4 ms·
You're misrepresenting both schools here. First, the "objective" school consists largely of internet loudmouths who have never done an actual A/B test. They're
by beat 7y ago
You're misrepresenting both schools here.
First, the "objective" school consists largely of internet loudmouths who have never done an actual A/B test. They're saying what seems intuitive to them, and imagining it's logical.
Second, most serious subjectivists recognize the value of experiments and testing. Where they disagree with the would-be objectivists is that when their subjective experience disagrees with the test, they suspect the test might be wrong as well as the possibility that their subjective experience might be wrong. The so-called objectivists argue that when the test disagrees with the subjective experience, then the subjective experience must be purely imaginary. This perspective could be easily disproven with a test...
- dsr_ 7y agoSomebody might be misrepresenting something here, yes. I especially like the way you managed to exactly explain the subjectivist viewpoint here while being completely fair to the objectivists.
- beat 7y agoWhen it comes to sensory aesthetic experience, I don't think there's any such thing as a true objectivist. Acknowledging the limitations of scientific method for testing personal experience is itself a "subjective" thing, and any good scientist knows that when the results of one measurement disagree with another, it doesn't mean the other measurement is necessarily wrong. But I'm not talking about scientists or the scientific method here. I'm talking about dudes on the internet who claim they are "objective", which is a whole different horse.
- dsr_ 7y agoYou are continuing to make your point eloquently.
- beat 7y agoLet's put it another way... subjectivist says that falling onto concrete hurts more than falling onto pillows. Objectivist says you're falling at the same speed either way, so the difference in pain must be your imagination.