David 1

David Han
Instructor: Amal Bagulayan
Warren Writing 10A
1 October 2012
Summary of Thinking Critically About the Subjective / Objective Distinction
Throughout the years, humanity has battled endlessly over ethical and moral conflicts.
Many individuals argue that this confusion stems from misuse and misunderstanding of
subjective and objective reasoning. In her essay Thinking Critically About the Subjective /
Objective Distinction, Sandra LaFave makes the argument that perceiving the terms
subjective and objective as opposites can hinder peoples reasoning, stating further that
critically approaching the distinction between subjective and objective perspective can help
better understanding of moral matters. She asserts that her approach might aid people in the
realization that moral matters can have quantifiable, factual conclusions, even though each moral
matter is specific to the experience of an individual. LaFaves conclusion is evidenced by concise
explanations of subjective and objective thinking, relatable situations and examples, and open
reasoning that allows the readers to make their own conclusions.
Initially, LaFave articulately explains the terms subjective and objective, before
going on to explain how a misuse of these terms can be negative on a persons moral
understanding. She explains that a misunderstanding of these words can lead to an ordinary
simplified (problematic) view (LaFave). In this non-philosophical approach, subjective is
thought to be synonymous with beliefs, feelings; events that exist only while they are
experienced. Objective is used to refer to quantifiable facts that can be sustained with certainty.
LaFave asserts that Ethical subjectivism is the view that since we cant be objective about

David 2
morality, morality must be purely subjective (LaFave). She then delves deeper into the
philosophical results of the aforementioned misconception that subjective and objective are utter
opposites, using metaphysical idealism as a primary example. Initially, LaFave explains the
premises and conclusion behind metaphysical idealism, stating that everything an individual
experiences is utterly unique to that individual. Therefore, whatever you say, its just your
opinion (your truth) Reality and truth differ for everyone, and always will (LaFave).
After pointing out and thoroughly explaining metaphysical idealism, LaFave goes on to
point out its problems before moving onto the distinctions between the different kinds of
subjective and objective thinking. She removes plausibility of metaphysical idealism through
hypothetical, relatable reasoning, stating I cant prove the universe didnt come into existence
five minutes ago, complete with historical records and memories, but the fact that I cant
prove its false doesnt make it true, or even plausible (LaFave).
LaFave explains further to address her main point, the correct understanding of the
subjective and objective. She starts by explaining the two different types of both subjective
and objective reasoning, metaphysical and epistemological. LaFave states that in the
metaphysical approach something exists objectively if its existence does not depend on its being
experienced (LaFave), using Antarctica and the Eiffel Tower as examples of objects that exist
objectively.

David 3
Bibliography
LaFave, Sandra. "Thinking Critically about the Subjective-Objective Distinction."Thinking
Critically about the Subjective-Objective Distinction. West Valley College, 06 Oct. 2008. Web.
02 Oct. 2012. <http://instruct.westvalley.edu/lafave/subjective_objective.html>.