On Values - Subjectivity vs. Objectivity

Are our values in life subjective?

Or is there a set of objective values and principles to live by?

Well, let’s first define objectivity, and its counterpart before we dive into this moral quandary…

Subjectivity - The quality of being based on or influenced by personal feelings, tastes, or opinions.

Objectivity - The quality of not being influenced by personal feelings or opinions in considering and representing facts.

So let’s take a Mountain for instance…

You could say, “That is objectively a mountain.”

But then what if a child comes up to you and says, “Nope. That’s an earth pyramid.”

Does that mean your objective definition has become subjective?

“Well no, most of the people on earth would believe that is a mountain!”

Well, how many people have to believe something for it to be objective?

Is the answer to that subjective or objective?

How many people have to have a different opinion for it to then become subjective?

Can something be mostly objective with room for some subjectivity?

See how this is a big ole’ doozy?

The reason I bring this up is that I’ve been pondering the idea of values in life, and almost always that’s going to bring you to people like Nietzche and Jung.

I’m no expert in either of these men’s work, however, I have somewhat of a basic grasp on what both of them believed…

Nietzche thought that the world was objective (lol isn’t that a subjective opinion though?) and valueless.

He explained that the only way anyone could escape from nihilism and totalitarianism was by creating your own values, projecting them onto the valueless reality, and then abiding by them.

However, Jung believed that there is little evidence to suggest we’re able to create ourselves from nothing.

To me it seems like Jung was trying to explain that we discover what we value, we don’t create it out of thin air.

Whenever I talk to people who buy into what Nietzche is explaining, I almost always find someone who’s using it as a way to rationalize their one-way ticket to “Piss Off Island” where they do nothing but enjoy the pleasantries of life.

Their ideology goes something like this…

If life is entirely subjective, and everything means nothing, then I’m just going to have as much fun as humanly possible. Sex, drugs, and rock n’ roll baby!

And hey, it makes sense from their perspective, right?

But here’s the conundrum…

If life is valueless and entirely subjective, what unites us as a people?

How could a society of people living out their own subjective way of life avoid being at each other’s throats, unless there was something similar between their values?

And also…

If something can mean anything, it means nothing.

Going back to the mountain example, does that mean everything means nothing?

Ugh. Philosophy, you asshole.

This is why I think Nietzche and Jung were both right.

Let’s combine the two and explore what a Nietzung philosophy (yes, I did just do that) for life looks like.

Without anyone to attribute any meaning to anything, the world is inherently valueless outside of primal values.

If humans ceased to exist, really all we’re left with is the procreation of animals and their corresponding dominance hierarchies, there are no value sets outside of that…

I believe that’s what Nietzche was getting at.

But when we introduce humans into the mix and allow them enough time and resources to get to the top of Mazlo’s hierarchy of needs…

They’re eventually posed with the question…

“What do I want from life?”

And I don’t think you can TRULY know what you want unless you’ve tried a little bit of everything.

I thought I wanted a fast life with cars, drugs, reckless spending, casual dating, and expensive vacations.

I experienced it, and In my opinion, it was extremely overrated.

Now I’m on a path that’s a lot more grounded.

I’m pursuing a significant relationship with a lovely lady, I’m starting my journey in faith with Orthodox Christianity, and I’m focusing on maximizing my discipline in all areas of life.

It feels purer, and I think it fits me a lot better.

I don’t feel like I’m trying to be someone that I’m not.

Okay, so it appears to me that what I want from life, say thirty years down the road, is an expansion of this…

So how do I know what values to orientate my life around?

I only have a basic understanding of it, how can I expand this understanding of the values which help expand my understanding of how to act in the world?

Easy, talk to people who have what you want.

As many of them as you can.

Try to pick apart the common philosophy amongst them all.

This is the “DISCOVERY” process of what Jung was saying instead of the “CREATION” process that Nietzche talked about.

There’s nothing new under the sun…

To think you’re magically going to come up with a new way to live life is a bit unrealistic.

I can already hear a twitter bro going…

“WhAt AbOUt ElOn mUsK?”

You’re not Elon Musk, nor do you want to be.

He talks about that all the time, it is a massive burden to think at the level that he thinks.

Simplify it down, what would make your life worth living?

Go test it.

How does it make you feel? Try to stay sober while asking this question.

Good? Find people who have the expanded version of what you want and seek their guidance.

Bad? Test a new hypothesis.

There is no objective way to live life for everyone…

I believe you need to start at the subjective level, try out some different approaches, find one that truly resonates with you.

And from there, make it objective FOR YOU.

Orientate your life around those principles with a little wiggle room to correct what you may not be able to see right now.

Damn this article was confusing to write, I think I got my point across pretty well.

Or maybe this made no sense whatsoever.

I guess that’s subjective as well.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯