Gave you an upper for your thoughtful comment but am going to remind you that objectivity only holds for superficial circumstances - for superficial conditions.
What does that mean?
Just this: Objectification necessarily leaves a residuum (that which objectifies).
The objectifier (that which objectifies) is necessarily "more intimate" than what it objectifies.
Thus the ultimate objectifier is always "self" (than which NOTHING is more intimate).
Because of this, "self" cannot be objectified and since it is required to have a residuum (that which objectifies) to have ANY object - there are no objects.
Thus we find that objectivity fails.
This paradox is the fundamental condition of nature. It cannot be resolved. Nature is not objective. We are nature.
Gave you an upper for your thoughtful comment but am going to remind you that objectivity only holds for superficial circumstances - for superficial conditions.
What does that mean?
Just this: Objectification necessarily leaves a residuum (that which objectifies).
The objectifier (that which objectifies) is necessarily "more intimate" than what it objectifies.
Thus the ultimate objectifier is always "self" (than which NOTHING is more intimate).
Because of this, "self" cannot be objectified and since it is required to have a residuum (that which objectifies) to have ANY object - there are no objects.
Thus we find that objectivity fails.
This paradox is the fundamental condition of nature. It cannot be resolved. Nature is not objective. We are nature.
Reality does not require an observer to be objective