It is no secret that we learn the whole surrounding world thanks to our consciousness, which perceives objects of surrounding reality and kindly connects them with concepts and specific images. This has been proven a long time ago and, perhaps, does not require any further explanation.
Nevertheless, the question remains, to what extent are the images arising in our consciousness adequate to what they are in reality? How much does the color, form, temperature, and even the essence of this or that object coincide with how our brain perceives it? And this is just the tip of the iceberg. Actually, it’s still more complicated.
Does objectivity exist
In this context, the issue that entitled this subsection becomes particularly relevant. Indeed, is it possible to say that the principle of objectivity really has a place to be if absolutely everything in our world is refracted through the prism of our consciousness, which, by the way, is deeply individual, despite the presence of archetypes and other manifestations of collective representation.
On the one hand, there is definitely a problem. And on the other hand, the question remains how serious and worthy of attention.
In what area is the principle of objectivity needed
Based on the basic semantics of this phrase, it is easy to assume that it definitely refers to the scientific conceptual apparatus and this will not be a mistake at all. This phenomenon really takes place mainly in the world of accurate data, specific meanings and fundamental discoveries. Moreover, it is precisely it that forms the basis of any research, and accordingly, it always determines the direction of movement of a particular scientific thought.
In fact, all the knowledge of modern mankind is somehow based on the principle of objectivity, and this can be considered a key point in achieving truly fantastic results and making absolutely incredible discoveries.
The essence of the concept
If we talk about the specific meaning of this phrase, it is worth noting that in each area of scientific knowledge it will have its own shade, depending on the specifics of the subject of study. At a basic level, the principle of objectivity can be interpreted as a rejection of any subjectivity during the study. In other words, while working with a particular phenomenon or concept, a scientist can operate solely on facts, without resorting to any speculation and manifestations of a personal attitude.
Such a system of scientific work is necessary to obtain the most accurate output data, and, accordingly, a better result.
Does it really exist
Of course, if the concept itself exists, the principles of scientific objectivity are no less real. At least that is what any research or analytical process seeks.
Nevertheless, the influence of consciousness, both creator and cognizer, cannot be ruled out. In addition, in order to comply with this condition, a number of different factors are necessary, among which the level of training of the researcher, the volume of his conceptual apparatus, the specifics of the subject and object of study (it is one thing when some new type of bacteria is studied, and quite another when study of mental processes).
In fact, the principle of objectivity is a methodological principle, the observance of which is extremely important for the adequacy of the study. Nevertheless, it depends on a huge number of factors and is not always observed.
Something About Features
In general terms, several points have already been devoted to this point in this article. Now we will examine in more detail what the principle of objectivity, scientificness and adequacy of a particular research is actually.
From a purely methodological point of view, the essence of this phenomenon is that knowledge of a particular subject in the real world should be as adequate as possible. In other words, the subject must be perceived by the researcher exactly as he really is.
It is with this that the main difficulty and snag in this matter is connected. Since the process of cognition of an object is directly related to the brain activity and characteristics of the researcher’s worldview, can it be considered that his vision of an object or phenomenon can actually be equivalent to a cognizable object?
Biggest snag
An even greater difficulty is the study of phenomena that do not find material representation in the real world. An example is any philological study. The principle of objectivity and historicism definitely takes place in this case (especially when it comes to linguistic norms or syntax that have at least some idea).
But what about the study of literature (except, perhaps, formalistic and structuralistic searches)? In fact, the artistic world of a work is not represented in any way in objective reality. Accordingly, absolutely everything in this case depends on the vision of the researcher. So is it possible to say that understanding the subject will be equivalent to it? And does this item exist at all?
Is there a way out?
What to do if the principle of objectivity implies something that sometimes seems completely impossible? The answer to this question is extremely simple - in this case, the problem can be solved by the presence of a rich conceptual apparatus and a sufficiently voluminous baggage of knowledge about the subject and object of research.
Finally, we must not forget about the information that is already available at the moment and is of greater or lesser scientific value. In fact, absolutely any object or phenomenon has value exclusively in comparison with others, since only in this case its significance and value can be evaluated. Of course, in this case, an argument can be made about the existence of decisively unique things, however, without going into terminology, we note that the value of such things is determined by comparison with their absence.
Thus, we can say that the most significant, basic component of the adequacy of a particular study is precisely analysis and comparison. Only in this way can a subjective assessment be kept to an acceptable minimum.
It is equally important for the researcher to simply abandon the personal assessment, the subjective perception of the situation. This is especially true, of course, in the sciences related to history, where a personal attitude to a particular phenomenon can deprive the information of the status of adequate data.
