing taste).

The subjectivist viewpoint has been with humanity for milennia now. With respect to both ethics and epistemology, the view can be traced to the Greek Sophist Protagoras of Abdera (c. 490 - c.420 BCE).

In aesthetics the history of the view is less clear cut, but obviously goes back at least to the Romans. The more recent aesthetic views of non-representationalists, in which strong subjectivistic elements can be detected, can be traced to Picasso and Georges Braque.

It seems to be really quite difficult, even for the professed subjectivist, to grasp what subjectivism implies if it is true. With respect to knowledge, it would mean that, for example, when I say

 

"The Civil War ended in 1865", I really mean "I have the belief that the Civil War ended in 1865" — not, as I would suppose, that the Civil War ended in 1865 whether or not I personally have that belief.

In the field of ethics, subjectivism implies that there are no acts that are morally right or wrong (except to me personally), and that there are no ends that are either trivial or significant. Thus, there can be no legitimate basis for law or morality.

In the arts, subjectivism implies that a string of nonsense syllables typed out by a chimp and a novel by Victor Hugo are of exactly the same artistic value.

Pragmatically speaking, then, it is well that, outside of the arts, few subjectivists actually act in light of what they suppose that they believe, as the result would be absolute anarchy.

Curiously, however, despite the fact that

 

 

almost no one acts as if they believe in the truth of subjectivism, a great many individuals do profess to believe it. This suggests either that most subjectivists are hypocrites, or else that subjectivism is incoherent. The latter would seem to be the more plausible view, given that the subjectivist can never mount an objectively true argument on behalf of his own ideology (since his belief in subjectivism must itself be nothing more than a matter of personal opinion.)

The most exhaustive analysis of the issue of the truth of subjectivism to date may be found in Brand Blanshard's Reason and Analysis. Proponents of subjectivism have never answered the critique of subjectivism he offers there, nor does it appear that Blanshard's argument can be answered. Until such time as it is, and until such time as subjectivists can show that their arguments are not self-defeating, subjectivism must be regarded as false.

See also: Relativism